BC Calfan said:

---

I have never understood the "Cuonzo leaving the cupboard bare" criticism. So the coach's responsibilities to the program exist after he leaves? It's part of the business. It's normal to have roster turnover during a coaching change. What should he have done? Convinced Rabb and Moore to stay even though he was leaving?

It's very interesting to me how Cuonzo rubs a lot of Cal fans the wrong way. I wonder why that is?

---

That one season was great until the Hawaii fiasco. From my perspective, some of the things that drove me nuts in no particular order were 1) offense (particularly after enjoying Monty's offense) was painful to watch 2) Rabb was woefully under utilized (seemed like no one practiced passing to the post!) and it likely cost him a shot at a pro career 3) Brown looked like no one coached him the entire season (driving with a full head of steam every time resulting in a charge?) 4) all or nothing recruiting strategy - when we inevitably struck out on some of the big fish there was zero back-ups planned. Great year, no doubt, but I did not see a recipe for sustained success.

calumnus said:

---

oskidunker said:

---

HoopDreams said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

HKBear97! said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

Cal8285 said:

---

philbert said:

---

No, they hired him because Knowlton let the search firm (Collegiate Sports Associates) do the heavy lifting.https://t.co/zGd4Pu4UBo https://t.co/hUKyHlsZl7

— Jon Wilner (@wilnerhotline) March 9, 2023

---

Wilner is simply wrong.

He's right that Fox wasn't hired because Cal is cheap. After all, someone like Gates would have come as cheap as Fox. But he's completely wrong that Fox was hired because Knowlton let the search firm do the heavy lifting.

Fox was hired because he was the perfect fit for what Knowlton wanted. I don't know how much Knowlton let the search firm do all the heavy lifting, but in the brief window between Jones and the Fox hired, Knowlton was public about what he wanted in the MBB HC.

Fox checked all of Knowlton's boxes, more than any other available candidate. If Knowlton had hired me to identify a coach who checked all his boxes, I probably would have recommended Fox. The problem is that Knowlton's boxes were wrong.

The mistake of the Fox hire had nothing to do with hiring a search firm, and everything to do with what Knowlton was looking for in a head coach.

---

Yes, it seems like the goal with Fox was someone who won enough and did not cheat in recruiting (when that was a thing) so that the Knowlton could go back to playing solitaire on his computer.

I would like someone who brings excitement. That means developing talent, playing good basketball, and recruiting at that the level that should be expected given Cal's resources and position in the world. The only coach going back to the 80s whose hire I liked was Monty. I don't expect a hall of fame coach like Monty to fall into Cal's laps, so I would like someone who shows characteristics such that my three goals will be met. Fox was zero for three.

---

I was pretty excited when, among all the schools that were after him, we were the school that landed Tennessee's up and coming young African American coach days after taking them to the Sweet 16.

Fox acting like the notorious Georgia boosters just stood down for 9 years always came off as sanctimonious BS and excuse-making. It is not like Pete Carroll ever arranged payments to Reggie Bush, but at least he didn't go around bragging about it and claiming everyone else was cheating but USC wasn't.

When it was relayed on this board that Jaylen Brown said he was offered cash to stay home and play for Georgia (and for Fox), Fox defenders on this board called it a lie.

Misplaced loyalties. Now that Fox has delivered the worst W/L record in the entire country after 4 years of "team building" maybe people will consider the possibility that it was true, and it took the assistance of Georgia boosters for Fox to achieve even mediocrity at Georgia and why his sanctimonious "the right way" BS seemed so hypocritical to many of us.

---

I was open minded about Martin, but considerably less excited when he could not design a functional offense out of Rabb, Brown, Wallace, Bird, and Mathews. And I did not think recruiting at that level was sustainable. Who knows what would have happened with more time, but I know I did not enjoy watching his teams play, although I appreciated the talent he brought in. I liked the early Monty years best.

---

But you weren't excited when Martin was hired?

Knowing Monty and seeing him flame out with the Warriors I was not certain how he would do at Cal, especially with regard to recruiting and the deference the PAC-12 refs showed him at Stanford. However he inherited a great roster from Braun, hired good,complimentary assistants, got good transfers and overlooked players and started winning immediately, which is the key to everything. His teams did usually get the most from their talent, at least in the regular season, which I guess is less frustrating than guys that bring in more talent, and achieve more, but underachieve doing it,

---

Neutral on Martin. Never saw one of his teams play. Had a good record. Concerned that some vocal fans wanted him gone, but thought there might be a racial component.

---

I agree with this. I was pretty neutral on the Martin hire as his track record had some question marks. Yes, he had that sweet sixteen run, but that seemed like catching lightening in a bottle. Also the trend at Tennessee wasn't great and clearly the fans pushing for his termination says they weren't thrilled either. After he arrived and I saw the lack of offensive coaching, poor player development and really questionable recruiting strategy, I realized why Tennessee fans were upset. I was glad to see him go. Of course, wasn't expecting Williams to make one of the worst coaching decisions ever made with Wyking.

---

Tough grade on Cuonzo. His record at Cal was very good - 62-39! won 19 straight regular season home wins (28 straight over a 2 year stretch) achieved a #14 regular season national ranking and Haas Arena was rocking with several sell outs and attendance in the 9-10K range/game. He brought in some outstanding players and had several other highly rated recruits that the admissions turned down unfortunately. Yes the offense was stagnate, but the overall results were solid. And his players highly respected him. I was sad to see him go - especially in light of what the following 6 years produced in the W/L column.

---

I can't read the article, but is it saying that one candidate could be Martin?

he was a good choice first time, but wouldn't be my first choice now. but I would be ok hiring Martin again, especially if it means we would have otherwise hired Tim Miles who would be a terrible choice

---

Martin gave awaybthe Bakersfield game. Ibwill not attend if he comes back. He can praise rhe lord somewhere else.

---

We forgave Wilcox for Lupoi, we forgave Moby for being a jerk at the Furd and for the Shove and we are willing to forgive Pasternak for the Kick. Martin and the team mailing it in for the NIT because he is leaving is unforgivable?

We need to hire based on the prospects for the future.

I don't want Martin because I want a coach that is more offense oriented.

However the main reason I don't want Martin now is he is 51 and is officially a retread.

9 years ago Martin was a rising young coach coming off of a Sweet 16 with Tennessee.

The Jeff Tedford of 2012 was not the Jeff Tedford of 2003.

The Ben Braun of 2008 was not the Ben Braun of 1999.

The best bet is to hire up and coming, energetic, positive, young coaches and hope they catch fire and ride that until they flame out or burn out, or develop a sustainable long term program (usually by hiring and mentoring good assistants and delegating). If they don't catch fire early (Wyking, Wilcox) it is probably best to rinse and repeat. It is tough to build upward momentum if you don't turn around things immediately (Tedford).

Fox, Miles or Martin are retreads. Even Travis DeCuire is now 52. Wilcox is only 46, but he seem tired.

4 years ago Dennis Gates was 39, that would have been a good bet.

---

I don't think so much emphasis should be placed on the age of the coach. When Roy Williams left Kansas for North Carolina he was 52.

Give me a good coach. I don't care how old he is.

CalLifer said:

---

Outside of Monty, and maybe the one year under Campanelli where he hired the offensive OC, who really was a better offensive coach we have had at Cal?....

---

Jason Kidd. He made everyone around him so much better at Cal. That team was the most fun to watch, IMHO. Monty ran some good schemes that made his players seem better offensively and always outcoached *****gon, so that was sort of nice. Under Braun, he was smart enough to put the ball into the hands of dominant players like Lampley, Powe and Anderson, when we had them.

But yeah - we've rarely had a dynamic offensive scheme that was credit to the coach.

Civil Bear said:

---

BC Calfan said:

---

I have never understood the "Cuonzo leaving the cupboard bare" criticism. So the coach's responsibilities to the program exist after he leaves? It's part of the business. It's normal to have roster turnover during a coaching change. What should he have done? Convinced Rabb and Moore to stay even though he was leaving?

It's very interesting to me how Cuonzo rubs a lot of Cal fans the wrong way. I wonder why that is?

---

Rabb left for the NBA draft and Moore was in Cuonzo's doghouse by the season's end (and was a habitual transferrer). What makes you think they would have stayed? Knowing what he had returning made his choice to bolt all that much easier.

It's very interesting to me how Cuonzo still appeals to some Cal fans. I wonder why that is?

---

Rabb stayed another year, exposing the limitations of his game, and cost himself millions.

dimitrig said:

---

calumnus said:

---

oskidunker said:

---

HoopDreams said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

HKBear97! said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

Cal8285 said:

---

philbert said:

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

---

I don't think so much emphasis should be placed on the age of the coach. When Roy Williams left Kansas for North Carolina he was 52.

Give me a good coach. I don't care how old he is.

---

There should be an upper limit on how old someone should be to be suited for the role of taking on a new head coaching job that will be a complete teardown and rebuild.

Yes, getting a coach who will thrive in this job is the most important thing, and 52 is not too old by any means. But IMO it would be a mistake to fill this particular job with a coach who is 62.

CalLifer said:

---

HKBear97! said:

---

BC Calfan said:

---

I have never understood the "Cuonzo leaving the cupboard bare" criticism. So the coach's responsibilities to the program exist after he leaves? It's part of the business. It's normal to have roster turnover during a coaching change. What should he have done? Convinced Rabb and Moore to stay even though he was leaving?

It's very interesting to me how Cuonzo rubs a lot of Cal fans the wrong way. I wonder why that is?

---

That one season was great until the Hawaii fiasco. From my perspective, some of the things that drove me nuts in no particular order were 1) offense (particularly after enjoying Monty's offense) was painful to watch 2) Rabb was woefully under utilized (seemed like no one practiced passing to the post!) and it likely cost him a shot at a pro career 3) Brown looked like no one coached him the entire season (driving with a full head of steam every time resulting in a charge?) 4) all or nothing recruiting strategy - when we inevitably struck out on some of the big fish there was zero back-ups planned. Great year, no doubt, but I did not see a recipe for sustained success.

---

Outside of Monty, and maybe the one year under Campanelli where he hired the offensive OC, who really was a better offensive coach we have had at Cal? I just find that specific criticism to be weird in a year where we were so successful. And the Hawaii fiasco was that we had two of our critically important seniors get injured 2 days before that game, playing an experienced senior-laden team, and also had the head coach get implicated in a sexual harassment scandal where he was not involved and did everything right but was not pretected also days before that game.

What I also don't understand about all of the criticism about Brown and how he was used was that this was an extremely raw, athletic kid who was limited in how much practice time he could get. Everyone loves to point to how Brown has improved in Boston, without acknowledging that (1) he has unlimited time to practice in the NBA, and (2) it still took him years to get to the player he is today. At Cal, Brown was an athlete learning to play basketball, not a refined basketball player who was athletic. How do we know that any coach in a college setting was going to change brown rather than try to let him do what he was good at and live with the negatives.

And yes, in the post Brown year, he struck out on some players, but how much of that was due to the incompetence of the admin not accurately communicating what could and couldn't be allowed in terms of admissions? Do you think with a better AD who was more proactive in communicating the actual specifics of what could be allowed, Cuonzo would have gone so far down the road of recruiting guys who couldn't get in? I'm curious of why when we know we had an incompetent AD, none of those failures is connected to the AD.

Maybe I'm a Martin apologist because the success we had both in recruiting with Rabb/Brown, the undefeated season at home, the high seed in the tournament all gave me a regular season high unlike any I've had outside of the Braun first year. So be it. You can think Martin was flawed, which I'll agree with. But every single coach we've had since 1989 when I started at Cal has been flawed, and some people here see Martin as barely better than Jones/Fox (or at least complain about him almost as much).

---

When I read about Cuonzo both before and after he was hired, the description of his style was generally "grind it out, defensive slug fest". Yes, good results, but it wasn't pretty basketball (of course, better basketball than the last six years!) And for the recruiting, he should have known what he could and couldn't do, that's his job and what he was well paid for.

Martin is better than Fox and much better than Wyking. However, from looking at his time at Tennessee and his time here, I suspected his approach wasn't going to be successful in the long run. I think what happened post Cal proved that suspicion right. Of course, the most frustrating thing about his tenure is when Missouri hired him away and Cal received buyout money - which never happens!. The AD not only screwed that opportunity up, he hired a guy who was never a head coach or even an assistant head coach in his entire career. Mind boggling.

HoopDreams said:

---

agree.

i liked Martin because he had a strong personal brand and was a leader of men

he also didn't accept some of the long standing "it's cal" stuff. he has high character, great experience and just needs to hire a good associate head coach for strategy/offense

the one ding for me is the NIT game, but i can look past that given it wasn't the NCAA

---

I liked Martin for all the reasons you listed. It was frustrating to see him swing and miss on so many of his recruiting targets. The killer for me was the terrible offense he ran. I just don't know if he even saw any issues with what they were doing on that side of the ball.

I hardly even remember the NIT game. What I do remember was the overall trajectory of the team during his last season and all of the swings and misses in recruiting. I wasn't convinced he would be successful long-term.

As a BOD Dragon, it will always bother me that Ivan Rabb cost himself millions of dollars not entering the NBA with Jaylen Brown when his stock was at it highest (projected to be a high 1st rounder).
Instead, he came back for a 2nd year to play in a rudderless program, clearly receiving little coaching with regard to his game, his weaknesses got highlighted and the NBA's interest in him crashed and burned. I have little doubt he got lobbied to come back because otherwise his decision to do so makes no sense.


"The Cal coaching staff previously did due diligence and the consensus was that Rabb would be selected in the lottery, possibly as high as No. 6."

"Rabb felt he wasn't ready. He shot 61.5% last winter but wanted to extend the range on his jump shot. He wanted to be a better ball-handler. He wanted to improve as a perimeter defender, cognizant that switching on to wings and holding his own will be crucial to his success at the next level. If he managed all that, he figured, he wouldn't lose much ground."

"This summer, Martin would like Rabb to get up 500 shots a day in an effort to improve his range; Rabb guesses 200 is more realistic. "I want to shoot them and make them," he says. He doesn't know yet how he'll gear other workouts to improve his game, but he's around to do them alreadythe first step on the path to take ownership of the Bears this winter."

For Ivan Rabb, returning to Cal for another season was as simple choice | Sports Illustrated


https://www.si.com/college/2016/06/09/ivan-rabb-california-golden-bears-nba-draft

*My interpretation of that article, reading between the lines, is that the cupboard was taking a hit at Cal with Brown leaving for the NBA and Jordan Matthews leaving for the Zags. Ivan leaving would have been a knockout punch for the Bears.

If I am looking out for Ivan, I'm telling him to leave for the NBA, get a good contract and work on his game. I simply don't believe the coaching staff didn't convince him they would coach him up and give his game more battle testing in a top PAC 12 program. Neither of those things occurred. They sold him down the drain.

If in fact Martin lobbied Ivan to leave for the NBA, then my criticism of Martin on this issue is without merit. I still don't think Cuonzo Martin is a good basketball coach.

Perhaps Shocky has first hand knowledge if Martin played any role in Rabb coming back for a 2nd year.

bearister said:

---

As a BOD Dragon, it will always bother me that Ivan Rabb cost himself millions of dollars not entering the NBA with Jaylen Brown when his stock was at it highest (projected to be a high 1st rounder).
Instead, he came back for a 2nd year to play in a rudderless program, clearly receiving little coaching with regard to his game, his weaknesses got highlighted and the NBA's interest in him crashed and burned. I have little doubt he got lobbied to come back because otherwise his decision to do so makes no sense.


"The Cal coaching staff previously did due diligence and the consensus was that Rabb would be selected in the lottery, possibly as high as No. 6."

"Rabb felt he wasn't ready. He shot 61.5% last winter but wanted to extend the range on his jump shot. He wanted to be a better ball-handler. He wanted to improve as a perimeter defender, cognizant that switching on to wings and holding his own will be crucial to his success at the next level. If he managed all that, he figured, he wouldn't lose much ground."

"This summer, Martin would like Rabb to get up 500 shots a day in an effort to improve his range; Rabb guesses 200 is more realistic. "I want to shoot them and make them," he says. He doesn't know yet how he'll gear other workouts to improve his game, but he's around to do them alreadythe first step on the path to take ownership of the Bears this winter."

For Ivan Rabb, returning to Cal for another season was as simple choice | Sports Illustrated


https://www.si.com/college/2016/06/09/ivan-rabb-california-golden-bears-nba-draft

*My interpretation of that article, reading between the lines, is that the cupboard was taking a hit at Cal with Brown leaving for the NBA and Jordan Matthews leaving for the Zags. Ivan leaving would have been a knockout punch for the Bears.

If I am looking out for Ivan, I'm telling him to leave for the NBA, get a good contract and work on his game. I simply don't believe the coaching staff didn't convince him they would coach him up and give his game more battle testing in a top PAC 12 program. Neither of those things occurred. They sold him down the drain.

If in fact Martin lobbied Ivan to leave for the NBA, then my criticism of Martin on this issue is without merit. I still don't think Cuonzo Martin is a good basketball coach.

Perhaps Shocky has first hand knowledge if Martin played any role in Rabb coming back for a 2nd year.

---

Rule of life #1. If you don't have a million dollars and someone offers you a million dollars, you take the million dollars. You never know what will happen tomorrow. From a basketball perspective, Rabb wasn't ready, but was probably as ready as he was ever going to be. He needed to strike while scouts thought he had upside.

I don't hate Martin, either. But I still think his hiring led to the problem we have now, because I don't think he was going to stay long enough to build a coaching tree that would lead to long-term success. He went to one Sweet 16, and otherwise had first-round losses, or worse. And the eye test, particularly regarding offenses, just indicates that he's not that good a coach.

His career win percentage is .571. That's much better than Fox's, but not close to Monty's .681. It may be that I'm just too biased in favor of Montgomery. But I'm still swayed by the idea that you have to build a program for the long term, which is why I favor Pasternack, since the indications are he might be willing to stay at Cal, even if he has success.

Jeff82 said:

---

I don't hate Martin, either. But I still think his hiring led to the problem we have now, because I don't think he was going to stay long enough to build a coaching tree that would lead to long-term success. He went to one Sweet 16, and otherwise had first-round losses, or worse. And the eye test, particularly regarding offenses, just indicates that he's not that good a coach.

His career win percentage is .571. That's much better than Fox's, but not close to Monty's .681. It may be that I'm just too biased in favor of Montgomery. But I'm still swayed by the idea that you have to build a program for the long term, which is why I favor Pasternack, since the indications are he might be willing to stay at Cal, even if he has success.

---

Coaching decisions contributed to the failure but they were also symptoms of the problems we were always going to have and the failure to understand how to mitigate those problems.

The biggest problem with Cuonzo was Cal decided a couple years before that it was going to demand higher academics. Some like to think we were doing that already. We weren't. That was going to make it hard for any coach to recruit. Cuonzo was not the right guy to continue that transition. In hindsight, it was a huge mistake to not keep going with Monty's program by hiring Decuire. He had the understanding of the challenge. We would have slipped some, but not as much. Cuonzo ultimately was a disaster recruiting after Rabb and Brown (and I think Decuire would have gotten Rabb).

Wyking was flat out a result of Cal's realization that investing in basketball was not going to have a great revenue return. Wyking was a terrible decision because we could have gotten a much better, young coach even for the pittance that we paid him (compared to our peers). But the key issue was going to be there regardless.

Wyking actually did a reasonable job recruiting under the circumstances and if Fox hadn't been such an ass and had kept some of those guys, we probably could have maintained at least low middle conference status.

My speculation on Fox was that Cal overplayed their hand going so cheap on Wyking and found that donations took a hit. Fox was an attempt to go as cheap as possible without making it obvious we weren't trying to win. It was just Cal being Cal. And whenever someone hires a "mediocre" long time coach because he is experienced and "he may not have a high ceiling, but you know where his floor is", run. There are many examples of not knowing where their floor is - I always think of Willingham at UW, Walt Harris at Stanford, and probably Braun at Rice. And now topping those charts is Fox here. Coaches have windows. Recruits don't dream of being on a .500 team. These types of candidates crash as often as not and I think have some of the lowest floors around. Young coaches can at least sell hope and maybe pull some recruits and that is at least half the game.

Frankly, between Fox and Jones, from a potential success standpoint, Cal should have kept Jones and hoped his guys stayed and saved some on the buyout, but I think they thought (probably somewhat correctly) that they needed to look like they were attempting to get someone competent or they would lose more in donations than they would save. Honestly, again I think Decuire should have been the guy that year because he was both young and upcoming AND he would restore confidence from donors given his time under Monty.

Honestly, I think Joe P. seems to be the right guy now for this reason, assuming he wants the job. I think Decuire would be #2. I'd be thrilled if they surprised me with something better for Cal, but I doubt it.

I'm not confident any of it is going to work for those who don't recognize that Cal's situation has changed and think we are a coach away from being what we were under Monty. Monty is right about the academics being an issue. NIL could improve under the right guy, but it isn't going to compete with Oregon or Arizona or most of the conference. And I don't see Cal investing significantly more in the program. Those are the base issues. But yes, the right coach can lift us up out of the depths we are at right now. I'm just afraid y'all are going to want him fired when he tops out at 8-10 win conference records.

Agree. Unless there's a sudden flow of a lot of NIL money, it's going to take quite awhile to even get back to respectability.

Rabb stood to make from $12 to $15M if he went out with Jaylen and was drafted # 6 through # 10 (Rabb was projected as high as # 6). After staying at Cal a second year, he was drafted # 35, made about $2.5M and is no longer in the league.

Had he gone into the NBA draft after his first year at Cal, he probably wouldn't have lasted any longer in the league, but regardless of how much he took a haircut on his first round salary, he would have been exponentially better off financially,

BearlyCareAnymore said:

---

Jeff82 said:

---

Monty is right about the academics being an issue.

---

---

No
He
is
NOT!!!

Now if you tell me that A-G is an issue I will believe it. Especially the second year of Foreign language the the 4th year of Math. Those raise the stakes.

But I can tell you EMPHATICALLY that getting a 3.0 in California High Schools today is simple. I mean ridiculously easy. I mean you have to show up and have a pulse and probably can't skip 100 days to play hoop but essentially it is EASY. And Cal also provides for some sports admit slots for kids that can't get that.

Now if you tell me that these SA also need to satify A-G I will take back the above. There are probably good reasons that creates a pretty significant barrier - especially for out of state kids whose HS circulumn doesn't align. But it takes a real effort these days to pull an under 3.0

#Ihaveahighschoolseniorandjunior

dimitrig said:

---

calumnus said:

---

oskidunker said:

---

HoopDreams said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

HKBear97! said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

Cal8285 said:

---

philbert said:

---

No, they hired him because Knowlton let the search firm (Collegiate Sports Associates) do the heavy lifting.https://t.co/zGd4Pu4UBo https://t.co/hUKyHlsZl7

— Jon Wilner (@wilnerhotline) March 9, 2023

---

Wilner is simply wrong.

He's right that Fox wasn't hired because Cal is cheap. After all, someone like Gates would have come as cheap as Fox. But he's completely wrong that Fox was hired because Knowlton let the search firm do the heavy lifting.

Fox was hired because he was the perfect fit for what Knowlton wanted. I don't know how much Knowlton let the search firm do all the heavy lifting, but in the brief window between Jones and the Fox hired, Knowlton was public about what he wanted in the MBB HC.

Fox checked all of Knowlton's boxes, more than any other available candidate. If Knowlton had hired me to identify a coach who checked all his boxes, I probably would have recommended Fox. The problem is that Knowlton's boxes were wrong.

The mistake of the Fox hire had nothing to do with hiring a search firm, and everything to do with what Knowlton was looking for in a head coach.

---

Yes, it seems like the goal with Fox was someone who won enough and did not cheat in recruiting (when that was a thing) so that the Knowlton could go back to playing solitaire on his computer.

I would like someone who brings excitement. That means developing talent, playing good basketball, and recruiting at that the level that should be expected given Cal's resources and position in the world. The only coach going back to the 80s whose hire I liked was Monty. I don't expect a hall of fame coach like Monty to fall into Cal's laps, so I would like someone who shows characteristics such that my three goals will be met. Fox was zero for three.

---

I was pretty excited when, among all the schools that were after him, we were the school that landed Tennessee's up and coming young African American coach days after taking them to the Sweet 16.

Fox acting like the notorious Georgia boosters just stood down for 9 years always came off as sanctimonious BS and excuse-making. It is not like Pete Carroll ever arranged payments to Reggie Bush, but at least he didn't go around bragging about it and claiming everyone else was cheating but USC wasn't.

When it was relayed on this board that Jaylen Brown said he was offered cash to stay home and play for Georgia (and for Fox), Fox defenders on this board called it a lie.

Misplaced loyalties. Now that Fox has delivered the worst W/L record in the entire country after 4 years of "team building" maybe people will consider the possibility that it was true, and it took the assistance of Georgia boosters for Fox to achieve even mediocrity at Georgia and why his sanctimonious "the right way" BS seemed so hypocritical to many of us.

---

I was open minded about Martin, but considerably less excited when he could not design a functional offense out of Rabb, Brown, Wallace, Bird, and Mathews. And I did not think recruiting at that level was sustainable. Who knows what would have happened with more time, but I know I did not enjoy watching his teams play, although I appreciated the talent he brought in. I liked the early Monty years best.

---

But you weren't excited when Martin was hired?

Knowing Monty and seeing him flame out with the Warriors I was not certain how he would do at Cal, especially with regard to recruiting and the deference the PAC-12 refs showed him at Stanford. However he inherited a great roster from Braun, hired good,complimentary assistants, got good transfers and overlooked players and started winning immediately, which is the key to everything. His teams did usually get the most from their talent, at least in the regular season, which I guess is less frustrating than guys that bring in more talent, and achieve more, but underachieve doing it,

---

Neutral on Martin. Never saw one of his teams play. Had a good record. Concerned that some vocal fans wanted him gone, but thought there might be a racial component.

---

I agree with this. I was pretty neutral on the Martin hire as his track record had some question marks. Yes, he had that sweet sixteen run, but that seemed like catching lightening in a bottle. Also the trend at Tennessee wasn't great and clearly the fans pushing for his termination says they weren't thrilled either. After he arrived and I saw the lack of offensive coaching, poor player development and really questionable recruiting strategy, I realized why Tennessee fans were upset. I was glad to see him go. Of course, wasn't expecting Williams to make one of the worst coaching decisions ever made with Wyking.

---

Tough grade on Cuonzo. His record at Cal was very good - 62-39! won 19 straight regular season home wins (28 straight over a 2 year stretch) achieved a #14 regular season national ranking and Haas Arena was rocking with several sell outs and attendance in the 9-10K range/game. He brought in some outstanding players and had several other highly rated recruits that the admissions turned down unfortunately. Yes the offense was stagnate, but the overall results were solid. And his players highly respected him. I was sad to see him go - especially in light of what the following 6 years produced in the W/L column.

---

I can't read the article, but is it saying that one candidate could be Martin?

he was a good choice first time, but wouldn't be my first choice now. but I would be ok hiring Martin again, especially if it means we would have otherwise hired Tim Miles who would be a terrible choice

---

Martin gave awaybthe Bakersfield game. Ibwill not attend if he comes back. He can praise rhe lord somewhere else.

---

We forgave Wilcox for Lupoi, we forgave Moby for being a jerk at the Furd and for the Shove and we are willing to forgive Pasternak for the Kick. Martin and the team mailing it in for the NIT because he is leaving is unforgivable?

We need to hire based on the prospects for the future.

I don't want Martin because I want a coach that is more offense oriented.

However the main reason I don't want Martin now is he is 51 and is officially a retread.

9 years ago Martin was a rising young coach coming off of a Sweet 16 with Tennessee.

The Jeff Tedford of 2012 was not the Jeff Tedford of 2003.

The Ben Braun of 2008 was not the Ben Braun of 1999.

The best bet is to hire up and coming, energetic, positive, young coaches and hope they catch fire and ride that until they flame out or burn out, or develop a sustainable long term program (usually by hiring and mentoring good assistants and delegating). If they don't catch fire early (Wyking, Wilcox) it is probably best to rinse and repeat. It is tough to build upward momentum if you don't turn around things immediately (Tedford).

Fox, Miles or Martin are retreads. Even Travis DeCuire is now 52. Wilcox is only 46, but he seem tired.

4 years ago Dennis Gates was 39, that would have been a good bet.

---

I don't think so much emphasis should be placed on the age of the coach. When Roy Williams left Kansas for North Carolina he was 52.

Give me a good coach. I don't care how old he is.

---

The operative word there is North Carolina.

Cal, in 2023, is not North Carolina. We need a young energetic program builder, not a top program manager.

calumnus said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

calumnus said:

---

oskidunker said:

---

HoopDreams said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

HKBear97! said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

calumnus said:

---

sluggo said:

---

Cal8285 said:

---

philbert said:

---

No, they hired him because Knowlton let the search firm (Collegiate Sports Associates) do the heavy lifting.https://t.co/zGd4Pu4UBo https://t.co/hUKyHlsZl7

— Jon Wilner (@wilnerhotline) March 9, 2023

---

Wilner is simply wrong.

He's right that Fox wasn't hired because Cal is cheap. After all, someone like Gates would have come as cheap as Fox. But he's completely wrong that Fox was hired because Knowlton let the search firm do the heavy lifting.

Fox was hired because he was the perfect fit for what Knowlton wanted. I don't know how much Knowlton let the search firm do all the heavy lifting, but in the brief window between Jones and the Fox hired, Knowlton was public about what he wanted in the MBB HC.

Fox checked all of Knowlton's boxes, more than any other available candidate. If Knowlton had hired me to identify a coach who checked all his boxes, I probably would have recommended Fox. The problem is that Knowlton's boxes were wrong.

The mistake of the Fox hire had nothing to do with hiring a search firm, and everything to do with what Knowlton was looking for in a head coach.

---

Yes, it seems like the goal with Fox was someone who won enough and did not cheat in recruiting (when that was a thing) so that the Knowlton could go back to playing solitaire on his computer.

I would like someone who brings excitement. That means developing talent, playing good basketball, and recruiting at that the level that should be expected given Cal's resources and position in the world. The only coach going back to the 80s whose hire I liked was Monty. I don't expect a hall of fame coach like Monty to fall into Cal's laps, so I would like someone who shows characteristics such that my three goals will be met. Fox was zero for three.

---

I was pretty excited when, among all the schools that were after him, we were the school that landed Tennessee's up and coming young African American coach days after taking them to the Sweet 16.

Fox acting like the notorious Georgia boosters just stood down for 9 years always came off as sanctimonious BS and excuse-making. It is not like Pete Carroll ever arranged payments to Reggie Bush, but at least he didn't go around bragging about it and claiming everyone else was cheating but USC wasn't.

When it was relayed on this board that Jaylen Brown said he was offered cash to stay home and play for Georgia (and for Fox), Fox defenders on this board called it a lie.

Misplaced loyalties. Now that Fox has delivered the worst W/L record in the entire country after 4 years of "team building" maybe people will consider the possibility that it was true, and it took the assistance of Georgia boosters for Fox to achieve even mediocrity at Georgia and why his sanctimonious "the right way" BS seemed so hypocritical to many of us.

---

I was open minded about Martin, but considerably less excited when he could not design a functional offense out of Rabb, Brown, Wallace, Bird, and Mathews. And I did not think recruiting at that level was sustainable. Who knows what would have happened with more time, but I know I did not enjoy watching his teams play, although I appreciated the talent he brought in. I liked the early Monty years best.

---

But you weren't excited when Martin was hired?

Knowing Monty and seeing him flame out with the Warriors I was not certain how he would do at Cal, especially with regard to recruiting and the deference the PAC-12 refs showed him at Stanford. However he inherited a great roster from Braun, hired good,complimentary assistants, got good transfers and overlooked players and started winning immediately, which is the key to everything. His teams did usually get the most from their talent, at least in the regular season, which I guess is less frustrating than guys that bring in more talent, and achieve more, but underachieve doing it,

---

Neutral on Martin. Never saw one of his teams play. Had a good record. Concerned that some vocal fans wanted him gone, but thought there might be a racial component.

---

I agree with this. I was pretty neutral on the Martin hire as his track record had some question marks. Yes, he had that sweet sixteen run, but that seemed like catching lightening in a bottle. Also the trend at Tennessee wasn't great and clearly the fans pushing for his termination says they weren't thrilled either. After he arrived and I saw the lack of offensive coaching, poor player development and really questionable recruiting strategy, I realized why Tennessee fans were upset. I was glad to see him go. Of course, wasn't expecting Williams to make one of the worst coaching decisions ever made with Wyking.

---

Tough grade on Cuonzo. His record at Cal was very good - 62-39! won 19 straight regular season home wins (28 straight over a 2 year stretch) achieved a #14 regular season national ranking and Haas Arena was rocking with several sell outs and attendance in the 9-10K range/game. He brought in some outstanding players and had several other highly rated recruits that the admissions turned down unfortunately. Yes the offense was stagnate, but the overall results were solid. And his players highly respected him. I was sad to see him go - especially in light of what the following 6 years produced in the W/L column.

---

I can't read the article, but is it saying that one candidate could be Martin?

he was a good choice first time, but wouldn't be my first choice now. but I would be ok hiring Martin again, especially if it means we would have otherwise hired Tim Miles who would be a terrible choice

---

Martin gave awaybthe Bakersfield game. Ibwill not attend if he comes back. He can praise rhe lord somewhere else.

---

We forgave Wilcox for Lupoi, we forgave Moby for being a jerk at the Furd and for the Shove and we are willing to forgive Pasternak for the Kick. Martin and the team mailing it in for the NIT because he is leaving is unforgivable?

We need to hire based on the prospects for the future.

I don't want Martin because I want a coach that is more offense oriented.

However the main reason I don't want Martin now is he is 51 and is officially a retread.

9 years ago Martin was a rising young coach coming off of a Sweet 16 with Tennessee.

The Jeff Tedford of 2012 was not the Jeff Tedford of 2003.

The Ben Braun of 2008 was not the Ben Braun of 1999.

The best bet is to hire up and coming, energetic, positive, young coaches and hope they catch fire and ride that until they flame out or burn out, or develop a sustainable long term program (usually by hiring and mentoring good assistants and delegating). If they don't catch fire early (Wyking, Wilcox) it is probably best to rinse and repeat. It is tough to build upward momentum if you don't turn around things immediately (Tedford).

Fox, Miles or Martin are retreads. Even Travis DeCuire is now 52. Wilcox is only 46, but he seem tired.

4 years ago Dennis Gates was 39, that would have been a good bet.

---

I don't think so much emphasis should be placed on the age of the coach. When Roy Williams left Kansas for North Carolina he was 52.

Give me a good coach. I don't care how old he is.

---

The operative word there is North Carolina.

Cal, in 2023, is not North Carolina. We need a young energetic program builder, not a top program manager.

---

I wouldn't turn down Roy Williams even now if he wanted to come out of retirement.

Civil Bear said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

Tough grade on Cuonzo. His record at Cal was very good - 62-39! won 19 straight regular season home wins (28 straight over a 2 year stretch) achieved a #14 regular season national ranking and Haas Arena was rocking with several sell outs and attendance in the 9-10K range/game. He brought in some outstanding players and had several other highly rated recruits that the admissions turned down unfortunately. Yes the offense was stagnate, but the overall results were solid. And his players highly respected him. I was sad to see him go - especially in light of what the following 6 years produced in the W/L column.

---

Yes, but that one season had 4 NBA prospects and a dead-eye 3-point shooter that went on to win an NC at Gonzaga the following year. Clearly, he was not going to be able to sustain that kind of roster as evidenced by the roster he left for Jones. With his overall career record, rehiring Martin now would be worse than hiring Fox in 2019.

---

No one has ever won a national championship in hoops at Gonzaga, but losing Matthews hurt.

I'm not sure the roster he left would have been the roster if he stayed. I sure as hell wouldn't go back to that well but I also wouldn't denigrate what he did at Cal despite being frustrated at times.

socaltownie said:

---

BearlyCareAnymore said:

---

Jeff82 said:

---

Monty is right about the academics being an issue.

---

---

No
He
is
NOT!!!

Now if you tell me that A-G is an issue I will believe it. Especially the second year of Foreign language the the 4th year of Math. Those raise the stakes.

But I can tell you EMPHATICALLY that getting a 3.0 in California High Schools today is simple. I mean ridiculously easy. I mean you have to show up and have a pulse and probably can't skip 100 days to play hoop but essentially it is EASY. And Cal also provides for some sports admit slots for kids that can't get that.

Now if you tell me that these SA also need to satify A-G I will take back the above. There are probably good reasons that creates a pretty significant barrier - especially for out of state kids whose HS circulumn doesn't align. But it takes a real effort these days to pull an under 3.0

#Ihaveahighschoolseniorandjunior

---

If you read my other post on the subject you will see that I agree with everything you say here and I said Monty is playing on the fact that people don't know how easy it is to get a 3.0 now (I have a college junior and high school senior). I said you have to have a learning disability, be monumentally stupid, or just not care. Problem is that most of the recruits are falling into the below 3.0 category and since Cal is not going to change, that is an issue. Should any of these guys be able to pull a 3.0? Absolutely. Do they? No. I am completely against taking sub 3.0 guys regularly (unless they have learning disabilities that can be corrected/mitigated) because of the above, but I know what the cost is. I do think that people who want us to abandon that policy should truly understand how low a bar that is.

I also pointed out that if you can go to one place and train for your chosen field 24x7 and another place and spend 80% of your time doing stuff that has nothing to do with your chosen field, what are you going to choose? Plenty of schools provide that option.

"No one has ever won a national championship in hoops at Gonzaga, but losing Matthews hurt."

Everyone has their own facts. It's a new thing.

I feel sorry for any student that attends a school where attaining a 3.0 gpa is as way as you say. Teachers at schools like that have no business teaching and parents that do nothing about it should be ashamed of themselves.

HateRed said:

---

I feel sorry for any student that attends a school where attaining a 3.0 gpa is as way as you say. Teachers at schools like that have no business teaching and parents that do nothing about it should be ashamed of themselves.

---

Agree! Fire all the ungrateful $66,000.00 a year ingrates!

HateRed said:

---

I feel sorry for any student that attends a school where attaining a 3.0 gpa is as way as you say. Teachers at schools like that have no business teaching and parents that do nothing about it should be ashamed of themselves.

---

Whatever. Be oblivious if you want to be. We are talking top high schools. Grading being easier is not an indication of the type of education students get. It is national and it is just how things are graded. Already over ten years ago a study showed over 50% of high school grades were A's. A high school can't screw their kids college chances by grading like it is 1975.

And by the way, Cal, like virtually every other university that wasn't already inflating grades, grades far easier now and has a much higher graduation rate than when I was in school. There is nothing wrong with it, but you have to be realistic that the standards for grading have changed.

Civil Bear said:

---

With his overall career record, rehiring Martin now would be worse than hiring Fox in 2019.

---

Captain Fletcher to Senator Lane: "Cuonzo Martin is an easy man to track. He leaves a trail of broken hearts wherever he goes."

Golden One said:

---

socaltownie said:

---

I understand the Wilcox contract extension - because losing him if that really was going to happen to Oregon would have been program busting.

---

You're kidding, right? Losing Wilcox to Oregon would have been the best thing to happen to Cal football since the hiring of Jeff Tedford.

---

I agree 100%! I really like Wilcox as a person and his personality but as a coach for our Bears his teams have been less than stellar. He has an overall losing record here and he has been given enough time to show us something. Lets take the guy they hired at Oregon instead.

I can guarantee you that any student in California that would go to the high school where I taught would not garner a 3.0 gpa by sleep walking through classes. I would be very interested in seeing a writing sample of your high school student. A-G is not a piece of cake at the high school I taught at for many years.

Thar was then and this is now. I am talking about top 10 high-schools in the state with excellent uc placements. No one gets Bs

socaltownie said:

---

Thar was then and this is now. I am talking about top 10 high-schools in the state with excellent uc placements. No one gets Bs

---

Of course, at the top high schools, they have the best teachers, the most serious students, and the best funding.

That's why they call them "top 10 high-schools".

No hyphen, Oxford comma is acceptable, but not recommended.

I attended a ghetto high school with ten, count 'em, TEN proven child molesters.

Those were the days when men were men.