This search has yielded some really interesting candidates, and several whom might reasonably do a good job here at Cal. JP, AAR, and a few others have been reportedly targeted. This raises the question, why on earth did we land on Fox the last cycle? We are undoubtedly in far worse shape as a program now than we were in 2019. In 2019, Cal was coming off just 2 down years, before which we were a 4 seed in the tournament. Yet after 6 years of gross ineptitude, we now have a roster list of potential candidates all of whom are far better than Fox. So this begs the question, how on earth did we arrive at Fox as our choice? Knowlton must have really been blowing smoke to suggest that Fox was the best candidate and that all the other candidates turned him down or told him the job was too hard, right?? That must have been the WORST search process in the history of search processes!
Post Reply
1 of 1
Something I'm Confused About
2,933 Views |
23 Replies |
Last: 1 yr ago by bearister
Because we locked Shocky1 and Chapman is gone in a room together and wouldn't let him out until they decided on a choice.*
Yes, the entire house of cards would collapse 3 questions into the cross examination of Knowlton.
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
Worked out for the best. A profit was turned.
eastcoastcal said:
This search has yielded some really interesting candidates, and several whom might reasonably do a good job here at Cal. JP, AAR, and a few others have been reportedly targeted. This raises the question, why on earth did we land on Fox the last cycle? We are undoubtedly in far worse shape as a program now than we were in 2019. In 2019, Cal was coming off just 2 down years, before which we were a 4 seed in the tournament. Yet after 6 years of gross ineptitude, we now have a roster list of potential candidates all of whom are far better than Fox. So this begs the question, how on earth did we arrive at Fox as our choice? Knowlton must have really been blowing smoke to suggest that Fox was the best candidate and that all the other candidates turned him down or told him the job was too hard, right?? That must have been the WORST search process in the history of search processes!
Knowlton knows nothing. He is incompetent, in over his head, a horrible fit for Cal. He has no clue what will be successful at Cal because he does not understand basketball, Cal or young people that are attracted to Cal.
The Fox hire was a reaction to the failure of Wyking Jones as a hire. Fox is the exact opposite, the other extreme, and even more of a failure, Wyking Jones was a young charismatic African American from L. A., who was an assistant to Westphal, Alford and Pitino (including a National Championship) before Martin, with AAU contacts and experience recruiting to Cal, but zero head coaching experience and would make too many rookie mistakes in his first (only) two years. Fox was an older white guy from the Midwest, with a surly personality, who disdains AAU, who had 9 years as a head coach at the P5 level to prove his mediocrity at this level.
Rather than realizing the problem with the Wyking hire was that Wyking had zero head coaching experience at any level, and you would like to see that demonstrated first, Knowlton instead asked the search firm for a coach with P5 head coaching experience, but one that we could afford. That guarantees you are going to get a fired coach who failed at the P5 level and whose other offers are mid-majors at best. Unemployed means no buyout! Fox and Miles. Between the two, Fox is the more authoritarian coach that gives lip service to "doing it the right way" (without a lot of specifics) and with whom the former Army offficer felt MOST comfortable.
eastcoastcal said:
This search has yielded some really interesting candidates, and several whom might reasonably do a good job here at Cal. JP, AAR, and a few others have been reportedly targeted. This raises the question, why on earth did we land on Fox the last cycle? We are undoubtedly in far worse shape as a program now than we were in 2019. In 2019, Cal was coming off just 2 down years, before which we were a 4 seed in the tournament. Yet after 6 years of gross ineptitude, we now have a roster list of potential candidates all of whom are far better than Fox. So this begs the question, how on earth did we arrive at Fox as our choice? Knowlton must have really been blowing smoke to suggest that Fox was the best candidate and that all the other candidates turned him down or told him the job was too hard, right?? That must have been the WORST search process in the history of search processes!
because Cal athletics is dumb. Whatever didn't work out last time, they automatically go HARD the other direction. Wyking was a no experience and was on the younger side. He failed. So Knowlton decided the next coach needed to be an established head coach. Fox had nearly a decade as a major conference head coach. Add a dash of affinity bias and a sprinkling of AD knows nothing about basketball specifically and the most important part of his job (hiring revenue sports coaches) in general and you get Fox.
We did the same thing with football. Why did we hire Wilcox? Because the last guy was an offensive guy from the South who "didn't get" the culture or whatever. So we go 180, defensive first guy from the West who coached here before. Whenever we finally put ourselves out of our self imposed Wilcox misery we'll try offense first again.
100%. My take on Knowlton is he wants to hire someone good enough so he can go back to playing solitaire on his office computer. He thought Fox was such a guy, and he celebrated a little too publicly about how little work he did. Hiring Pasternack now would make the most sense because everyone would leave him alone for a bit. And Pasternack might be the right guy. But I wish the person leading the search was someone who actually cared about winning championships.calumnus said:eastcoastcal said:
This search has yielded some really interesting candidates, and several whom might reasonably do a good job here at Cal. JP, AAR, and a few others have been reportedly targeted. This raises the question, why on earth did we land on Fox the last cycle? We are undoubtedly in far worse shape as a program now than we were in 2019. In 2019, Cal was coming off just 2 down years, before which we were a 4 seed in the tournament. Yet after 6 years of gross ineptitude, we now have a roster list of potential candidates all of whom are far better than Fox. So this begs the question, how on earth did we arrive at Fox as our choice? Knowlton must have really been blowing smoke to suggest that Fox was the best candidate and that all the other candidates turned him down or told him the job was too hard, right?? That must have been the WORST search process in the history of search processes!
Knowlton knows nothing. He is incompetent, in over his head, a horrible fit for Cal. He has no clue what will be successful at Cal because he does not understand basketball, Cal or young people that are attracted to Cal.
The Fox hire was a reaction to the failure of Wyking Jones as a hire. Fox is the exact opposite, the other extreme, and even more of a failure, Wyking Jones was a young charismatic African American from L. A., who was an assistant to Westphal, Alford and Pitino (including a National Championship) before Martin, with AAU contacts and experience recruiting to Cal, but zero head coaching experience and would make too many rookie mistakes in his first (only) two years. Fox was an older white guy from the Midwest, with a surly personality, who disdains AAU, who had 9 years as a head coach at the P5 level to prove his mediocrity at this level.
Rather than realizing the problem with the Wyking hire was that Wyking had zero head coaching experience at any level, and you would like to see that demonstrated first, Knowlton instead asked the search firm for a coach with P5 head coaching experience, but one that we could afford. That guarantees you are going to get a fired coach who failed at the P5 level and whose other offers are mid-majors at best. Unemployed means no buyout! Fox and Miles. Between the two, Fox is the more authoritarian coach that gives lip service to "doing it the right way" (without a lot of specifics) and with whom the former Army offficer felt MOST comfortable.
Knowlton has only one person to please - the equally inept Chancellor Carol. And once he got her to go the Smith College route of "Winning's not the most important thing", he has then not only been able to coast, but to get an unprecedented contract extension.
boredom said:eastcoastcal said:
This search has yielded some really interesting candidates, and several whom might reasonably do a good job here at Cal. JP, AAR, and a few others have been reportedly targeted. This raises the question, why on earth did we land on Fox the last cycle? We are undoubtedly in far worse shape as a program now than we were in 2019. In 2019, Cal was coming off just 2 down years, before which we were a 4 seed in the tournament. Yet after 6 years of gross ineptitude, we now have a roster list of potential candidates all of whom are far better than Fox. So this begs the question, how on earth did we arrive at Fox as our choice? Knowlton must have really been blowing smoke to suggest that Fox was the best candidate and that all the other candidates turned him down or told him the job was too hard, right?? That must have been the WORST search process in the history of search processes!
because Cal athletics is dumb. Whatever didn't work out last time, they automatically go HARD the other direction. Wyking was a no experience and was on the younger side. He failed. So Knowlton decided the next coach needed to be an established head coach. Fox had nearly a decade as a major conference head coach. Add a dash of affinity bias and a sprinkling of AD knows nothing about basketball specifically and the most important part of his job (hiring revenue sports coaches) in general and you get Fox.
We did the same thing with football. Why did we hire Wilcox? Because the last guy was an offensive guy from the South who "didn't get" the culture or whatever. So we go 180, defensive first guy from the West who coached here before. Whenever we finally put ourselves out of our self imposed Wilcox misery we'll try offense first again.
Yes, and yes about Wilcox. Unfortunately Knowlton bit hard on the "he turned down Oregon" hook and extended him out through year 11. The he did the same with Northwestern and got an 8 year extension from Christ.
I'm hoping Spavital/Wilcox works, though if it does we will probably need to replace Spavital. Maybe Davis Webb? It would be a great problem to have.
My gut says Pasternack will be another Wilcox. He's not the coach we need but the one we deserve. He'll be a good enough coach to make us look competitive but will not quite get Cal to where we desire it to be.
Unfortunately that sounds great right about now.bluehenbear said:
My gut says Pasternack will be another Wilcox. He's not the coach we need but the one we deserve. He'll be a good enough coach to make us look competitive but will not quite get Cal to where we desire it to be.
bluehenbear said:
My gut says Pasternack will be another Wilcox. He's not the coach we need but the one we deserve. He'll be a good enough coach to make us look competitive but will not quite get Cal to where we desire it to be.
My gut is there too, but my head is saying "this is the NIL era, if these rumored big money boosters really will back him with significant NIL, I could see big things happening. After all, it only takes a few great players in basketball."
bluehenbear said:
My gut says Pasternack will be another Wilcox. He's not the coach we need but the one we deserve. He'll be a good enough coach to make us look competitive but will not quite get Cal to where we desire it to be.
Wilcox doesn't have us anywhere close to where we desire to be.
calumnus said:bluehenbear said:
My gut says Pasternack will be another Wilcox. He's not the coach we need but the one we deserve. He'll be a good enough coach to make us look competitive but will not quite get Cal to where we desire it to be.
My gut is there too, but my head is saying "this is the NIL era, if these rumored big money boosters really will back him with significant NIL, I could see big things happening. After all, it only takes a few great players in basketball."
Why would boosters give NIL money to Pasternack and not to another coach? Is he perceived as that much better than any other candidate?
-- If Spavital succeeds at Cal and then gets a "better" job, that's a good thing. I'd rather have a coach do well enough that others notice and want to hire him, than a coach who doesn't do well.calumnus said:
I'm hoping Spavital/Wilcox works, though if it does we will probably need to replace Spavital. Maybe Davis Webb? It would be a great problem to have.
-- My guess is that Webb's ambitions lie in the NFL. If he excels as a QB coach for a few years, his move up will be an NFL offensive coordinator job.
Fox wasn't nearly Fox until he became Fox.
Pasternack has some personal connections to the Cal community, so there are some big donors who would give to NIL on day one for that reason. Or at least that is what I have read on BI. Whether those donors could be won over by another coach is unclear, and it is also unclear whether other donors would step up.dimitrig said:calumnus said:bluehenbear said:
My gut says Pasternack will be another Wilcox. He's not the coach we need but the one we deserve. He'll be a good enough coach to make us look competitive but will not quite get Cal to where we desire it to be.
My gut is there too, but my head is saying "this is the NIL era, if these rumored big money boosters really will back him with significant NIL, I could see big things happening. After all, it only takes a few great players in basketball."
Why would boosters give NIL money to Pasternack and not to another coach? Is he perceived as that much better than any other candidate?
I think this also
Why? I watched his team play 2.5 games and they got a high value shot almost every possession. He has experience as a program builder and is known as a good recruiter. Everyone says he is a basketball junkie so he will work at it. After his stint at New Orleans I think he would be a perfect guy to overcome the small complications of coaching at Cal. And possibly being able to rebuild Cal's donor community seems like a big deal.calumnus said:bluehenbear said:
My gut says Pasternack will be another Wilcox. He's not the coach we need but the one we deserve. He'll be a good enough coach to make us look competitive but will not quite get Cal to where we desire it to be.
My gut is there too, but my head is saying "this is the NIL era, if these rumored big money boosters really will back him with significant NIL, I could see big things happening. After all, it only takes a few great players in basketball."
I worry most about the low defensive rankings. I dislike macho, high-pressure man-to-man defense unless you have the athletes to play it. UCSB played in a very weak conference, but he does have big time experience at U of A.. Technically, he has never won an NCAA tournament game, but the sample size is small.
Not that I matter, but I have been won over.
sluggo said:Why? I watched his team play 2.5 games and they got a high value shot almost every possession. He has experience as a program builder and is known as a good recruiter. Everyone says he is a basketball junkie so he will work at it. After his stint at New Orleans I think he would be a perfect guy to overcome the small complications of coaching at Cal. And possibly being able to rebuild Cal's donor community seems like a big deal.calumnus said:bluehenbear said:
My gut says Pasternack will be another Wilcox. He's not the coach we need but the one we deserve. He'll be a good enough coach to make us look competitive but will not quite get Cal to where we desire it to be.
My gut is there too, but my head is saying "this is the NIL era, if these rumored big money boosters really will back him with significant NIL, I could see big things happening. After all, it only takes a few great players in basketball."
I worry most about the low defensive rankings. I dislike macho, high-pressure man-to-man defense unless you have the athletes to play it. UCSB played in a very weak conference, but he does have big time experience at U of A.. Technically, he has never won an NCAA tournament game, but the sample size is small.
Not that I matter, but I have been won over.
Why my gut? Who knows. It's my gut. I just can't get excited about him. Maybe it is his interviews. "Loyalty" (to him, not the cause) is the primary quality he looks for in an assistant? That is a red flag. His staff of 6 has one African American? Maybe the kick. Maybe more what he says about the kick or about what happened in Arizona. He does not seem genuine.
As I said, my head has me convinced he could be good with significant NIL backing. His X's and O's are adequate. He would work hard. He is competitive. He knows Cal. His brother-in-law is Roxy. Shocky REALLY likes him. Donors are reportedly pushing for him. Dennis Gates is now unattainable. Kidd is employed. DeCuire is less successful. Coach K was never very likeabke. My head is convinced he would be at least acceptable, maybe even a master of the NIL era. I will be happy Fox is gone and Cal games will be watchable.
Probably because 2 of the past four hires were fantastically exciting and 2 were horrific. Joe p is in the meh middle. There isn't a compelling narrative but that doesn't mean he wouldn't be a great hire
There is no such thing as a candidate who is a sure thing to be a successful coach for Cal men's basketball. It took UCLA a long time and several coaches after John Wooden to find a coach that brought them back to the high level of success they sought. (And their current coach was not their first choice). Stanford has not managed to reach the level of success they had under Montgomery with their subsequent coaches. While WJ and MF were mind-bogglingly terrible hires, there are no guarantees that any new coach is going to get us to the point where we are competing for post season tournaments. And even if someone we passed over in a previous search went on to be successful at another place like Missouri or Arkansas, or wherever, those coaches still might not have been successful at Cal.
Correct. When people say Pasternack "checks all the boxes," they mean he appears to have the qualities that would make it more likely that he could be successful at Cal. But there are still no guarantees. That says we should try to give him a shorter contract for less money and a lot of incentives, but that's not how the process works, because he would certainly have better offers than that scenario. IMHO, given where we're starting from, we have to give him a five-year deal at good money, and hope he's successful.GoCal80 said:
There is no such thing as a candidate who is a sure thing to be a successful coach for Cal men's basketball. It took UCLA a long time and several coaches after John Wooden to find a coach that brought them back to the high level of success they sought. (And their current coach was not their first choice). Stanford has not managed to reach the level of success they had under Montgomery with their subsequent coaches. While WJ and MF were mind-bogglingly terrible hires, there are no guarantees that any new coach is going to get us to the point where we are competing for post season tournaments. And even if someone we passed over in a previous search went on to be successful at another place like Missouri or Arkansas, or wherever, those coaches still might not have been successful at Cal.
"100%. My take on Knowlton is he wants to hire someone good enough so he can go back to playing solitaire on his office computer."
Over 20 years ago I had a law partner that did just that…..and with his office door open. He had been a partner in a huge SF law firm that went Titanic and was laterally brought in to our shop on a puffed book of business. It took way too long to jettison him.
*How you prevent that is to start a guy like that offering to pay him based a percentage of his existing book. Puffers never take that deal.
Over 20 years ago I had a law partner that did just that…..and with his office door open. He had been a partner in a huge SF law firm that went Titanic and was laterally brought in to our shop on a puffed book of business. It took way too long to jettison him.
*How you prevent that is to start a guy like that offering to pay him based a percentage of his existing book. Puffers never take that deal.
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
Featured Stories
See All
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
Cal Wins Thriller Over Auburn
by Cal Athletics