https://fb.watch/ytHdOsIzFJ/?fs=e

I hope you're right, but I've felt for a while that he'd end up at an SEC school that's driving distance from Atlanta.

You don't think he could have a leadership role and get plenty of playing time at another school?

Madsen did recruit JW initially - but I don't recall if JW had any second thoughts in his HS senior year that required Madsen to re-recruit him.

We had free agency for coaches for years. There are voices that have legitimacy on this issue - principally those ppint out what is going to be abysmal degree completion rates....but not the coaches who are exhausted

Spot on BearlyCare in your response.

You cannot expect to build a competitive team by getting just one high school recruit in 2024 and two this year (which Rivals 247 ranks Cal 10th in the ACC and 53rd in the nation).

And trying to rebuild your team every year through the portal. Cal doesn't have the financial resources to do that. Unless we can find a billionaire backer like St John's now has.

https://nypost.com/2025/03/18/sports/how-billionaire-mike-repole-helped-st-johns-to-march-madness/

Caleast said:

---

Spot on BearlyCare in your response.

You cannot expect to build a competitive team by getting just one high school recruit in 2024 and two this year (which Rivals 247 ranks Cal 10th in the ACC and 53rd in the nation).

And trying to rebuild your team every year through the portal. Cal doesn't have the financial resources to do that. Unless we can find a billionaire backer like St John's now has.

https://nypost.com/2025/03/18/sports/how-billionaire-mike-repole-helped-st-johns-to-march-madness/

---

"They" (and it isn't really anyone) are going to KILL college basketball. I literally laughed out loud in the airport when they atributed St. John's success on the TV to Coach.

Any word on the progress of the practice facility? Madsen made some pretty bold claims when he was hired that the facility would be under construction in the near future. It is now 2 years later and it seems progress has stalled. The women's team having a very good season should be helpful to getting donors to pony up money.

BearlyCareAnymore said:

---

socaltownie said:

---

Caleast said:

---

Spot on BearlyCare in your response.

You cannot expect to build a competitive team by getting just one high school recruit in 2024 and two this year (which Rivals 247 ranks Cal 10th in the ACC and 53rd in the nation).

And trying to rebuild your team every year through the portal. Cal doesn't have the financial resources to do that. Unless we can find a billionaire backer like St John's now has.

https://nypost.com/2025/03/18/sports/how-billionaire-mike-repole-helped-st-johns-to-march-madness/

---

"They" (and it isn't really anyone) are going to KILL college basketball. I literally laughed out loud in the airport when they atributed St. John's success on the TV to Coach.

---

I think that remains to be seen. I think one potential outcome to this is that it becomes so clear that only the big guys can compete that you end up with a national semi-pro league of roughly 30 teams and everyone else resets to what college basketball used to be about - a local/regional phenomena where coaches are paid a reasonable salary and students and alums go to games to watch guys who actually sit in class play and school spirit isn't driven by whether you make national news. Of course guys from those teams will still try and get recruited by the top 30, but it will have a lesser impact,

The problem right now is that you have programs that have such a disparity of resources playing in the same leagues. We are sour about it because we are being left behind. Self sorting may ultimately resolve this.

---

But St. Johns is not a big (nor wealthy) school. 819 million endowment isn't anything to sneeze at but it is probaby barely covering closeing the cost of admission for some very decidedly middle class students. They got a whale (for now). This is what adds to the screwness.

LudwigsFountain said:

---

Golden One said:

---

No surprise. That's the standard procedure in college athletics nowadays, and it's killing college football and basketball.

---

I was a decades long season ticket holder until Fox destroyed things. Was about to re-up when NIL hit. It takes away one of the things I enjoyed most, seeing the players improve over their stay at Cal. I'll take my grandkids to a few games, but that's it.

---

I have had hoop season tickets since 1986. My last in person game was just before Covid nuked season. I have not been back but maintained my tickets out of guilt over how my cheap my tuition was ($212.50/Quarter).
NIL, The Portal, the death of the Pac 12 and joining the ACC. The patient died. I'm unplugging next season. I will live vicariously through Big C's in person attendance.*

*Big C, I need a new scoreboard shot from you next season.

I will see what I can do (^), but they say lightening doesn't strike in the same place twice. Will be at most of the games though!

westcoastdude said:

---

Any word on the progress of the practice facility? Madsen made some pretty bold claims when he was hired that the facility would be under construction in the near future. It is now 2 years later and it seems progress has stalled. The women's team having a very good season should be helpful to getting donors to pony up money.

---

The practice facility is a red herring. It is trotted out as an example/excuse/explanation for various reasons whenever there is a new coach, AD, Chancellor or need for "Why Cal" explanation.

I'm old enough to remember when the argument for RSF being built is because the students didn't have anywhere to play basketball, because the athletes weren't letting them use the facilities. LOL

BeachedBear said:

---

westcoastdude said:

---

Any word on the progress of the practice facility? Madsen made some pretty bold claims when he was hired that the facility would be under construction in the near future. It is now 2 years later and it seems progress has stalled. The women's team having a very good season should be helpful to getting donors to pony up money.

---

The practice facility is a red herring. It is trotted out as an example/excuse/explanation for various reasons whenever there is a new coach, AD, Chancellor or need for "Why Cal" explanation.

I'm old enough to remember when the argument for RSF being built is because the students didn't have anywhere to play basketball, because the athletes weren't letting them use the facilities. LOL

---

No longer a red herring. These are professional athletes, looking to move up, and they expect every advantage, or they move on to a better opportunity.

For the sake of discussion, freshman are all over NCAA championships. The issue is "the right freshman". In today's game, freshman have played many high intensity games and all-star games: they don't need to adjust that much to a higher level of competition.

4thGenCal said:

---

Bobodeluxe said:

---

BeachedBear said:

---

westcoastdude said:

---

Any word on the progress of the practice facility? Madsen made some pretty bold claims when he was hired that the facility would be under construction in the near future. It is now 2 years later and it seems progress has stalled. The women's team having a very good season should be helpful to getting donors to pony up money.

---

The practice facility is a red herring. It is trotted out as an example/excuse/explanation for various reasons whenever there is a new coach, AD, Chancellor or need for "Why Cal" explanation.

I'm old enough to remember when the argument for RSF being built is because the students didn't have anywhere to play basketball, because the athletes weren't letting them use the facilities. LOL

---

No longer a red herring. These are professional athletes, looking to move up, and they expect every advantage, or they move on to a better opportunity.

---

Spot on - Cal get hammered by opposing coaches over recruiting by stating that Cal is one of just 5 D1 universities that don't have a dedicated practice facility. To think it's a "red herring"/minimal importance to players on the team/those considering Cal hoops, is simply naive and not aware of this key disadvantage. Our two key players have been kicked off Gold's gym multiple times this past season when they were wanting to get extra hoop time/shooting practice in. The lack of a dedicated basketball gym on campus is a huge negative to recruiting the top players. NIL first in importance, but, development, competing/post season team, housing and ability to practice at any time day or night is extremely important.

---

Ok. Ifbyou would rather go somewhere else and take less money and be in a program that does not run an Nba offense then go. There could because case like this.

Btw, I think Omot is dreaming if he thinks he can get more money as a re ward for not playing this year . I expect he will end up staying. But if he doesn't, who cares h e didn't show much in the few games he played .

4thGenCal said:

---

Bobodeluxe said:

---

BeachedBear said:

---

westcoastdude said:

---

Any word on the progress of the practice facility? Madsen made some pretty bold claims when he was hired that the facility would be under construction in the near future. It is now 2 years later and it seems progress has stalled. The women's team having a very good season should be helpful to getting donors to pony up money.

---

The practice facility is a red herring. It is trotted out as an example/excuse/explanation for various reasons whenever there is a new coach, AD, Chancellor or need for "Why Cal" explanation.

I'm old enough to remember when the argument for RSF being built is because the students didn't have anywhere to play basketball, because the athletes weren't letting them use the facilities. LOL

---

No longer a red herring. These are professional athletes, looking to move up, and they expect every advantage, or they move on to a better opportunity.

---

Spot on - Cal get hammered by opposing coaches over recruiting by stating that Cal is one of just 5 D1 universities that don't have a dedicated practice facility. To think it's a "red herring"/minimal importance to players on the team/those considering Cal hoops, is simply naive and not aware of this key disadvantage. Our two key players have been kicked off Gold's gym multiple times this past season when they were wanting to get extra hoop time/shooting practice in. The lack of a dedicated basketball gym on campus is a huge negative to recruiting the top players. NIL first in importance, but, development, competing/post season team, housing and ability to practice at any time day or night is extremely important.

---

Maybe I used the term incorrectly or out of context,..

YES, a practice facility is important to recruits. And THUS to the success of Mens Bball

However, recruits aren't going to build one. That will be done by the University and financed by large donors. The story/tale (and this the Red Herring analogy) will be trotted out to 'show' that something is happening when it really isn't. It is a vehicle for excuses - not a plan for success.

If the REAL issue was about privding JW a place to shoot, there have been dozens of excellent suggestions on this board alone for decades (YES - it has been that long) that do not cost $100M. And yet, when confronted about progress, James "Jimmy the Squeeze" Knowlton has a laundry list of why nots and it's much more complicated than BeachedBear's naive brain can comprehend. Sample dialog follows:

"You have to understand that doing anything on campus comes with a 9 figure price tag and years of red tape."

"But what about any of these dozens other stop gaps to cover that 10 year time line"

"Those simply is not possible"

"But if we can play basketball on an aircraft carrier, then we can get somewhere a dozen players can shoot around"

"Have I told about this fish I caught?"

On the subject of NIL. Next year, 25-26 will see a big change in how revenue sharing worsk. Under the proposed model, NCAA Division I schools could directly pay their athletes up to a tentative annual revenue sharing cap of $20.5 million per school. I assume it is not a hard cap, and schools can exceed this limit? But will it create more level playing field for a school like Cal?

BeachedBear said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

Bobodeluxe said:

---

BeachedBear said:

---

westcoastdude said:

---

Any word on the progress of the practice facility? Madsen made some pretty bold claims when he was hired that the facility would be under construction in the near future. It is now 2 years later and it seems progress has stalled. The women's team having a very good season should be helpful to getting donors to pony up money.

---

The practice facility is a red herring. It is trotted out as an example/excuse/explanation for various reasons whenever there is a new coach, AD, Chancellor or need for "Why Cal" explanation.

I'm old enough to remember when the argument for RSF being built is because the students didn't have anywhere to play basketball, because the athletes weren't letting them use the facilities. LOL

---

No longer a red herring. These are professional athletes, looking to move up, and they expect every advantage, or they move on to a better opportunity.

---

Spot on - Cal get hammered by opposing coaches over recruiting by stating that Cal is one of just 5 D1 universities that don't have a dedicated practice facility. To think it's a "red herring"/minimal importance to players on the team/those considering Cal hoops, is simply naive and not aware of this key disadvantage. Our two key players have been kicked off Gold's gym multiple times this past season when they were wanting to get extra hoop time/shooting practice in. The lack of a dedicated basketball gym on campus is a huge negative to recruiting the top players. NIL first in importance, but, development, competing/post season team, housing and ability to practice at any time day or night is extremely important.

---

Maybe I used the term incorrectly or out of context,..

YES, a practice facility is important to recruits. And THUS to the success of Mens Bball

However, recruits aren't going to build one. That will be done by the University and financed by large donors. The story/tale (and this the Red Herring analogy) will be trotted out to 'show' that something is happening when it really isn't. It is a vehicle for excuses - not a plan for success.

If the REAL issue was about privding JW a place to shoot, there have been dozens of excellent suggestions on this board alone for decades (YES - it has been that long) that do not cost $100M. And yet, when confronted about progress, James "Jimmy the Squeeze" Knowlton has a laundry list of why nots and it's much more complicated than BeachedBear's naive brain can comprehend. Sample dialog follows:

"You have to understand that doing anything on campus comes with a 9 figure price tag and years of red tape."

"But what about any of these dozens other stop gaps to cover that 10 year time line"

"Those simply is not possible"

"But if we can play basketball on an aircraft carrier, then we can get somewhere a dozen players can shoot around"

"Have I told about this fish I caught?"

---

Have you taken a tour of the Kansas basketball dorm? Kansas got the dorm and practice court built for a total of 11 million. Players want a place to shoot that is convenient. They don't want to have to walk away from campus.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.reddit.com/r/CollegeBasketball/comments/vtlabg/a_tour_of_the_kansas_basketball_players_dorm/&ved=2ahUKEwi7-vqj16GMAxUMLkQIHSSvDWEQjjh6BAgiEAE&sqi=2&usg=AOvVaw0as5sSwub-HhAwetQXbcJu

BearlyCareAnymore said:

---

socaltownie said:

---

Caleast said:

---

Spot on BearlyCare in your response.

You cannot expect to build a competitive team by getting just one high school recruit in 2024 and two this year (which Rivals 247 ranks Cal 10th in the ACC and 53rd in the nation).

And trying to rebuild your team every year through the portal. Cal doesn't have the financial resources to do that. Unless we can find a billionaire backer like St John's now has.

https://nypost.com/2025/03/18/sports/how-billionaire-mike-repole-helped-st-johns-to-march-madness/

---

"They" (and it isn't really anyone) are going to KILL college basketball. I literally laughed out loud in the airport when they atributed St. John's success on the TV to Coach.

---

I think that remains to be seen. I think one potential outcome to this is that it becomes so clear that only the big guys can compete that you end up with a national semi-pro league of roughly 30 teams and everyone else resets to what college basketball used to be about - a local/regional phenomena where coaches are paid a reasonable salary and students and alums go to games to watch guys who actually sit in class play and school spirit isn't driven by whether you make national news. Of course guys from those teams will still try and get recruited by the top 30, but it will have a lesser impact,

The problem right now is that you have programs that have such a disparity of resources playing in the same leagues. We are sour about it because we are being left behind. Self sorting may ultimately resolve this.

---

Yes indeed! But in addition I think we will see many of the smaller schools drop their intercollegiate sports entirely like Sonoma State just did.

Big C said:

---

He would pair better with Stojakovic if they could each have their own basketball.

---

This. I don't think it was sustainable having them both on the same team. I remember at the end of the Georgia Tech game, when Wilkinson was absolutely rolling in front of his family, Andrej looked him off, turned the ball over, which led to Wilkinson getting hurt on the other end.

Me, I would have preferred to keep Wilkinson, but they weren't a good pairing.

HoopDreams said:

---

oski003 said:

---

BeachedBear said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

Bobodeluxe said:

---

BeachedBear said:

---

westcoastdude said:

---

Any word on the progress of the practice facility? Madsen made some pretty bold claims when he was hired that the facility would be under construction in the near future. It is now 2 years later and it seems progress has stalled. The women's team having a very good season should be helpful to getting donors to pony up money.

---

The practice facility is a red herring. It is trotted out as an example/excuse/explanation for various reasons whenever there is a new coach, AD, Chancellor or need for "Why Cal" explanation.

I'm old enough to remember when the argument for RSF being built is because the students didn't have anywhere to play basketball, because the athletes weren't letting them use the facilities. LOL

---

No longer a red herring. These are professional athletes, looking to move up, and they expect every advantage, or they move on to a better opportunity.

---

Spot on - Cal get hammered by opposing coaches over recruiting by stating that Cal is one of just 5 D1 universities that don't have a dedicated practice facility. To think it's a "red herring"/minimal importance to players on the team/those considering Cal hoops, is simply naive and not aware of this key disadvantage. Our two key players have been kicked off Gold's gym multiple times this past season when they were wanting to get extra hoop time/shooting practice in. The lack of a dedicated basketball gym on campus is a huge negative to recruiting the top players. NIL first in importance, but, development, competing/post season team, housing and ability to practice at any time day or night is extremely important.

---

Maybe I used the term incorrectly or out of context,..

YES, a practice facility is important to recruits. And THUS to the success of Mens Bball

However, recruits aren't going to build one. That will be done by the University and financed by large donors. The story/tale (and this the Red Herring analogy) will be trotted out to 'show' that something is happening when it really isn't. It is a vehicle for excuses - not a plan for success.

If the REAL issue was about privding JW a place to shoot, there have been dozens of excellent suggestions on this board alone for decades (YES - it has been that long) that do not cost $100M. And yet, when confronted about progress, James "Jimmy the Squeeze" Knowlton has a laundry list of why nots and it's much more complicated than BeachedBear's naive brain can comprehend. Sample dialog follows:

"You have to understand that doing anything on campus comes with a 9 figure price tag and years of red tape."

"But what about any of these dozens other stop gaps to cover that 10 year time line"

"Those simply is not possible"

"But if we can play basketball on an aircraft carrier, then we can get somewhere a dozen players can shoot around"

"Have I told about this fish I caught?"

---

Have you taken a tour of the Kansas basketball dorm? Kansas got the dorm and practice court built for a total of 11 million. Players want a place to shoot that is convenient. They don't want to have to walk away from campus.

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&source=web&rct=j&opi=89978449&url=https://www.reddit.com/r/CollegeBasketball/comments/vtlabg/a_tour_of_the_kansas_basketball_players_dorm/&ved=2ahUKEwi7-vqj16GMAxUMLkQIHSSvDWEQjjh6BAgiEAE&sqi=2&usg=AOvVaw0as5sSwub-HhAwetQXbcJu

---

This is the type of court I was advocating in a different thread. A half court just large enough for putting up shots, practice ball handling, etc.

It's not the perfect solution, but I guarantee it would be welcome to the players

---

In my city a bond election was passed a years ago allowing the Middle Schools to build small, additional gymnasiums. They were used by the schools and also by the community for recreation leagues for younger kids.

These gyms were not costly and I asked booster I knew at Cal if the same thing might be possible in Berkeley. Instead we saw a proposal for a huge addition to Haas with tons of bells and whistles that I believe cost more than $100M and was at that time going to be largely funded by a donation from the Haas family. That idea of course never came to fruition and is no longer even discussed.

The point is that a lower cost gymasium was possible at one time but the University seems to only build the highest cost, most complicated projects....

Cal shouldn't be in the professional sports business, and thus, facility problem evaporates.

ac_green33 said:

---

Big C said:

---

He would pair better with Stojakovic if they could each have their own basketball.

---

This. I don't think it was sustainable having them both on the same team. I remember at the end of the Georgia Tech game, when Wilkinson was absolutely rolling in front of his family, Andrej looked him off, turned the ball over, which led to Wilkinson getting hurt on the other end.

Me, I would have preferred to keep Wilkinson, but they weren't a good pairing.

---

Calling Stojakovic (or Wilkinson) a ball-hog is unfair. Per Rod Benson and according to many observers on this board, Cal ran primarily a "NBA style" four-out 1v1 offense. I interpret this as meaning:

• Whomever has the ball has priority #1 and #2 to score. Only if they don't have a chance to do this do they pass. Passing to a teammate is only priority #3.
• The other four offensive players are hopefully trying to keep good spacing and maybe looking to rebound a missed shot - they're not trying to get in a better scoring position to receive a pass, so rarely try backdoor, give-and-go, etc. because it's just not how they've been coached.
• All these factors combine to drive a small number of assists.

Stojakovic and Wilkinson taking a lot of shots only indicates that they are better able (or think they are) to get decent shots than their teammates when going 1 v 1. Looking at the team, who was better? Not Campbell, not Petraitis, not Blacksher, not Tucker, and probably not JOJ.

HearstMining said:

---

ac_green33 said:

---

Big C said:

---

He would pair better with Stojakovic if they could each have their own basketball.

---

This. I don't think it was sustainable having them both on the same team. I remember at the end of the Georgia Tech game, when Wilkinson was absolutely rolling in front of his family, Andrej looked him off, turned the ball over, which led to Wilkinson getting hurt on the other end.

Me, I would have preferred to keep Wilkinson, but they weren't a good pairing.

---

Calling Stojakovic (or Wilkinson) a ball-hog is unfair. Per Rod Benson and according to many observers on this board, Cal ran primarily a "NBA style" four-out 1v1 offense. I interpret this as meaning:

• Whomever has the ball has priority #1 and #2 to score. Only if they don't have a chance to do this do they pass. Passing to a teammate is only priority #3.
• The other four offensive players are hopefully trying to keep good spacing and maybe looking to rebound a missed shot - they're not trying to get in a better scoring position to receive a pass, so rarely try backdoor, give-and-go, etc. because it's just not how they've been coached.
• All these factors combine to drive a small number of assists.

Stojakovic and Wilkinson taking a lot of shots only indicates that they are better able (or think they are) to get decent shots than their teammates when going 1 v 1. Looking at the team, who was better? Not Campbell, not Petraitis, not Blacksher, not Tucker, and probably not JOJ.

---

I'm sorry, but if that's the offense Madsen needs to be fired yesterday. Taking turns running isos with 0 respectable shooters on the court is idiotic.