Is it too early for a countdown to opening day with CSUB?
Does someone know why they got rid of exhibition games on the schedule? I always thought those were good warmups with no pressure and gave diehard fans a look at new players. But they stopped scheduling them fairly recently.
We beat the Roadrunners last year in the home opener, and I'm expecting the same result this year.

Call it "exhibition" or "preseason" or whatever, what I see are mostly ho-hum opponents (Columbia, K-State, UCLA, Utah being exceptions) where fans are expected to pay full-price for games of little real meaning. At least the four exceptions mentioned will give an indicator of what to expect during the ACC season.

barsad said:

---

We beat the Roadrunners last year in the home opener, and I'm expecting the same result this year.

---

FWIW:
Rod Barnes to step away from CSUB men's basketball after 14 seasons


Their top 3 scorers transferred/graduated including Jemel Jones (to New Mexico State)...who seemed like he could score from anywhere on the planet.


GO BEARS!!!

calbearinamaze said:

---

barsad said:

---

We beat the Roadrunners last year in the home opener, and I'm expecting the same result this year.

---

FWIW:
Rod Barnes to step away from CSUB men's basketball after 14 seasons


Their top 3 scorers transferred/graduated including Jemel Jones (to New Mexico State)...who seemed like he could score from anywhere on the planet.


GO BEARS!!!

---

Cuonzo Martin memorial fucla

HearstMining said:

---

Call it "exhibition" or "preseason" or whatever, what I see are mostly ho-hum opponents (Columbia, K-State, UCLA, Utah being exceptions) where fans are expected to pay full-price for games of little real meaning.

---

Or you could look at it a different way and think these early games have a whole lot of meaning for a team like Cal.
Here's what I mean: we're never going to be a top 3 ACC team, so we will sustain a significant number of losses after January 1 every season. The ONLY way we ever make it to March Madness is as an at-large bid after we run the table on all the November-December games (or at least only lose to another tourney team) and perform reasonably well in ACC play.
So no, a win against a CSUB or Columbia now has no real meaning. But a LOSS against one of those patsies could be the difference between last-one-in and first-one-out on Selection Sunday 2027 (being realistic with the year there).

Yeah - Basketball before conference is such a hard sell. Even in the best years it is. And it is especially hard this year when at least on paper and before the eyeball test we have an untalented and uncompetitive ACC team. It isn't even the fun of watching player development (such as seeing if Jorge or Jerome was going to show continued progress) as it is almost entirely new line up of new players. Pretty depressed about the whole thing since I honestly believe that CBB is such a superior entertainment value than CFB but it is what it is.

barsad said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

Call it "exhibition" or "preseason" or whatever, what I see are mostly ho-hum opponents (Columbia, K-State, UCLA, Utah being exceptions) where fans are expected to pay full-price for games of little real meaning.

---

Or you could look at it a different way and think these early games have a whole lot of meaning for a team like Cal.
Here's what I mean: we're never going to be a top 3 ACC team, so we will sustain a significant number of losses after January 1 every season. The ONLY way we ever make it to March Madness is as an at-large bid after we run the table on all the November-December games (or at least only lose to another tourney team) and perform reasonably well in ACC play.
So no, a win against a CSUB or Columbia now has no real meaning. But a LOSS against one of those patsies could be the difference between last-one-in and first-one-out on Selection Sunday 2027 (being realistic with the year there).

---

Post-season play with this roster? A more realistic goal is to eclipse last years' 14 wins, which I think might be very difficult with this group.

HKBear97! said:

---

barsad said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

Call it "exhibition" or "preseason" or whatever, what I see are mostly ho-hum opponents (Columbia, K-State, UCLA, Utah being exceptions) where fans are expected to pay full-price for games of little real meaning.

---

Or you could look at it a different way and think these early games have a whole lot of meaning for a team like Cal.
Here's what I mean: we're never going to be a top 3 ACC team, so we will sustain a significant number of losses after January 1 every season. The ONLY way we ever make it to March Madness is as an at-large bid after we run the table on all the November-December games (or at least only lose to another tourney team) and perform reasonably well in ACC play.
So no, a win against a CSUB or Columbia now has no real meaning. But a LOSS against one of those patsies could be the difference between last-one-in and first-one-out on Selection Sunday 2027 (being realistic with the year there).

---

Post-season play with this roster? A more realistic goal is to eclipse last years' 14 wins, which I think might be very difficult with this group.

---

While I tend to agree with you, as usual I hang on to the yearly hope that somehow this new group of guys might "surprise" us. Usually by mid December that hope has faded away.

socaltownie said:

---

> I honestly believe that CBB is such a superior entertainment value than CFB but it is what it is.

---

^ low bars

barsad said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

Call it "exhibition" or "preseason" or whatever, what I see are mostly ho-hum opponents (Columbia, K-State, UCLA, Utah being exceptions) where fans are expected to pay full-price for games of little real meaning.

---

Or you could look at it a different way and think these early games have a whole lot of meaning for a team like Cal.
Here's what I mean: we're never going to be a top 3 ACC team, so we will sustain a significant number of losses after January 1 every season. The ONLY way we ever make it to March Madness is as an at-large bid after we run the table on all the November-December games (or at least only lose to another tourney team) and perform reasonably well in ACC play.
So no, a win against a CSUB or Columbia now has no real meaning. But a LOSS against one of those patsies could be the difference between last-one-in and first-one-out on Selection Sunday 2027 (being realistic with the year there).

---

I understand your argument and you may be right. But the whole landscape is so volatile now that I wonder how many of this season's players will even be on the team for Selection Sunday in 2027. Or for that matter, if Cal will still have the same coach. At some point, Madsen will have a boss who didn't hire him and maybe either he or the new AD decides the arrangement isn't working.

Honestly, I'm just griping as it's difficult to get excited about Cal basketball. On his latest podcast, Rod Benson sounds enthusiastic about the season starting, but sounds like he's TRYING to get excited about Cal's prospects. I'm sure we'd all love to be surprised.

HearstMining said:

---

Call it "exhibition" or "preseason" or whatever, what I see are mostly ho-hum opponents (Columbia, K-State, UCLA, Utah being exceptions) where fans are expected to pay full-price for games of little real meaning. At least the four exceptions mentioned will give an indicator of what to expect during the ACC season.

---

Under the previous two regimes, we lost a bunch of those games. Some weren't even close.

HearstMining said:

---

barsad said:

---

HearstMining said:

---

Call it "exhibition" or "preseason" or whatever, what I see are mostly ho-hum opponents (Columbia, K-State, UCLA, Utah being exceptions) where fans are expected to pay full-price for games of little real meaning.

---

Or you could look at it a different way and think these early games have a whole lot of meaning for a team like Cal.
Here's what I mean: we're never going to be a top 3 ACC team, so we will sustain a significant number of losses after January 1 every season. The ONLY way we ever make it to March Madness is as an at-large bid after we run the table on all the November-December games (or at least only lose to another tourney team) and perform reasonably well in ACC play.
So no, a win against a CSUB or Columbia now has no real meaning. But a LOSS against one of those patsies could be the difference between last-one-in and first-one-out on Selection Sunday 2027 (being realistic with the year there).

---

I understand your argument and you may be right. But the whole landscape is so volatile now that I wonder how many of this season's players will even be on the team for Selection Sunday in 2027. Or for that matter, if Cal will still have the same coach. At some point, Madsen will have a boss who didn't hire him and maybe either he or the new AD decides the arrangement isn't working.

Honestly, I'm just griping as it's difficult to get excited about Cal basketball. On his latest podcast, Rod Benson sounds enthusiastic about the season starting, but sounds like he's TRYING to get excited about Cal's prospects. I'm sure we'd all love to be surprised.

---

For all that to happen by the start of next season (another full roster churn and we somehow find enough money to pay out Madsen through 2030 (how many millions would that be?), then it truly would have to be a disastrous 2025-26. So I'm keeping my sights set on a decent year now and a ticket to the Dance in '27. Madsen may not be the perfect coach, but he's all we got for 5 years unless you're hoping for a flameout.

BerkeleyBAT said:

---

For what it's worth, both KenPom and Torvik, two of the pre-eminent computer ratings guys, have Cal at #87 on the nation, finishing 17-14, 7-11. This is remarkably consistent and reflects their assessment of the incoming group. For comparison purposes, last year we finished at #127 in Torvik and #110 at KenPom.

Here is the Torvik analysis of Cal: https://barttorvik.com/team.php?team=California&year=2026

KenPom's Cal analysis is subscription only, but their overall ratings page is free: https://kenpom.com/index.php


I post this only because at least some important so-called "experts" don't think our talent has taken a big dip.

---

Probably not good enough for the Nit

BerkeleyBAT said:

---

For what it's worth, both KenPom and Torvik, two of the pre-eminent computer ratings guys, have Cal at #87 on the nation, finishing 17-14, 7-11. This is remarkably consistent and reflects their assessment of the incoming group. For comparison purposes, last year we finished at #127 in Torvik and #110 at KenPom.

Here is the Torvik analysis of Cal: https://barttorvik.com/team.php?team=California&year=2026

KenPom's Cal analysis is subscription only, but their overall ratings page is free: https://kenpom.com/index.php


I post this only because at least some important so-called "experts" don't think our talent has taken a big dip.

---

Curious, what did they have Cal ranked before last season and how close was their projection?

socaltownie said:

---

Yeah - Basketball before conference is such a hard sell. Even in the best years it is. And it is especially hard this year when at least on paper and before the eyeball test we have an untalented and uncompetitive ACC team. It isn't even the fun of watching player development (such as seeing if Jorge or Jerome was going to show continued progress) as it is almost entirely new line up of new players. Pretty depressed about the whole thing since I honestly believe that CBB is such a superior entertainment value than CFB but it is what it is.

---

The one thing that keeps me interested in college basketball is my belief that the legendary idea of "diamonds in the rough,'' exists in basketball, in a way that really isn't possible in football. Why do I believe that? Because basketball is played all over the world. American football at this point isn't even played in large swaths of America. In a worldwide game, there's always a possibility of Cal finding someone that our competitors have overlooked, who can become a star. Hope springs eternal.

The downside of basketball is that, even more than football, it's scheduled for TV. At least I know that football games are all going to be on Friday or Saturday. Basketball can be on any weeknight, and now a lot of games are at 6 p.m. for TV in the ACC. I can't get there. That's why my father and I finally gave up our season tickets. What Cal should do is sell a package that includes only weekend games and games during the week of Thanksgiving and the Christmas-New Year period. I'd buy that, because I could probably go to most of them.