That is a good question, OD. We may never know.oskidunker said:I wonder if the players that left would have still left if Fox was retainedBeachedBear said:The thing is, he was bad in every facet. And seems to have gotten worse and worse.calumnus said:
Still blows me away how bad Fox was.
I mean I guess he could run a practice as well as a HS coach, so with Wykings players, he was able to show a very small amount of organization that was absent under Jones. But that lasted, what - 3 or 4 games?
A couple months ago, I was surprised that he hadn't completely lost the locker room, but since Madsen came on board, it seems that it was even worse than I imagined and a tribute to the players to stick it out DESPITE Mark Fox.
But regardless of shortcomings, regression, culture-misfit, whatever. The stubborn reluctance to attempt the slightest change in the face of blatant failure is mind boggling.
Mark Fox Venting Tent
10,357 Views |
63 Replies |
Last: 1 yr ago by bearister
BeachedBear said:The thing is, he was bad in every facet. And seems to have gotten worse and worse.calumnus said:
Still blows me away how bad Fox was.
I mean I guess he could run a practice as well as a HS coach, so with Wykings players, he was able to show a very small amount of organization that was absent under Jones. But that lasted, what - 3 or 4 games?
A couple months ago, I was surprised that he hadn't completely lost the locker room, but since Madsen came on board, it seems that it was even worse than I imagined and a tribute to the players to stick it out DESPITE Mark Fox.
But regardless of shortcomings, regression, culture-misfit, whatever. The stubborn reluctance to attempt the slightest change in the face of blatant failure is mind boggling.
Some articles on Coach K:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2022/03/16/mike-krzyzewski-coaching-legacy/
https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/mike-krzyzewski-became-the-goat-by-being-the-ultimate-chameleon/amp/
Covid is what saved Fox from getting fired sooner. As for the extensions all the coaches received due to Covid - not to mention the idiotic buy-out clause for Wilcox - that was just straight up incompetence.BeachedBear said:I can think of two reasons:calfanz said:
The last month has created an energy and excitement that is far and above ANY time during the Fox "era'
The bullcrap excuses, lack of transparency, lazy recruiting, no promotions are all the more apparent now.
The fact that that troll hung around for that long is truly inexplicable
One - Jimmy 'the squeeze' Knowlton
Two - million$ of other reason$
But yeah, the sense of direction and momentum was clearly bad at the end of year 1. By the end of year 2, it was completely obvious. Only the tired excuses dragged it on to year 3. year 4 was simply criminal.
Why Jones was let go after 2 seasons, but Fox retained for 4 (and given a hefty extension) - leads me to believe that Knowlton is corrupt.
When Fox came in some our best players left. Over the next years under Fox more of our best players left.BeachedBear said:That is a good question, OD. We may never know.oskidunker said:
I wonder if the players that left would have still left if Fox was retained
When Madsen came in our best players stayed.
stu said:When Fox came in some our best players left. Over the next years under Fox more of our best players left.BeachedBear said:That is a good question, OD. We may never know.oskidunker said:
I wonder if the players that left would have still left if Fox was retained
When Madsen came in our best players stayed.
Paradoxically it can be said;
Mark Fox was the opposite of Wyking Jones.
Mark Madsen is the opposite of Mark Fox.
Knowlton's reactionary flailing finally landed us a good coach. We are very lucky.
That's a really good point. I would have put Sam Alajiki in the category of one of our best players (maybe 4th best). However, I would say our three best players -- Newell, Askew and Celestine -- are staying put, and our recruits did not opt out (although to his credit, Joel Brown did not either when Fox was hired). I am also glad ND Okafor is staying as well. I am looking forward to seeing what Mad Dog and his coaching staff can do to develop him, as the raw talent I believe is there. Bowser seems to also have raw talent which the staff can work with. He won't be depended on to start, which may help him to play without added pressure.stu said:When Fox came in some our best players left. Over the next years under Fox more of our best players left.BeachedBear said:That is a good question, OD. We may never know.oskidunker said:
I wonder if the players that left would have still left if Fox was retained
When Madsen came in our best players stayed.
The rapidity with which Madsen has come in and turned this program upside down, getting good portal commits, keeping recruits and players, and apparently jump-starting a practice facility is astounding, and tons of credit to him and his energy. But it also just highlights how inept Fox was at ever single aspect of his job. Everything he used as an excuse Madsen just blew on by. It'll be interesting and important to see how he recruits in the future to develop some continuity, but so far this is flat out amazing.calumnus said:stu said:When Fox came in some our best players left. Over the next years under Fox more of our best players left.BeachedBear said:That is a good question, OD. We may never know.oskidunker said:
I wonder if the players that left would have still left if Fox was retained
When Madsen came in our best players stayed.
Paradoxically it can be said;
Mark Fox was the opposite of Wyking Jones.
Mark Madsen is the opposite of Mark Fox.
Knowlton's reactionary flailing finally landed us a good coach. We are very lucky.
IMO the only thing worse than Fox were the losers who believed that Cal was the reason Fox was a complete failure.
Cal hired Fox so they University is partly responsible.PtownBear1 said:
IMO the only thing worse than Fox were the losers who believed that Cal was the reason Fox was a complete failure.
Go Bears!
PtownBear1 said:
IMO the only thing worse than Fox were the losers who believed that Cal was the reason Fox was a complete failure.
Absolutely. Can we have a venting tent for that? Despite pointing out that just a few years before Cal had multiple McDonalds AAs on the team, went undefeated at home and earned a 4 Seed? To which they responded complaining about Cuonzo's offense, or saying Cuonzo just "got lucky" or pointing out how bad Cuonzo did in recruiting at Missouri all of which actually only proves the point that Cal was not the problem.
Knowlton "We knew it would be a long turnaround, but Mark Fox is doing it the right way." Uggh.
It's the lack of institutional support, it's the chancellor, the AD, the lack of practice facility, the faculty hates athletics, the academic restrictions, the student apathy, the city of Berkeley, the cal brand sucks... am I missing any?
It's all about the Coach.
It's all about the Coach.
Buh?BC Calfan said:
It's the lack of institutional support, it's the chancellor, the AD, the lack of practice facility, the faculty hates athletics, the academic restrictions, the student apathy, the city of Berkeley, the cal brand sucks... am I missing any?
It's all about the Coach.
In his recent interview Madsen said there will be no whining. I wonder if he knew this was an issue. It was bad enough that Fox was incompetent at every aspect of his job. (Don't get me started on the people who thought he was good at Xs and Os). But when he whined about injuries and said he knew what he signed up for, that was way, way too much.
sluggo said:
In his recent interview Madsen said there will be no whining. I wonder if he knew this was an issue. It was bad enough that Fox was incompetent at every aspect of his job. (Don't get me started on the people who thought he was good at Xs and Os). But when he whined about injuries and said he knew what he signed up for, that was way, way too much.
Yes, like taking our $2 million a year while not doing his job and blaming everyone else was torture.
Oh, yeah, "Cal is so cheap, such a bad place, Mark Fox is the only one who would take the job, name another basketball coach who would come here."
"Mark Fox did a great job at Nevada, 20 years ago, he did not forget how to recruit or coach."
Good to know we still made the cut after the Fox era. Also feels good to be on the list over Furd, SC and UW.
The top 5 college basketball programs of all-time in each power 6 conference🏀 pic.twitter.com/FOkiPVjfAy
— College Basketball Report (@CBKReport) July 11, 2023
Cal is only on the list because 5 billion years ago, before the modern game of basketball was invented, Cal won a championship.
Hopefully, Cal returns to that greatness and moves up the list.
Hopefully, Cal returns to that greatness and moves up the list.
Who knows, maybe Cal would have been #4 without the Mark Fox and Wyking Jones eras.BC Calfan said:
Good to know we still made the cut after the Fox era. Also feels good to be on the list over Furd, SC and UW.
Ran across this article again:
https://writeforcalifornia.com/p/the-sad-state-of-cal-basketball-commercial
https://writeforcalifornia.com/p/the-sad-state-of-cal-basketball-commercial
After many months, I've had the opportunity to enjoy Mad Dog and reflect on the Fox era.
1. Cal seemed to be in dire straights as a result of Jones era.
2. Fox seemed like a very meh hire (putting it nicely), how could it be worse than Jones?
3. It was. Jones was in over his head. But FOX should have been better. He went out of his way to be worse.
Fox seemed to make every wrong choice. Despite his many flaws - he never addressed them. Only exacerbated them.
Knowlton was a very bad mix with Fox. A perfect storm of ignorance, incompetence and intransigence. The dreaded 3 i's.
1. Cal seemed to be in dire straights as a result of Jones era.
2. Fox seemed like a very meh hire (putting it nicely), how could it be worse than Jones?
3. It was. Jones was in over his head. But FOX should have been better. He went out of his way to be worse.
Fox seemed to make every wrong choice. Despite his many flaws - he never addressed them. Only exacerbated them.
Knowlton was a very bad mix with Fox. A perfect storm of ignorance, incompetence and intransigence. The dreaded 3 i's.
Well, Stanford did win the NCAA in 1942, so there is that. USC and UW haven't done that yet.BC Calfan said:
Good to know we still made the cut after the Fox era. Also feels good to be on the list over Furd, SC and UW.The top 5 college basketball programs of all-time in each power 6 conference🏀 pic.twitter.com/FOkiPVjfAy
— College Basketball Report (@CBKReport) July 11, 2023
SFCityBear
ever wonder where the money is coming to pay for the fox buyout after he got extended by the con artist or the future mckeever related lawsuits?
instead of cutting teams & rightsizing the internal bureaucracy knowlton has borrowed $11,000,000 to cover costs including his $1,300,000+ salary
https://bearinsider.com/forums/2/topics/110786/0
instead of cutting teams & rightsizing the internal bureaucracy knowlton has borrowed $11,000,000 to cover costs including his $1,300,000+ salary
https://bearinsider.com/forums/2/topics/110786/0
calumnus said:
Still blows me away how bad Fox was.
xCoach Fox, The Cooler.
"Those who say don't know, and those who know don't say." - LT
The only reason the Cal made that list of the best P6 conference programs is that they won one championship? Obviously, whoever made the list has more knowledge of Cal basketball than that.parentswerebears said:
Cal is only on the list because 5 billion years ago, before the modern game of basketball was invented, Cal won a championship.
Hopefully, Cal returns to that greatness and moves up the list.
For openers, Cal men's basketball teams have won 14 Conference championships, which is the 3rd most in Conference history, behind UCLA and Arizona.
From 1957 through 1960, Cal teams overall were the most dominant in the country. They won 4 straight conference championships, went to 4 straight Elite Eights, two Final Fours, and two NCAA Championship games. In those 4 years, no other team in the country went to more than two Elite Eights. Only one other team in the country, Cincinnati, went to 2 Final Fours, and no other team in the country went to two NCAA Final games, in that 4 year stretch.
In 1957, Cal had lost 2 starters from a very good 1956 team, but they won the conference and went to the Elite 8
In 1958, Cal lost 4 starters from the 1957 Elite 8 team, but won the conference again, and again went to the Elite 8.
In 1959, Cal lost 3 starters from the 1958 Elite 8 team, but won the conference again, and went on to win the NCAA Championship.
In 1960, Cal lost 3 starters from the 1959 NCAA Championship team, but they won the conference again, and lost in the NCAA championship game to Ohio State, one of the greatest teams of all time, with Jerry Lucas, John Havlicek, Larry Siegfried, Joe Roberts, Mel Nowell, and Bobby Knight.
During those four years from 1957 to 1960, Cal had to win the conference to get an invitation to the NCAA Tournament, and Cal's main rival in the conference was UCLA, coached by none other than the great John Wooden. Cal's record vs UCLA and in those 4 years of 1957-1960 was 8 wins and one loss. John Wooden and UCLA would have to wait until 1964, 4 years after Pete Newell retired, to win their first NCAA Championship. UCLA would go on to win 9 more NCAA Championships under Wooden. One could say that if Pete Newell had not retired, John Wooden and UCLA might never have won an NCAA championship.
Cal has had several other very good basketball teams, and many very good basketball players.
Cal is one of the all-time great basketball programs, and has been influential in how the game has been played over the years.
SFCityBear
SFCityBear said:The only reason the Cal made that list of the best P6 conference programs is that they won one championship? Obviously, whoever made the list has more knowledge of Cal basketball than that.parentswerebears said:
Cal is only on the list because 5 billion years ago, before the modern game of basketball was invented, Cal won a championship.
Hopefully, Cal returns to that greatness and moves up the list.
For openers, Cal men's basketball teams have won 14 Conference championships, which is the 3rd most in Conference history, behind UCLA and Arizona.
From 1957 through 1960, Cal teams overall were the most dominant in the country. They won 4 straight conference championships, went to 4 straight Elite Eights, two Final Fours, and two NCAA Championship games. In those 4 years, no other team in the country went to more than two Elite Eights. Only one other team in the country, Cincinnati, went to 2 Final Fours, and no other team in the country went to two NCAA Final games, in that 4 year stretch.
In 1957, Cal had lost 2 starters from a very good 1956 team, but they won the conference and went to the Elite 8
In 1958, Cal lost 4 starters from the 1957 Elite 8 team, but won the conference again, and again went to the Elite 8.
In 1959, Cal lost 3 starters from the 1958 Elite 8 team, but won the conference again, and went on to win the NCAA Championship.
In 1960, Cal lost 3 starters from the 1959 NCAA Championship team, but they won the conference again, and lost in the NCAA championship game to Ohio State, one of the greatest teams of all time, with Jerry Lucas, John Havlicek, Larry Siegfried, Joe Roberts, Mel Nowell, and Bobby Knight.
During those four years from 1957 to 1960, Cal had to win the conference to get an invitation to the NCAA Tournament, and Cal's main rival in the conference was UCLA, coached by none other than the great John Wooden. Cal's record vs UCLA and in those 4 years of 1957-1960 was 8 wins and one loss. John Wooden and UCLA would have to wait until 1964, 4 years after Pete Newell retired, to win their first NCAA Championship. UCLA would go on to win 9 more NCAA Championships under Wooden. One could say that if Pete Newell had not retired, John Wooden and UCLA might never have won an NCAA championship.
Cal has had several other very good basketball teams, and many very good basketball players.
Cal is one of the all-time great basketball programs, and has been influential in how the game has been played over the years.
Glorious post. Go Bears!
SFCityBear said:The only reason the Cal made that list of the best P6 conference programs is that they won one championship? Obviously, whoever made the list has more knowledge of Cal basketball than that.parentswerebears said:
Cal is only on the list because 5 billion years ago, before the modern game of basketball was invented, Cal won a championship.
Hopefully, Cal returns to that greatness and moves up the list.
For openers, Cal men's basketball teams have won 14 Conference championships, which is the 3rd most in Conference history, behind UCLA and Arizona.
From 1957 through 1960, Cal teams overall were the most dominant in the country. They won 4 straight conference championships, went to 4 straight Elite Eights, two Final Fours, and two NCAA Championship games. In those 4 years, no other team in the country went to more than two Elite Eights. Only one other team in the country, Cincinnati, went to 2 Final Fours, and no other team in the country went to two NCAA Final games, in that 4 year stretch.
In 1957, Cal had lost 2 starters from a very good 1956 team, but they won the conference and went to the Elite 8
In 1958, Cal lost 4 starters from the 1957 Elite 8 team, but won the conference again, and again went to the Elite 8.
In 1959, Cal lost 3 starters from the 1958 Elite 8 team, but won the conference again, and went on to win the NCAA Championship.
In 1960, Cal lost 3 starters from the 1959 NCAA Championship team, but they won the conference again, and lost in the NCAA championship game to Ohio State, one of the greatest teams of all time, with Jerry Lucas, John Havlicek, Larry Siegfried, Joe Roberts, Mel Nowell, and Bobby Knight.
During those four years from 1957 to 1960, Cal had to win the conference to get an invitation to the NCAA Tournament, and Cal's main rival in the conference was UCLA, coached by none other than the great John Wooden. Cal's record vs UCLA and in those 4 years of 1957-1960 was 8 wins and one loss. John Wooden and UCLA would have to wait until 1964, 4 years after Pete Newell retired, to win their first NCAA Championship. UCLA would go on to win 9 more NCAA Championships under Wooden. One could say that if Pete Newell had not retired, John Wooden and UCLA might never have won an NCAA championship.
Cal has had several other very good basketball teams, and many very good basketball players.
Cal is one of the all-time great basketball programs, and has been influential in how the game has been played over the years.
Like I said- a billion years ago. Pretty much irrelevant now. We made a sweet sixteen in the last 1/2 century. That's it.
Why do you use the word "We"? It is obvious you are not one of us. if your are going to continue to denigrate Cal basketball history, you should try and learn it. Go back and look at the record. Cal made two sweet 16s in the last half century, not just one, and played very well both times. Once under Todd Bozeman, and then another one under Ben Braun.parentswerebears said:SFCityBear said:The only reason the Cal made that list of the best P6 conference programs is that they won one championship? Obviously, whoever made the list has more knowledge of Cal basketball than that.parentswerebears said:
Cal is only on the list because 5 billion years ago, before the modern game of basketball was invented, Cal won a championship.
Hopefully, Cal returns to that greatness and moves up the list.
For openers, Cal men's basketball teams have won 14 Conference championships, which is the 3rd most in Conference history, behind UCLA and Arizona.
From 1957 through 1960, Cal teams overall were the most dominant in the country. They won 4 straight conference championships, went to 4 straight Elite Eights, two Final Fours, and two NCAA Championship games. In those 4 years, no other team in the country went to more than two Elite Eights. Only one other team in the country, Cincinnati, went to 2 Final Fours, and no other team in the country went to two NCAA Final games, in that 4 year stretch.
In 1957, Cal had lost 2 starters from a very good 1956 team, but they won the conference and went to the Elite 8
In 1958, Cal lost 4 starters from the 1957 Elite 8 team, but won the conference again, and again went to the Elite 8.
In 1959, Cal lost 3 starters from the 1958 Elite 8 team, but won the conference again, and went on to win the NCAA Championship.
In 1960, Cal lost 3 starters from the 1959 NCAA Championship team, but they won the conference again, and lost in the NCAA championship game to Ohio State, one of the greatest teams of all time, with Jerry Lucas, John Havlicek, Larry Siegfried, Joe Roberts, Mel Nowell, and Bobby Knight.
During those four years from 1957 to 1960, Cal had to win the conference to get an invitation to the NCAA Tournament, and Cal's main rival in the conference was UCLA, coached by none other than the great John Wooden. Cal's record vs UCLA and in those 4 years of 1957-1960 was 8 wins and one loss. John Wooden and UCLA would have to wait until 1964, 4 years after Pete Newell retired, to win their first NCAA Championship. UCLA would go on to win 9 more NCAA Championships under Wooden. One could say that if Pete Newell had not retired, John Wooden and UCLA might never have won an NCAA championship.
Cal has had several other very good basketball teams, and many very good basketball players.
Cal is one of the all-time great basketball programs, and has been influential in how the game has been played over the years.
Like I said- a billion years ago. Pretty much irrelevant now. We made a sweet sixteen in the last 1/2 century. That's it.
And all you care about seems to be the NCAA tournament. The NCAA did not even become a respected tournament until the 1950s, and it was USF and Cal who put the NCAA on the map. Before that the NIT was considered the true National Championship. Before that, it was the NIT, because the NIT was invitational, guaranteeing the best field, while the NCAA was only conference champions. And it was UCLA who brought it into a real spectacle. And in the 1950s, all the NCAA tournament games were played on back-to-back nights, unlike today's candy-ass schedules for all college teams, who rarely play on back to back nights, even during the season.
The "modern game" is nothing more than the old game with some rule changes, to favor the offense and limit or handicap the defense, one to make one type of shot worth much more than other types of shots, allow the offensive player more freedom to move, and give him a wide open path the bucket. Tip the scales in favor of the offenses. A couple of new semi-circles painted on the floor. I guess it is designed to put more butts in the seats, more viewers of the tube. Many of the players will be paid to play now. If I want to watch players play for money, I will watch the pros.
Gone are the reasons basketball was allowed in college to begin with, to help mature the student, teach him respect, teamwork, character, etc. College basketball is all about money now. I have never witnessed an era in college basketball with so little teamwork, and I have never witnessed an era that had more injuries, many of them quite serious, ending careers and more. How in the world do players get injured so much now, with all they rules favoring the offensive player? College basketball has become little more than a way to get exposure, and draw interest from the pro teams, with the best players leaving after a year.
Why is it you and so many Cal basketball fans have no respect for Cal's past players and past teams which accomplished a lot in the sport they played? I don't hear UCLA fans ridiculing Kareem, or any fans trashing Bill Russell and what he did. The only reason I joined this forum years ago was to counter all the negative vibes here by so-called Cal fans toward Cal basketball of the past. I failed to move the needle.
Why is basketball the only sport where we ridicule players and teams of old and the games they played, in the era they played in? Why doesn't anyone here trash Willie Mays or Sandy Koufax or Ted Williams? Or teams of Will Clark or Jack Clark? Why don't we trash the old 49er teams of John Brodie, or the teams of Joe Montana. Why aren't the old track stars ridiculed? No one seems to ridicule Jesse Owens, or John Thomas, or Bob Hayes, when their records are long gone? Who bashes great golfers like Hogan or Snead, or Nicklaus or Palmer? Who trashes tennis stars like Tilden, Borg or Laver? I read here Cal fans denigrating our own Darrall Imhoff, for being slow, or because he was one of the defenders who defended against Wilt the night he scored 100. Darrall Imhoff was the most dominant center in college basketball for two seasons.
It is clear that all the sports have evolved and the athletes are bigger, stronger, faster, can jump higher, the fields and equipment are so much better, so what is the reason why you and many Cal fans have chosen to single out Cal's basketball teams and players of the past and what they accomplished for ridicule?
I remember a couple of years ago at the PAC12 basketball tournament, one obnoxious announcer stuck a microphone and the face of a spectator, Julius Erving, and asked, "Dr. J, the players of today are so athletic, were they better than players of your era?" Dr J. replied, "Well, they are very athletic, but we were not allowed to do all the things they are allowed to do."
I asked a friend who once played for Red Auerbach, did he like to watch basketball today? He said, "No, I don't watch anymore. They palm it, they carry it, and they charge. It is not the same game." If the fans get bored with modern basketball, the men who control the game will change some of the rules back to allowing some more defense. Players don't like to get scored upon. Rules change back and forth from one era to another, to favor offense or defense, and back again in basketball, baseball, and football. So enjoy the modern game while you can, because if history is any guide, they will change the rules back one day, and you will not be a happy camper.
SFCityBear
Many great points SFCB. And while many of your statements are subject to different opinions and discussion, the most important thing you bring up is that sometimes this site becomes a real downer with all of the cynicism and negativism directed to Cal basketball and its history.
People seem to forget that presently there are over 300 division one basketball programs and that no more than 50 of them have ever won a National title or ever been close. Sure, we are not Kentucky, UCLA or Duke, but Cal basketball history is as good as a decent majority of schools so why in the hell should we take every opportunity to bash it?
Looking to forward to an entertaining season. Go Bears!
People seem to forget that presently there are over 300 division one basketball programs and that no more than 50 of them have ever won a National title or ever been close. Sure, we are not Kentucky, UCLA or Duke, but Cal basketball history is as good as a decent majority of schools so why in the hell should we take every opportunity to bash it?
Looking to forward to an entertaining season. Go Bears!
Thanks RedlessWardrobe. I don't enjoy writing this stuff about the way the game is played, and I did not start this debate. I don't understand the cynicism either, and I started writing here because it seemed so few Cal fans knew much about our history in basketball. We have some things to be proud of. I don't like criticizing the way the game is played now, with the new rules, because for these kids playing now, it is all they know, and it is part of why they love the game.RedlessWardrobe said:
Many great points SFCB. And while many of your statements are subject to different opinions and discussion, the most important thing you bring up is that sometimes this site becomes a real downer with all of the cynicism and negativism directed to Cal basketball and its history.
People seem to forget that presently there are over 300 division one basketball programs and that no more than 50 of them have ever won a National title or ever been close. Sure, we are not Kentucky, UCLA or Duke, but Cal basketball history is as good as a decent majority of schools so why in the hell should we take every opportunity to bash it?
Looking to forward to an entertaining season. Go Bears!
I think I just chalk the cynicism up to the fact that Cal has not won much except the great PAC10 title in 2010 and fans here even ridiculed that, by claiming the players and teams in the league were not as talented as most years. Then they ridiculed how they played in the NCAA, which was not that bad, really. Those reactions disgusted me. What were those 2010 players supposed to do, refuse to play that year? They played, gave it all for Cal and for glory for themselves and fans alike, and they won the PAC10, first time in 50 years. Even if Bear Insider fans don't care about that Championship, the players do, and the bond and the love for each other will last them a lifetime. With fans, especially Cal fans, it is "What have you done for me lately?" I hope Madsen can change that.
SFCityBear
"Submitted for your approval, I propose that the Huskies add Mark Fox as an assistant so that they can be the only program in NCAA Basketball history to have two assistant coaches on staff personally responsible for an aggregate 32 consecutive losses at the same program (Cal).
You unlock this door with the key of imagination. Beyond it is another dimension - a dimension of sound, a dimension of sight, a dimension of mind. You're moving into a land of both shadow and substance, of things and ideas. You've just crossed over into the Twilight Zone."
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