On another forum I visit, someone was studying the 1970-71 season and posted a trivia question. What was the only college team that season that had 5 players play in either the NBA or ABA? There were the expected guesses of UCLA, Duke, North Carolina, Villanova, etc. All were wrong. There were a dozen or so teams with 4 players, but the only one with 5 was Cal!

Phil Chenier and Charles Johnson had lengthy NBA careers and Jackie Ridgle, Ainsley Truitt and John Coughran all played part of a season. Ridgle and Truitt were both 3rd round picks (41st overall) in different years and Coughran was a 5th round choice. Coughran must have knocked around awhile before he got a chance at the NBA because he was 29 when it happened.

Anyway, my question is that with that much talent on the roster, why did Cal finish 16-9 and and tied for 3rd with Oregon? UCLA won the national championship so that's not surprising. The only name I recognize on USC is Paul Westphal, but they went 24-2 with only 2 fairly close losses to UCLA (and no NCAA bid for them anyway - just UCLA). Still, Cal got blown out on each occasion by both teams and lost a few other games. Was it the coaching? Jim Padgett only had 1 winning season in his entire head coaching career (8 years) and this was it. I was young at the time, but I vaguely recall that there might have been some tension between the coach and the players. Also, it was a turbulent time on campus in general. So, do any of the older fans remember what happened that season?

Coach Padgett couldn't coach.

He was of the "roll the ball out and let 'em play" school--which was a huge departure from the Rene Herrarias "step-in-the-footprints" school. Neither was successful, although Padgett could at least recruit.

1970-71 team is the highest scoring team in Cal history, at 83.9 points per game.

They are also the highest rebounding team in Cal history, at 54.1 rebounds per game.

With all those rebounds, they would fast break opponents to death. The problem was their defense, as they allowed 79.8 points per game. Charles Johnson was a great defender, and Chenier and Truitt were pretty good defenders, but over all, they just could not stop other teams. And when they ran into a good defensive team like UCLA or USC, they could not fast break, and were forced into a half court game, and coach Padgett really had no plays compared to the coaches who preceded him, Newell and Herrerias. In 1970-71, UCLA was the best team in the country, and many, if not most experts felt that USC, coached by the great Bob Boyd was the 2nd best team in the country. Amazing to have both of them in the same town. The battles between UCLA and USC in those years were epic struggles on national TV, as I remember. USC got no NCAA bid, because in those days, you had to win the PCC to get a bid.

There likely was campus unrest (when was there no campus unrest at Berkeley?), but that did not affect basketball as it had before Padgett was named head coach. The unrest of the late 1960s on the basketball court, began with the Black players complaining about not getting playing time or getting the ball from the White players. Coach Herrerias lost control of things, as he tried disciplinary measures like ordering star center Bob Presley to cut his Afro haircut. There was dissension on the football team as well, as the Black football players joined the basketball players in revolt. It forced the resignation of Herrerias and also Athletic Director Pete Newell, which was ironic, because Newell was the first Cal basketball coach to recruit Black players to Cal.

Jim Padgett was an assistant under Herrerias, and he had recruited some of Herrerias' players. Because the Black players liked and trusted Padgett, when Herrerias left, the administration decided to hire Padgett as the head coach. I think the players liked Padgett, and I don't think there was any dissension or unrest on the team by 1970. Cal had the best individual talent they have ever had in 1970-71, IMO. But they lost to UCLA and USC because Wooden and Boyd were perhaps the two best coaches in the country. Padgett did not stand a chance up against them, no matter who was playing for him, IMO. I went to some practices, and there was a big difference. Under Herrerias and Newell, there was a big emphasis on defense, teamwork, and building stamina. In Padgett's practices the players just scrimmaged, ran few plays, and it looked really disorganized. It was a shame, because with that talent and a good coach, they might have given UCLA and USC a run for their money.

As I understand it, Padgett was basically hired for his supposed ability to relate to African-American players, following Herrerias, whose preparation to be the Cal head coach (head coach at St. Ignatius High in SF, years as Newell's assistant) was severely deficient in terms of being able to relate to athletes in the late 60s and early 70s. Unfortunately, Padgett's way of relating to his players was basically, as Ursa Major said, to roll the ball out and let them play. That was also the basic modus operandi of Edwards and Kuchen, and didn't change until Campanelli's arrival. It didn't really make a difference in the long run, as we never had anybody in that era who could contain either Alcindor or Walton. The closest we came was a game against Lew/Kareem where we stalled most of the way.

SFCB's recounting is basically correct. If you want to read about the athlete unrest in the late 60s, it's covered in "A Decent Man," Bruce Jenkins biography of Newell. There's a great scene in that book of Earl Robinson standing on the ASUC conference table in Eshelman Hall basically reading the riot act to some of the unhappy black athletes.

Jeff82;842646389 said:

---

As I understand it, Padgett was basically hired for his supposed ability to relate to African-American players, following Herrerias, whose preparation to be the Cal head coach (head coach at St. Ignatius High in SF, years as Newell's assistant) was severely deficient in terms of being able to relate to athletes in the late 60s and early 70s. Unfortunately, Padgett's way of relating to his players was basically, as Ursa Major said, to roll the ball out and let them play. That was also the basic modus operandi of Edwards and Kuchen, and didn't change until Campanelli's arrival. It didn't really make a difference in the long run, as we never had anybody in that era who could contain either Alcindor or Walton. The closest we came was a game against Lew/Kareem where we stalled most of the way.

---

Well there was the game where we poked Lew/Kareem in they eye. And as for Walton, we couldn't stop him then...and we can't stop him (from blathering on and on and on) now.

I saw Coughran go for 40 against uPortland. Could not miss from the corner.

That was Earl Robinson! A real leader, and a great athlete. RIP.

Thanks for the information. I thought it might be the coaching since overall, it looked like a talented team that happened to be in a PAC-8 with 2 top teams. Still, it looked like it shouldn't have lost 9 games.

Although Padgett was next in the long line of crappy Cal basketball coaches, I will forever be grateful to Bob Presley for getting rid of Herrerias. If not for Presley, he might still be coaching Cal basketball.

But we'd be disciplined.

A terrible post.
Bob Presley was a problem for the whole team who later ended up dead in the Willamette river in Portland.
The mistake was giving him a scholarship.
It was a troubling time, but Presley was never a good person.

I have it on good authority that there were a number of players on the teams in that era who not only were not qualified academically to go to Cal, but were not qualified to go to college period. Presley's issues are well known, but there were other players with similar school issues.

FYI, on that SC team, both Mo Layton and Ron Riley had NBA careers for 3-5 years, and Joe Mackey was drafted as well. They were a brilliant team.

No depth on the team, too. After the starters the talent really dropped off.