As I wait for the office coffee to brew I thought I might jot down some thoughts. Feel free to get a good chuckle.
As way of background I grew up (ergo the username) as a "faculty brat", introduced to Cal Basketball in the Edwards days. It remains, I believe, the greatest sport in the world with a fantastic one-and-done tournament at the end of the season. It is perfection.
I also have work and educational experience that has taken me to several of the UCs OTHER than Cal. I have tangentially studied higher educational governance and understand the business side of higher education, again from a work experience. That doesn't make me an expert but hopefully provides a way of background in respect to perspective. I also tend to be someone of strong opinions.....
1) When it comes to revenue sports (and basketball) Cal is a REGIONAL school.
By this I mean that the core talent on Cal teams has ALWAYS come from California and often the Bay Area. There is nothing wrong with this. MOST NCAA teams are built this way. For many, college is a "first in family" experience. Being closer to home matters. Familiarity matters. There are maybe a HANDFUL of true bloodbloods that recruit nationally - either because they have brand (KU) or because they are forced to because of the lack of population in their metro (Zaga). But even North Carolina - the bluest of royalty - often had squads whose talent came from NC, Virginia or Georgia.
An exercise to do is to take Cal rosters that made it to the dance (or even got 10+ wins in the Pac12 and see who were the key guys and the glue guys. While there are the rare Jaylen Brown or the SAR, the rosters usually are chalk full of Birds, Cobbs, Theos,Andersons, Rabbs. Indeed, in my years of following Cal hoop really only three players made significant contributions to good Cal teams who were not California natives: Brown, Jorge, Randle.
1.5) That can create a disconnect with the university and the fans
But Cal as an institution is anything BUT a regional school. It has an international reputation and likely one of the 10 american institutions of Higher education that does. It draws applicants - undergrad, grad, and faculty - from all over the globe. And thus there is often this disconnect that while students from say France have heard about Cal and want to go to Cal the same should hold true for basketball players.
But this is not the case. For those that have the talent to win hoop is akin to a great musical conservancy. While UC Berkeley maybe a great shool for most, the other Berklee is where the apsiring jazz star is going. Thus point #1.
2) Being a regional sports player in the East Bay means having the cultural ability to recruit first in family to go to college African american players (as well as understand SoCal).
This is culturally senstive but it is critical that the staff understand African American families and cultural norms that exist in CALIFORNIA. That is different than the South. It is different than the urbanized east/midwest. It isn't some foreign land but it is distinct and important to navigate that with sensitivity and understanding.
Don't take the old white dude's word for it. Listen to Jaylen Brown who underscored the importance of coaching qualities in thinking about the replacements for Martin/Jones. Or even Jones - who was decidedly learning on the job but actually COULD STILL recruit better talent than Fox.
2.5) Doubly so because Cal is a pretty isolating place for AA students.
Cal isn't as bad as some but consider that 3.4% of the undergrad body at Cal is AA. UCLA isn't great but it is at 5%. Even Zona beats Cal at 3.9%. Lots of reasons for this - starting at the top with Prop 209, but it is what it is. That means that a coach must build a place of support for the players and help them navigate that.
3) One conclusion from this is that the new coach MUST know AAU California
Now people can learn. Skills can translate. But there are only so many days of the year. I truly believe that Cal's coach needs to be able to hit the ground running and that means having relationships with the amatuer coaches (AAU) throughout the state. Those relationships and trust are going to be key.
4) Another is that navigating the "inside" game will be key
Cal is different. It just is in the higher education landscape. Too many reasons for an already way long post to go into but a coach - especially with an "outsider" AD - will have a steep learning curve of what can't happen at Cal which is par for the course at most other P5s. And before you type "well just ask the chancellor" it is important to note that unlike a lot of places shorter term Chancellors in the system ALSO are pretty heavily constrained.
THis inside game gets you things. It gets you understanding (or patience) with faculty *******ry. It lets you build the critical support for grad transfer support. It alows you to understand how to ensure that funds are not diverted away from the program and also helps you understand who is important and who isn't in the overall Donor development game the university is playing.
5) So who should we hire SCT?
I have made no secret that I think Joe P navigates this the best. I also think a coach like Romar 15 years ago could have - and as we are finding out Seattle is a hard place to attract talent when you don't have SOCal AAU relationships.. I would have liked to see Gates give it a try - though worried that the Sherrif's roots were in the East rather than the West. Travis is still worth an interview because Montana is REALLY hard to recruit to. But whomever the candidate is these are qualities that matter.
6) But what about the picket fence?
One thing that drives me to drink (a tasty SoCal IPA) is the idea that we can just "coach em up". There just isn't TIME to do that. Especially true at a school like Cal that is going to demand time away from the court from its student athletes. Coaches matter but if your style of coaching requires hours upon hours of drilling and putting hoop in front of all good luck with that and Mr. Fox would like a call.
7) Or NIL?
Yes. NIL will matter. But I think it mostly matters as a "necessary but not sufficient" inducement. the NFL is a brutal career, with the average length of tenure being still under 4 years. You NEED to make money in college because your "paying" career is short.
But the NBA is far different. YEs. Players do wash out but for probably the top 2/3 of the league the earnings they could make in NIL are DWARFED by their first unrestricted constract. Their life time earnings will be far exceed anything an NIL deal will be. And NIL - unless just legalized inducements which the NCAA will probably wack - requires that you WIN and generate brand value.
Let me close with saying that is why I truly fear Miles. He checks NONE of the boxes except a white dude that Jeff the con man is probably comfortable with. He will fit the mold of Christ's misconception of the role of a modern revenue coach - a "molder of young adults with lifes lessons." Joe P isn't perfect but he is, IMO, the best candidate and can get the job done.
As way of background I grew up (ergo the username) as a "faculty brat", introduced to Cal Basketball in the Edwards days. It remains, I believe, the greatest sport in the world with a fantastic one-and-done tournament at the end of the season. It is perfection.
I also have work and educational experience that has taken me to several of the UCs OTHER than Cal. I have tangentially studied higher educational governance and understand the business side of higher education, again from a work experience. That doesn't make me an expert but hopefully provides a way of background in respect to perspective. I also tend to be someone of strong opinions.....
1) When it comes to revenue sports (and basketball) Cal is a REGIONAL school.
By this I mean that the core talent on Cal teams has ALWAYS come from California and often the Bay Area. There is nothing wrong with this. MOST NCAA teams are built this way. For many, college is a "first in family" experience. Being closer to home matters. Familiarity matters. There are maybe a HANDFUL of true bloodbloods that recruit nationally - either because they have brand (KU) or because they are forced to because of the lack of population in their metro (Zaga). But even North Carolina - the bluest of royalty - often had squads whose talent came from NC, Virginia or Georgia.
An exercise to do is to take Cal rosters that made it to the dance (or even got 10+ wins in the Pac12 and see who were the key guys and the glue guys. While there are the rare Jaylen Brown or the SAR, the rosters usually are chalk full of Birds, Cobbs, Theos,Andersons, Rabbs. Indeed, in my years of following Cal hoop really only three players made significant contributions to good Cal teams who were not California natives: Brown, Jorge, Randle.
1.5) That can create a disconnect with the university and the fans
But Cal as an institution is anything BUT a regional school. It has an international reputation and likely one of the 10 american institutions of Higher education that does. It draws applicants - undergrad, grad, and faculty - from all over the globe. And thus there is often this disconnect that while students from say France have heard about Cal and want to go to Cal the same should hold true for basketball players.
But this is not the case. For those that have the talent to win hoop is akin to a great musical conservancy. While UC Berkeley maybe a great shool for most, the other Berklee is where the apsiring jazz star is going. Thus point #1.
2) Being a regional sports player in the East Bay means having the cultural ability to recruit first in family to go to college African american players (as well as understand SoCal).
This is culturally senstive but it is critical that the staff understand African American families and cultural norms that exist in CALIFORNIA. That is different than the South. It is different than the urbanized east/midwest. It isn't some foreign land but it is distinct and important to navigate that with sensitivity and understanding.
Don't take the old white dude's word for it. Listen to Jaylen Brown who underscored the importance of coaching qualities in thinking about the replacements for Martin/Jones. Or even Jones - who was decidedly learning on the job but actually COULD STILL recruit better talent than Fox.
2.5) Doubly so because Cal is a pretty isolating place for AA students.
Cal isn't as bad as some but consider that 3.4% of the undergrad body at Cal is AA. UCLA isn't great but it is at 5%. Even Zona beats Cal at 3.9%. Lots of reasons for this - starting at the top with Prop 209, but it is what it is. That means that a coach must build a place of support for the players and help them navigate that.
3) One conclusion from this is that the new coach MUST know AAU California
Now people can learn. Skills can translate. But there are only so many days of the year. I truly believe that Cal's coach needs to be able to hit the ground running and that means having relationships with the amatuer coaches (AAU) throughout the state. Those relationships and trust are going to be key.
4) Another is that navigating the "inside" game will be key
Cal is different. It just is in the higher education landscape. Too many reasons for an already way long post to go into but a coach - especially with an "outsider" AD - will have a steep learning curve of what can't happen at Cal which is par for the course at most other P5s. And before you type "well just ask the chancellor" it is important to note that unlike a lot of places shorter term Chancellors in the system ALSO are pretty heavily constrained.
THis inside game gets you things. It gets you understanding (or patience) with faculty *******ry. It lets you build the critical support for grad transfer support. It alows you to understand how to ensure that funds are not diverted away from the program and also helps you understand who is important and who isn't in the overall Donor development game the university is playing.
5) So who should we hire SCT?
I have made no secret that I think Joe P navigates this the best. I also think a coach like Romar 15 years ago could have - and as we are finding out Seattle is a hard place to attract talent when you don't have SOCal AAU relationships.. I would have liked to see Gates give it a try - though worried that the Sherrif's roots were in the East rather than the West. Travis is still worth an interview because Montana is REALLY hard to recruit to. But whomever the candidate is these are qualities that matter.
6) But what about the picket fence?
One thing that drives me to drink (a tasty SoCal IPA) is the idea that we can just "coach em up". There just isn't TIME to do that. Especially true at a school like Cal that is going to demand time away from the court from its student athletes. Coaches matter but if your style of coaching requires hours upon hours of drilling and putting hoop in front of all good luck with that and Mr. Fox would like a call.
7) Or NIL?
Yes. NIL will matter. But I think it mostly matters as a "necessary but not sufficient" inducement. the NFL is a brutal career, with the average length of tenure being still under 4 years. You NEED to make money in college because your "paying" career is short.
But the NBA is far different. YEs. Players do wash out but for probably the top 2/3 of the league the earnings they could make in NIL are DWARFED by their first unrestricted constract. Their life time earnings will be far exceed anything an NIL deal will be. And NIL - unless just legalized inducements which the NCAA will probably wack - requires that you WIN and generate brand value.
Let me close with saying that is why I truly fear Miles. He checks NONE of the boxes except a white dude that Jeff the con man is probably comfortable with. He will fit the mold of Christ's misconception of the role of a modern revenue coach - a "molder of young adults with lifes lessons." Joe P isn't perfect but he is, IMO, the best candidate and can get the job done.
