OdontoBear66;842290855 said:

---

All I can say is that I have been attending ECNL girl's soccer (which for the most part is the gold standard in club soccer) for years and there is ethnicity across the board; to the point you really become color blind to it. So for you to say it is dominated by "pony tail white girls" (can't believe this categorization---imagine the opposite), they had to survive coming up through the ranks to get where they get. Believe me the coaches love it when they get a good soccer player coupled with a good GPA, ACT, SAT. It allows them to reach for students who aren't so gifted academically (and with need) to fill out their rosters, and of course are very athletically gifted.

The most bothersome thing about your post is the type of language you use against what I would suggest is the current target of rage in our society, aka "the haves"( I use it to include rich, smart, personality gifted, whatever). It is OK to vent against "them". How about vice versa? Not so. Just seems like a lot of genuine effort is brushed off with a "she came from privilege".

---

OB - I will not defend the use fo the term "pony tail girl" but I will say that I dislike, in the extreme, FOOTBALL (and it is football) being the big cash cow that supports million dollar Coaches salaries and high six figure AD ones. It is an EXTREMELY violent sport. It demands so much time of athletes that it is very hard for them to pursue a college degree. It takes a huge toil on their bodies. And it is their labor (and blood and tears) which brings in this $$$.

And yes, I also am not sure I like athletic scholarships, financed by the above, being given to upper middle class kids in sports whose demographics are scewed by the lack of opportunity to train for those sports in more socio-economically disadvantaged areas. When Crenshaw High offers 8 man crew we can have a different discussion. To the extent that those programs are truly self supporting I don't really care. But if they require a subsidy from Football there is something wrong with the picture.

I'm hoping he plays like a freshmen Solo and improves every year and plays like a senior solo in his senior year

That means he plays athletic defense ( but will probably foul a lot and leave his feet,etc), rebound and dunk the ball on put backs

I don't expect much offense and hope he can hit a FT

I wouldn't put too much expectations from him, beyond being in the rotation

We will need more rebounding from our wings ( beyond just Wallace)

wifeisafurd;842289986 said:

---

If he was being evaluated today would likely be a four star player. He is not a slender guy like Solomom as a frosh. He is built, will likely be the most athletic big in the conference and has scary film. Does that mean he plays well and under control as a frosh, who knows? And in other posts I have said what is lacking from this team is a consistent outside scorer like Crabbe, and everyone started packing it in on defense. So yes, our perimeter guys have to pick up the offense. They also have to pick it up on defense.

---

UrsaMajor;842290142 said:

---

Rugby is also self-sufficient or close.

---

and I think that covers women's rugby as well

socaltownie;842290971 said:

---

OB - I will not defend the use fo the term "pony tail girl" but I will say that I dislike, in the extreme, FOOTBALL (and it is football) being the big cash cow that supports million dollar Coaches salaries and high six figure AD ones. It is an EXTREMELY violent sport. It demands so much time of athletes that it is very hard for them to pursue a college degree. It takes a huge toil on their bodies. And it is their labor (and blood and tears) which brings in this $$$.

And yes, I also am not sure I like athletic scholarships, financed by the above, being given to upper middle class kids in sports whose demographics are scewed by the lack of opportunity to train for those sports in more socio-economically disadvantaged areas. When Crenshaw High offers 8 man crew we can have a different discussion. To the extent that those programs are truly self supporting I don't really care. But if they require a subsidy from Football there is something wrong with the picture.

---

SCT, I think the only thing you were responding to of which I spoke was the "pony tail (white) girls". The rest I don't even think I mentioned scholarships financed by football. We may not have much argument there, but I was talking about those "pony tail white girls" raising the GPA of a team such that the coach can grant a schollie to a disadvantaged student athlete, that may be a better athlete than a student. Something like team GPA or such. Now if you want a discussion about football supporting other sports let's have it. I do think that all blossomed as an outcropping of Title IX dictates allowing FB to continue.

CalHoopFan;842290443 said:

---

Agree 100%, he is beyond oblivious about our friends on the Farm.

With Diallo, I'm afraid it's wishful thinking to imagine he could replace Solomon defensively and on the glass, much less offensively.

Diallo can come in and help us. He's long and athletic and as you say, relatively strongly built for an 18 year old. He's very raw however. He averages 11 ppg in HS and while he impacts games at that level with his shot blocking and rebounding he does not dominate. Big men take awhile to develop. I can imagine ID getting 8-12 minutes a game next year but the real help down low is going to have to come from the development of Behrens, Rooks and Kravish. And the heartbeat of the team looks likely to be our perimeter players.

---

I agree that bigs do take longer, and when they come in NBA ready its really noticeable already, so Diallo is not there. But I think former Cal players like Dan who have seen him play say he will be ready to contribute more than people expect, and my guess is his offense will lag, but he will be athletic when he is out there (rebounds, defense, etc.). Can a perimeter dominated offensive team win? Probably not the Pac conference championship, but there were a lot of perimeter dominated teams that will be in the Dance and did well in conference (e.g., ASU). Given that there will be a new point, I look for the following season to be good.

OdontoBear66;842290855 said:

---

All I can say is that I have been attending ECNL girl's soccer (which for the most part is the gold standard in club soccer) for years and there is ethnicity across the board; to the point you really become color blind to it. So for you to say it is dominated by "pony tail white girls" (can't believe this categorization---imagine the opposite), they had to survive coming up through the ranks to get where they get. Believe me the coaches love it when they get a good soccer player coupled with a good GPA, ACT, SAT. It allows them to reach for students who aren't so gifted academically (and with need) to fill out their rosters, and of course are very athletically gifted.

The most bothersome thing about your post is the type of language you use against what I would suggest is the current target of rage in our society, aka "the haves"( I use it to include rich, smart, personality gifted, whatever). It is OK to vent against "them". How about vice versa? Not so. Just seems like a lot of genuine effort is brushed off with a "she came from privilege".

---

I hardly think, for example, that Missy Franklin's brutal training regimen and drive can be dismissed to coming from privilege. I am fairly close to the Furd and Cal soccer situation as I am living through a recruitment battle of a close relative. All four Pac 12 Cali schools are loaded with "kids of privilege" to round out their teams (they have limited scholies), and one only has to look at the teams and where the kids come from to see that its a country club sport. That may change, but in these colleges, its a country club sport right now. As for the pony tail girls, look at the teams. One of these teams may have a greater percentage of black and Latino players than the percentage of blacks and Latinos, but have you looked at the admissions percentages for these minorities? There are other posts here about why this is the case financially so I will not be repititive. The bottom line is Cal really does excel at these sports.

wifeisafurd;842291005 said:

---

I hardly think, for example, that Missy Franklin's brutal training regimen and drive can be dismissed to coming from privilege. I am fairly close to the Furd and Cal soccer situation as I am living through a recruitment battle of a close relative. All four Pac 12 Cali schools are loaded with "kids of privilege" to round out their teams (they have limited scholies), and one only has to look at the teams and where the kids come from to see that its a country club sport. That may change, but in these colleges, its a country club sport right now. As for the pony tail girls, look at the teams. One of these teams may have a greater percentage of black and Latino players than the percentage of blacks and Latinos, but have you looked at the admissions percentages for these minorities? There are other posts here about why this is the case financially so I will not be repititive. The bottom line is Cal really does excel at these sports.

---

Through the growth process of competitive soccer (not HS but ECNL) that includes each and every ethnicity as well represented. Are you suggesting that there is something about the Danville or South OC "white pony tail girls" that has been gifted to them such that they play even, or on top of most all ghetto (forgive the characterization, but done so for effect) athletes regularly. if you are, I do not know for the life of me what it is.

My granddaughter is in a fully integrated team in South OC and receives no more privileged "training" (believe it or not minorities will spend the family jewels to produce a good soccer player) than her peers. She is a 2015 and a very slight step below Pac 12 (California) caliber, but sought by most all of the east coast and much of the midwest at D1 level. Does not want to settle for less in the west and will probably wind up there. It is not because she has a blond (omigod) ponytail and is white. It is not because her parents or grandparents have spent more on her training than most ECNL players. It is not because she is of your implied privilege. It is because she is a great combination of athlete, student, leader and values (#1, by the way). Look, Long Beach Poly has great players, as does San Bernadoo, and many make it, but many are not the total package. That is the sad part of the equation.

My suggestion, is quit whining about privilege and clean up the school system so a student at each school in the state gets an equal "opportunity" for a good education. What they do with it is up to them? But while we continue to protect school unions from improved schooling, all kids will suffer. The disconnect comes not between teacher and student/parent, but when the outdated union enters the equation.

OdontoBear66;842291065 said:

---

Through the growth process of competitive soccer (not HS but ECNL) that includes each and every ethnicity as well represented. Are you suggesting that there is something about the Danville or South OC "white pony tail girls" that has been gifted to them such that they play even, or on top of most all ghetto (forgive the characterization, but done so for effect) athletes regularly. if you are, I do not know for the life of me what it is.

My granddaughter is in a fully integrated team in South OC and receives no more privileged "training" (believe it or not minorities will spend the family jewels to produce a good soccer player) than her peers. She is a 2015 and a very slight step below Pac 12 (California) caliber, but sought by most all of the east coast and much of the midwest at D1 level. Does not want to settle for less in the west and will probably wind up there. It is not because she has a blond (omigod) ponytail and is white. It is not because her parents or grandparents have spent more on her training than most ECNL players. It is not because she is of your implied privilege. It is because she is a great combination of athlete, student, leader and values (#1, by the way). Look, Long Beach Poly has great players, as does San Bernadoo, and many make it, but many are not the total package. That is the sad part of the equation.

My suggestion, is quit whining about privilege and clean up the school system so a student at each school in the state gets an equal "opportunity" for a good education. What they do with it is up to them? But while we continue to protect school unions from improved schooling, all kids will suffer. The disconnect comes not between teacher and student/parent, but when the outdated union enters the equation.

---

Let's just start with fields. It is much worse in la but in san diego there are something like 5 acres of sports field in the suburban neighborhoods in the city of San Diego for every acre in the less affluent areas. Do you not think that makes a difference in the ability of kids of privilege to excell compared to counterparts from Logan heights? Seriously smh. And I am a conservative!

OdontoBear66;842291065 said:

---

Through the growth process of competitive soccer (not HS but ECNL) that includes each and every ethnicity as well represented. Are you suggesting that there is something about the Danville or South OC "white pony tail girls" that has been gifted to them such that they play even, or on top of most all ghetto (forgive the characterization, but done so for effect) athletes regularly. if you are, I do not know for the life of me what it is.

My granddaughter is in a fully integrated team in South OC and receives no more privileged "training" (believe it or not minorities will spend the family jewels to produce a good soccer player) than her peers. She is a 2015 and a very slight step below Pac 12 (California) caliber, but sought by most all of the east coast and much of the midwest at D1 level. Does not want to settle for less in the west and will probably wind up there. It is not because she has a blond (omigod) ponytail and is white. It is not because her parents or grandparents have spent more on her training than most ECNL players. It is not because she is of your implied privilege. It is because she is a great combination of athlete, student, leader and values (#1, by the way). Look, Long Beach Poly has great players, as does San Bernadoo, and many make it, but many are not the total package. That is the sad part of the equation.

My suggestion, is quit whining about privilege and clean up the school system so a student at each school in the state gets an equal "opportunity" for a good education. What they do with it is up to them? But while we continue to protect school unions from improved schooling, all kids will suffer. The disconnect comes not between teacher and student/parent, but when the outdated union enters the equation.

---

I'm just saying what Cal is good at, and the demographics. I can't change the schools systems, the unions, and the like, especially in this State, and candidly, even if I could, I don't know how. Right now Cal is good (if not very good) at the sports considered country club sports, and is having its issues at football and basketball. Cal's academics cut both ways. They attract and repel. There must be ways it can be done. Duke does well at these sports (even football now), and Furd has been good at football recently and women's basketball. Michigan also does well periodically at basketball and football so its just not public vs. private issue. Not trying to pick a fight.

wifeisafurd;842291107 said:

---

I'm just saying what Cal is good at, and the demographics. I can't change the schools systems, the unions, and the like, especially in this State, and candidly, even if I could, I don't know how. Right now Cal is good (if not very good) at the sports considered country club sports, and is having its issues at football and basketball. Cal's academics cut both ways. They attract and repel. There must be ways it can be done. Duke does well at these sports (even football now), and Furd has been good at football recently and women's basketball. Michigan also does well periodically at basketball and football so its just not public vs. private issue. Not trying to pick a fight.

---

WIAF, nor am I trying to pick a fight. Have always enjoyed your input and posts and appreciate your moderation here to my passions. It was just something about about the "privilege" thing that set me off, and the white pony tails was the capper. i am very sensitive about what I consider (others may not) reverse forms of discrimination being OK, but be oh, so careful the other way. Most of these supposedly privileged kids work their butts off side by side with those of less privilege and may actually get there not because of it. In the meantime, they actually help their less privileged sisters and brothers who are gifted athletically, but don't have the academics totally together. JMHO.

socaltownie;842291070 said:

---

Let's just start with fields. It is much worse in la but in san diego there are something like 5 acres of sports field in the suburban neighborhoods in the city of San Diego for every acre in the less affluent areas. Do you not think that makes a difference in the ability of kids of privilege to excell compared to counterparts from Logan heights? Seriously smh. And I am a conservative!

---

Go out to the acres and acres of the Polo Fields in Del Mar almost any Saturday and watch boys and girls of all ethnicities playing on some of the most beautiful fields in the world. The game can be and is playing on dirt, asphalt, and even grass. Check the world scene. No privilege. Great soccer---much better than USA in the men's game BTW. I don't think the performance is measured by how many acres of parks are in affluent areas with soccer fields. I wouldn't for a minute deny that great facilities, great coaching, etc. are helpful in results, but some "privileged" players just seem to have it from the get go.

OdontoBear66;842291128 said:

---

Go out to the acres and acres of the Polo Fields in Del Mar almost any Saturday and watch boys and girls of all ethnicities playing on some of the most beautiful fields in the world. The game can be and is playing on dirt, asphalt, and even grass. Check the world scene. No privilege. Great soccer---much better than USA in the men's game BTW. I don't think the performance is measured by how many acres of parks are in affluent areas with soccer fields. I wouldn't for a minute deny that great facilities, great coaching, etc. are helpful in results, but some "privileged" players just seem to have it from the get go.

---

Really!!!!!!???? The polo fields? A four hour bus ride from barrio Logan. I just shake my head in disbelief.

socaltownie;842291146 said:

---

Really!!!!!!???? The polo fields? A four hour bus ride from barrio Logan. I just shake my head in disbelief.

---

Four hours from the barrio, but then light years away when the player is not involved at the most competitive level from the start. Opportunity is there, schollies on club teams are there, clubs are everywhere. Go out some Saturday to those Polo Fields (I assume you may live somewhere near) and you will hear and see all kinds of equality of opportunity. Now if you want equality of results as a guarantee, I take issue with you. And BTW, forget the conservative stuff. I am a moderate, excepting fiscally conservative. I laugh at Fox News and MSNBC equally, and both frustrate societal solutions.

OdontoBear66;842291155 said:

---

Four hours from the barrio, but then light years away when the player is not involved at the most competitive level from the start. Opportunity is there, schollies on club teams are there, clubs are everywhere. Go out some Saturday to those Polo Fields (I assume you may live somewhere near) and you will hear and see all kinds of equality of opportunity. Now if you want equality of results as a guarantee, I take issue with you. And BTW, forget the conservative stuff. I am a moderate, excepting fiscally conservative. I laugh at Fox News and MSNBC equally, and both frustrate societal solutions.

---

But how are they supposed to be "involved at the most competitive level from the start"? I do live close by (about 4 miles and pass it every day during my commute through the lovely community of Rancho Santa Fe). What I see in the suburbs is HUGE swatchs of green, paid for by development impact fees amortized into the cost of our overpriced McMansions, which are filled 4-5-6 days a week by soccer stuff that starts at age 4. Meanwhile, in the MUCH less affluent parts of our region, fields are MUCH less common, usually of poor quality, and with much harder prospects of finding coaching.

Now frankly - except for one thing (see below)- I could care less. As President Kennedy said, Life isn't fair and one can go crazy trying to socially engineering equity in opportunities (and more equity in outcomes). Part of the reward in a capitalist society is that one gets to have nicer things for earning more.

But College soccer DOES NOT pay its own way. People don't go to watch it in sufficient numbers or pull in the numbers on TV viewership to do it. We then need to look at who is "cross subsidizing it"....and there we find that it is kids from MUCH less affluent backgrounds....who risk MUCH more serious injury....and - perhaps my ignorance - train much harder and have much more demanding travel schedules. [For example, men's soccer took a total of THREE road trips this season...and only 2 out of state (Penn and to Northwest)].

That is my problem (and yes, it is a problem with Title IX as much as with anything). GREAT that kids want to play non-revenue generating sports in college. Heck, I liked to play hacky sack in my undergrad days. But they shouldn't get scholarship and support _IF_ said support is being earned off of others who are subject to idiotic constraints on trade by NCAA rules and who are coming from much more challenged socio-economic backgrounds. Frankly I am confused why this would be controversial - it seems to be a pretty easy moral call on fairness.

OdontoBear66;842291127 said:

---

WIAF, nor am I trying to pick a fight. Have always enjoyed your input and posts and appreciate your moderation here to my passions. It was just something about about the "privilege" thing that set me off, and the white pony tails was the capper. i am very sensitive about what I consider (others may not) reverse forms of discrimination being OK, but be oh, so careful the other way. Most of these supposedly privileged kids work their butts off side by side with those of less privilege and may actually get there not because of it. In the meantime, they actually help their less privileged sisters and brothers who are gifted athletically, but don't have the academics totally together. JMHO.

---

The white pony tail thing actually is not me, but from a well known Malcom Gladwell book where he is trying to describe the type of nerdy girls (though some of the girls actually were from India extraction, and one girl was even black - her father was a well known football player) of a league team out of an affluent neighborhood in the Pennisula that almost won the state championship.

socaltownie;842291165 said:

---

But how are they supposed to be "involved at the most competitive level from the start"? I do live close by (about 4 miles and pass it every day during my commute through the lovely community of Rancho Santa Fe). What I see in the suburbs is HUGE swatchs of green, paid for by development impact fees amortized into the cost of our overpriced McMansions, which are filled 4-5-6 days a week by soccer stuff that starts at age 4. Meanwhile, in the MUCH less affluent parts of our region, fields are MUCH less common, usually of poor quality, and with much harder prospects of finding coaching.

Now frankly - except for one thing (see below)- I could care less. As President Kennedy said, Life isn't fair and one can go crazy trying to socially engineering equity in opportunities (and more equity in outcomes). Part of the reward in a capitalist society is that one gets to have nicer things for earning more.

But College soccer DOES NOT pay its own way. People don't go to watch it in sufficient numbers or pull in the numbers on TV viewership to do it. We then need to look at who is "cross subsidizing it"....and there we find that it is kids from MUCH less affluent backgrounds....who risk MUCH more serious injury....and - perhaps my ignorance - train much harder and have much more demanding travel schedules. [For example, men's soccer took a total of THREE road trips this season...and only 2 out of state (Penn and to Northwest)].

That is my problem (and yes, it is a problem with Title IX as much as with anything). GREAT that kids want to play non-revenue generating sports in college. Heck, I liked to play hacky sack in my undergrad days. But they shouldn't get scholarship and support _IF_ said support is being earned off of others who are subject to idiotic constraints on trade by NCAA rules and who are coming from much more challenged socio-economic backgrounds. Frankly I am confused why this would be controversial - it seems to be a pretty easy moral call on fairness.

---

Look into the soccer and other CC sport schollies of which you speak. Many participants have none, others shared, some full. It is not as bad as you think. The big thing is the opportunity to get into schools that you otherwise would be borderline, or not qualified to access, if you are athletic. For instance, if you have a 4.6 GPA and 2250+ on your SATs and 33+ on the ACT you may get in to MIT. But if you are a good soccer player a 4.0, 2050, and 30 can do it. You seem more focused on the unfairness of FB providing schollies to CC type players, where I am focused on using excellence in a sport to open doors that otherwise would not be open.

OdontoBear66;842291199 said:

---

Look into the soccer and other CC sport schollies of which you speak. Many participants have none, others shared, some full. It is not as bad as you think. The big thing is the opportunity to get into schools that you otherwise would be borderline, or not qualified to access, if you are athletic. For instance, if you have a 4.6 GPA and 2250+ on your SATs and 33+ on the ACT you may get in to MIT. But if you are a good soccer player a 4.0, 2050, and 30 can do it. You seem more focused on the unfairness of FB providing schollies to CC type players, where I am focused on using excellence in a sport to open doors that otherwise would not be open.

---

True I think we may be discussing different things.

That said, if SOMETHING isn't operating at a loss AD would be turning a huge profit since Football operates so far into the black. We know, even accounting for screwy university accounting, it is in the red. So SOMETHING is requiring a cross subsidy.

tsubamoto2001;842289642 said:

---

It took 4 years for Solo to do what he's doing now and you expect Diallo, who isn't as highly regarded as Solo was coming out of HS, to put up Solo senior season numbers as a freshman?

Next season really depends on whether our perimeter guys (especially Bird, Mathews, and Singer) improve significantly. And we've got to find a PG out of TW, Singer, or Rorie. Cobbs dropped 16 and 6 this season and that's going to be hard to replace. Out of the bigs, our only proven performer will be DK and that's a scary proposition. Rooks will probably start and he figures to improve, but by how much?

---

I agree with all of this.

Whether Diallo is not as highly regarded as Solomon was out of high school is not the whole story on players, especially the bigs. What the recruit rankings fail to take into account is smarts, maturity, and heart. Without all three, you will not likely be successful. The ability and willingness to learn and translate that into production. Bigs usually come onto campus with height and athleticism, but very little in the way of fundamental basketball skills. Solomon got into the rotation as a freshman, because there was no better option. He had lots of problems with maturity, and Diallo may have none. Who knows? This year even with no better option, look how long it took Montgomery to be able to trust Rooks enough to put him into the rotation for maybe 7 minutes. I'm with you on Diallo. He is going to have to compete with Rooks and Behrens for minutes. Based on the improvement Rooks made this year, I expect him to be improved by Fall camp, and the longer Behrens plays and practices on that knee, the more he will trust it enough to try and do more things. If these guys recover and stay healthy, Diallo will have to fight for minutes. And there is RMB, who will have been in this system for a year, so he has a leg up on Diallo as well. Based on his improvement each year, I expect Kravish to be a real force next year.

None of the perimeter players played as well as I would have hoped. But they are all freshmen, thrust into roles in a complex system. I would expect all of them will settle down and play well. A lot of it is confidence, and not much will be new for them next year. Singer, for example, is way too good a shooter to be missing free throws. I was disappointed with Kreklow's offense this year. I figured he could get 10-12 points a game. Next season, we will likely often see a small lineup with Kreklow at the 4, and he needs to do more offensively, passing and scoring. Point guard is my big worry. Tyrone will need to play more under control if he is to be the guy. Based on the improvement he made this year, I expect him to be even better next year. Singer has the benefit of a year in the system, so unless Rorie's talent is over the top, it will be a learning curve for Rorie. One thing about Montgomery is, every player who stays with the program for consecutive years, usually improves individually under his tutelage. Whether they improve as a team is not always up to him, it is more up to the players.

tsubamoto2001;842289711 said:

---

Judging from the SF Pro-Am, "Bird and Cobbs" was supposed to be a lethal combo for us this season. Unfortunately, it did not turn out that way.

---

I don't know where we got the idea out of the SF Pro-Am that "Bird and Cobbs" would be a "lethal combo". More hype and hope than substance., I'm afraid.

I went to those ProAm games. What I got out of them was that Bird was a terrific offensive talent with moves and athleticism, touch and grace, but no defense whatsoever. And I wrote about those things after each game. What I got out of watching Justin Cobbs in those same ProAm games was that our best player, our key to a good season, had some good games, and broke his foot.

Fast forward to the Cal season. Cobbs' foot heals very well, and he has a fine year. Bird shows flashes of offensive brilliance, struggles to learn the offense and struggled to learn to play defense, and then sprains his ankle so badly that he misses games and is largely ineffective for several more games.

That's basketball.

Kreklow won't be scoring many points if he is the only player capable of blocking out bigs. Dude is taking a beating, giving up 20 to 40 pounds underneath.