NVBear78;842825538 said:

---

I have seen multiple teams run that same weave in the Tourney...

---

So did Monty to free up Jorge.

NVBear78;842825538 said:

---

I have seen multiple teams run that same weave in the Tourney...

---

It works particularly well when you have a guy that can both slash and hit threes. I don't thing it suited our personnel (where Charlie isn't really TALL enough to be a GREAT rim finisher and where Bird isn't that great of handle at a full on drive from the top of the key). Seems like mostly it wasted time before we got into the pick and roll ;-)

socaltownie;842825622 said:

---

It works particularly well when you have a guy that can both slash and hit threes. I don't thing it suited our personnel (where Charlie isn't really TALL enough to be a GREAT rim finisher and where Bird isn't that great of handle at a full on drive from the top of the key). Seems like mostly it wasted time before we got into the pick and roll ;-)

---

+1

As Charlie matures as a basketballer, he may become a more effective slasher both in his ability cleanly to get off his shots and to find open teammates that his beating his man off the dribble will create.

YOu never noticed the startling similarity between Kingsley Okoroh and John Cleese?

mikecohen;842825332 said:

---

Is that because all English people look alike?

---

He is an excellent coach. I don't think he'd do well at Cal though. He can get anyone he wants into school where he is, which wouldn't be the case at all in Berkeley. He's not a guy who would do well soothing the academics or dealing with bureaucracy. I don't know that Cal ever asked him, but I think he's smart staying where he is.

Bearprof;842825500 said:

---

Bennett at St Mary's has arguably had a much better run than we have in recent years, and with lower-rated players. He does not deserve faint praise. He is obviously a good coach.

---

south bender;842825638 said:

---

+1

As Charlie matures as a basketballer, he may become a more effective slasher both in his ability cleanly to get off his shots and to find open teammates that his beating his man off the dribble will create.

---

Charlie is already great but he had no room in Martin's double big man, anti-modern offense. Hopefully Jones knows something about how basketball is played best today.

Sluggo

Sluggo, you noticed an offense?

bearchamp;842825939 said:

---

Sluggo, you noticed an offense?

---

Weave. More. More.

Dump it in to Rabb. Stand and watch the double team. Drop back to play defense.

Repeat.

It was a mistake not to hire Dennis Gates three years ago.

It is a mistake not to hire Dennis Gates now.

96goldenbear;842826011 said:

---

It was a mistake not to hire Dennis Gates three years ago.

---

While hindsight is 20/20, it would have been hard to make an argument for hiring an assistant, even one with Gates' resume, over a current Head Coach coming off a Sweet Sixteen run.

okaydo;842825596 said:

---

Hmmm...Wyking Jones still doesn't have a Wikipedia page up.

---

You know anyone can create one, right?
Go for it, Okaydo!!
You'll forever be known as 'that guy' who got it started!!

96goldenbear;842826011 said:

---

It was a mistake not to hire Dennis Gates three years ago.

It is a mistake not to hire Dennis Gates now.

---

Thank you for posting here, Mrs. Gates, and I'm glad YOU would like your son to return to Cal, even though he has never shown much interest himself. (I'm the same way with my kids... I know what's best for them!)

You might suggest to him that he do two things to increase his chances:
1) Take a job as a Head Coach somewhere and show everybody that he can succeed at things like implementing his own system and hiring a staff.
2) Failing that, at least come out west here to work, showing a little enthusiasm for the Pac 12, in general, and Cal, in particular. That way, we can get a closer look at the job he's doing as an Assistant Coach.

Would he be willing to work at Cal as an Assistant? We seem to be promoting assistants lately!

Maybe then, the next time we're looking for a Head Coach, it'll be time to call "The Sheriff"!

Go Bears!

mdbear;842825141 said:

---

This is totally different from Bozeman who proved himself by coaching the team to the sweet sixteen. It was only later that he was caught cheating in recruiting. My first choice was Musselman, second choice Bennett, third choice the guy at Irvine, fourth choice Pasternak. Well, at least Wyking was not my last choice. I would rather give a young guy a chance than hire someone who has proven that he cannot build a program over the long term such as Gottfried, Lavin, Crean or a lot of the other names thrown around.

---

Your list reflected my choices exactly.

Much of the concern and outrage over the hiring of Wyking Jones has been based on the fact that he has never been a head coach. While this could very-well be a valid argument, I would like to provide some counterpoints.

First, every great head coach (Coach K, Geno, John Wooden, etc.) was a first-time head coach at one point in time. Yes, they may have had some growing pains before they reached success (and you understandably don’t want to have to endure a few years of them), but everyone has to start somewhere. How do first year coaches avoid these growing pains, mistakes, and “learning experiences”? They hire a former head coach to their staff. Wyking already has one in Tim O’Toole. We will see who else he adds.

Second, a lot of the concern about Jones being a first year head coach has been based off of the question: “How much did Wyking actually do as an assistant? What role did he have in game strategy? Do assistants even do anything besides recruit?” This is where I believe many people are ill-informed. Some of you will not believe me, but on almost every staff in America, Assistant coaches do MORE than the head coach. That is one of the perks of being the head coach! You get to pass off tasks and responsibilities to others and you basically get to just oversee the whole deal. Yes, head coaches decide what offense they are going to run, what their defensive principles are, etc., and then they teach their assistants how to teach these things, but when it comes to game-to-game strategy, assistant coaches do the bulk of the work and here is how…

Most staffs divide the season up amongst the three assistant coaches, with each assistant being responsible for every 3rd game scout (1st game, 4th, 7th, 10th, etc). Exceptions would be, if one coach had more insight on a particular team because of previous experience, or if a coach was due for a scout, but was going to be on the road recruiting, then the pattern would be broken… but you get the idea. When a coach is responsible for a scout, they begin working on it weeks in advance. Coaches will watch at minimum, the last 5 games that their opponent played in, picking out clips of set plays, out of bounds plays, and plays showcasing the top 5-7 players tendencies. They put all of these clips into their scout video and depending on the scheduling, they begin to show these clips to the team sometimes up to 4-5 days before the game. This same assistant will take the walk-ons and bottom of the depth chart players and teach them the opponents offense and run this offense against the rotation players during practice. This same assistant will stop play, and walk the defense through how they should be guarding certain actions, based off what they have seen in all of the video that they have watched on their opponent.

(This is why you will see different assistant being more active, during different games. If you see an assistant jumping around, pointing, almost knocking over the head coach, they are usually calling out the action/play that is about to occur and reminding the team how defend it)

The assistant responsible for the scout will have an ongoing dialogue with the head coach in the week leading up to the game, where they will discuss how to defend certain players, who should match-up with who, how to defend certain plays, and how to attack the opposing team’s defense. The head coach, obviously has the final say, but they will often differ to their assistant and take their advice because they are the ones who have spent dozens and dozens of hours dissecting the opponent. Head coaches rely on their assistant and trust them… that is why they hired them!

Now some of you may ask… If this is the case, why do coaches hire parents of players to be assistants just to ensure their son will commit? This can be worth it to get a 5 star player, if you have 2 other assistants who you can trust to do the actual basketball work. Some staffs only have 2 assistants who are responsible for opponent scouts. Some have 1, with graduate assistants and video coordinators collaborating with them to do some of the heavy lifting in terms of editing, cutting clips, and putting together video scouts.

Additionally, assistants often run the majority of practice. Think about it, do you really think Jim Boeheim, Coach K, and other 70 year olds are out their coaching basketball 2-3 hours a day 6 days a week? No. They are sitting their asses on the sideline watching all the drills and BS, interjecting every once in awhile, and then when live play occurs they will pay attention and give their 30-40 minutes of energy for the day. Thats the perk of being the head coach! You can sit on the sideline and yap it up with donors and other visitors while your assistants do most of the work.

Now there are exceptions to all of this and some coaches do not trust their assistants, treat them like garbage, do not care about their input, and only want them to recruit. But the vast majority of good coaches, operate their team in the way I described previously… I would guess, about 300 out of 350+ D1 programs.

Lastly, assistants who work under several different head coaches have the valuable experience of witnessing different coaching strategies and methods. They can then take different things from different coaches and use them as their own when they become a head coach. Every assistant coach is actively preparing themselves for the day when they will have the opportunity to be a head coach. I believe this hire is a good one and that will be clear in the next couple years.

LurkingSince2010;842826682 said:

---

Much of the concern and outrage over the hiring of Wyking Jones has been based on the fact that he has never been a head coach. While this could very-well be a valid argument, I would like to provide some counterpoints.

First, every great head coach (Coach K, Geno, John Wooden, etc.) was a first-time head coach at one point in time. Yes, they may have had some growing pains before they reached success (and you understandably don't want to have to endure a few years of them), but everyone has to start somewhere. How do first year coaches avoid these growing pains, mistakes, and "learning experiences"? They hire a former head coach to their staff. Wyking already has one in Tim O'Toole. We will see who else he adds.

Second, a lot of the concern about Jones being a first year head coach has been based off of the question: "How much did Wyking actually do as an assistant? What role did he have in game strategy? Do assistants even do anything besides recruit?" This is where I believe many people are ill-informed. Some of you will not believe me, but on almost every staff in America, Assistant coaches do MORE than the head coach. That is one of the perks of being the head coach! You get to pass off tasks and responsibilities to others and you basically get to just oversee the whole deal. Yes, head coaches decide what offense they are going to run, what their defensive principles are, etc., and then they teach their assistants how to teach these things, but when it comes to game-to-game strategy, assistant coaches do the bulk of the work and here is how

Most staffs divide the season up amongst the three assistant coaches, with each assistant being responsible for every 3rd game scout (1st game, 4th, 7th, 10th, etc). Exceptions would be, if one coach had more insight on a particular team because of previous experience, or if a coach was due for a scout, but was going to be on the road recruiting, then the pattern would be broken but you get the idea. When a coach is responsible for a scout, they begin working on it weeks in advance. Coaches will watch at minimum, the last 5 games that their opponent played in, picking out clips of set plays, out of bounds plays, and plays showcasing the top 5-7 players tendencies. They put all of these clips into their scout video and depending on the scheduling, they begin to show these clips to the team sometimes up to 4-5 days before the game. This same assistant will take the walk-ons and bottom of the depth chart players and teach them the opponents offense and run this offense against the rotation players during practice. This same assistant will stop play, and walk the defense through how they should be guarding certain actions, based off what they have seen in all of the video that they have watched on their opponent.

(This is why you will see different assistant being more active, during different games. If you see an assistant jumping around, pointing, almost knocking over the head coach, they are usually calling out the action/play that is about to occur and reminding the team how defend it)

The assistant responsible for the scout will have an ongoing dialogue with the head coach in the week leading up to the game, where they will discuss how to defend certain players, who should match-up with who, how to defend certain plays, and how to attack the opposing team's defense. The head coach, obviously has the final say, but they will often differ to their assistant and take their advice because they are the ones who have spent dozens and dozens of hours dissecting the opponent. Head coaches rely on their assistant and trust them that is why they hired them!

Now some of you may ask If this is the case, why do coaches hire parents of players to be assistants just to ensure their son will commit? This can be worth it to get a 5 star player, if you have 2 other assistants who you can trust to do the actual basketball work. Some staffs only have 2 assistants who are responsible for opponent scouts. Some have 1, with graduate assistants and video coordinators collaborating with them to do some of the heavy lifting in terms of editing, cutting clips, and putting together video scouts.

Additionally, assistants often run the majority of practice. Think about it, do you really think Jim Boeheim, Coach K, and other 70 year olds are out their coaching basketball 2-3 hours a day 6 days a week? No. They are sitting their asses on the sideline watching all the drills and BS, interjecting every once in awhile, and then when live play occurs they will pay attention and give their 30-40 minutes of energy for the day. Thats the perk of being the head coach! You can sit on the sideline and yap it up with donors and other visitors while your assistants do most of the work.

Now there are exceptions to all of this and some coaches do not trust their assistants, treat them like garbage, do not care about their input, and only want them to recruit. But the vast majority of good coaches, operate their team in the way I described previously I would guess, about 300 out of 350+ D1 programs.

Lastly, assistants who work under several different head coaches have the valuable experience of witnessing different coaching strategies and methods. They can then take different things from different coaches and use them as their own when they become a head coach. Every assistant coach is actively preparing themselves for the day when they will have the opportunity to be a head coach. I believe this hire is a good one and that will be clear in the next couple years.

---

Excellent post LS2010!!

Lurker2010, you should stop lurking and provide more insights...

This one was very enlightening.

Great read, LS2010!

Strong first post. Thank you for your insights, Lurking!

LurkingSince2010;842826682 said:

---

Much of the concern and outrage over the hiring of Wyking Jones has been based on the fact that he has never been a head coach. While this could very-well be a valid argument, I would like to provide some counterpoints.

First, every great head coach (Coach K, Geno, John Wooden, etc.) was a first-time head coach at one point in time. Yes, they may have had some growing pains before they reached success (and you understandably don’t want to have to endure a few years of them), but everyone has to start somewhere.

---

Coach K and John Wooden started their head coaching careers at Army and Indiana St. We are not those schools, we are the flagship university of the largest state in the country. Not everyone has to start their head coaching careers at Cal. The expectation is to win right now.

I just saw the Warriors run it a couple of times Sunday. But it had a purpose.

NVBear78;842825538 said:

---

I have seen multiple teams run that same weave in the Tourney...

---

I get your point. Mine was that assistant head coach titles don't mean a damned thing to me because it's frequently the guy who's been around longest. I would have been pissed if we hired Webster, even though by your view he's more qualified. My other point is that some of the "qualified" guys mentioned would have been disasters, Musselman in particular.

tsubamoto2001;842825050 said:

---

I brought up the Associate HC bit, but you're not getting the point. The point is that Wyking is not qualified this job. Name another HM program that elevated a lower tiered assistant to the HC spot. And not only that, he's apparently getting a 5-year deal. This may be unprecedented.

---

I've watched their games against St. Mary's and their tourney games this year. He is still making the same stupid mistakes he made here, like dribbling the ball into the corner to be trapped and screwing up fast breaks. He can shoot threes, but I don't see anything particularly different in his game. He got all the pub for hitting a big three, but look at his numbers that game. I'm not impressed by any "development" if that's what you want to call it.
.

OaktownBear;842825221 said:

---

I'm still processing the hire, so I'm not commenting postively or negatively, but Mathews shooting percentage is worse, his three point percentage is worse = under 40% , his free throw percentage is by far the worst of his career - down over 6.5 percentage points, and his points are way down. Rebounds and assists about the same. His performance significantly degraded at Gonzaga. So this tells me you aren't really seriously analyzing this but going with truthiness.

---

Exactly... associate head coach / assistant head coach / lead assistant means next to nothing on lots of staffs and many do not even have a hierarchy. Sure they may be listed in a certain order, but usually they are all equal, with the most tenured coach sometimes receiving the "associate" title. Does anyone really think Coach Martin would take that title from Tracy Webster who has been on his staff for years and whom he has known since the 90s? Not a chance.

In D1 basketball its a good idea to take titles with a grain of salt. They don't mean as much as you may think they do. Coaches often "promote" assistants and support staff by just changing the name of their role. None of their responsibilities change, but they get a nice article saying they were promoted, which I guess can help them get jobs in the future. "Coach so-and-so gets promoted to Associate Head coach", "Video Coordinator John Doe promoted to Director of Player Development".... meanwhile they both have the same role as before and neither receives a salary increase.

bluesaxe;842826891 said:

---

I get your point. Mine was that assistant head coach titles don't mean a damned thing to me because it's frequently the guy who's been around longest. I would have been pissed if we hired Webster, even though by your view he's more qualified. My other point is that some of the "qualified" guys mentioned would have been disasters, Musselman in particular.

---

If by "win" you mean deep tournament runs and by "now" you mean this upcoming year, I don't think that was gonna happen regardless of who the coach is given the roster and circumstances. With Wyking staying, there is some continuity which could help (remains to be seen, hopefully he scraps everything they were doing on offense). I never said "everyone has to start their career at Cal", but Wyking Jones happens to be doing so and I don't think its going to be as horrible as you think. We are the flagship university of the largest and best state in the country... but if anyone thinks a head coach was gonna come in and turn us into a Pac-12 contender in his first year I really just don't see it...

oskirules;842826846 said:

---

Coach K and John Wooden started their head coaching careers at Army and Indiana St. We are not those schools, we are the flagship university of the largest state in the country. Not everyone has to start their head coaching careers at Cal. The expectation is to win right now.

---

I really feel like this is the start of something here. I have a feeling the Jones will bring in some talent this year. Plus I think we have some guys who are going to progress in the off season. We may not be as bad as people think. We are just missing 2-3 pieces. I, in no way think we are going to be top 3, but top half, possibly.

bluesaxe;842826896 said:

---

I've watched their games against St. Mary's and their tourney games this year. He is still making the same stupid mistakes he made here, like dribbling the ball into the corner to be trapped and screwing up fast breaks. He can shoot threes, but I don't see anything particularly different in his game. He got all the pub for hitting a big three, but look at his numbers that game. I'm not impressed by any "development" if that's what you want to call it.
.

---

Yeah, his West Virginia game was not good, the only thing "decent" about it was 3-8 from 3 and 2-2 on FT's. Until his last shot, he was 3-11 floor, 2-7 from three, 2 turnovers, 0 assists. Only played 23 minutes because of foul trouble, 4 fouls in 23 minutes, and that was because he wasn't playing good defense, an aspect of his game you didn't mention. But he did hit an important 3.

To me, however, the most important Jordan Mathews stat of the year is this -- Mathews was 0-3 total from the line against the Gaels when he was within earshot of my son and the St. Mary's band. 2 missed FT's in Moraga and one in Las Vegas. Mathews couldn't hit a FT when either my son's sole voice or a group of voices from the band scripted by my son were harassing him for leaving Cal. That stat says nothing about Martin's coaching, and perhaps 0-3 isn't statistically significant, but still, in spite of the fact that there was perhaps unkind behavior towards a Cal grad, it gives me an odd sense of satisfaction.

Cal8285;842827004 said:

---

Yeah, his West Virginia game was not good, the only thing "decent" about it was 3-8 from 3 and 2-2 on FT's. Until his last shot, he was 3-11 floor, 2-7 from three, 2 turnovers, 0 assists. Only played 23 minutes because of foul trouble, 4 fouls in 23 minutes, and that was because he wasn't playing good defense, an aspect of his game you didn't mention. But he did hit an important 3.

To me, however, the most important Jordan Mathews stat of the year is this -- Mathews was 0-3 total from the line against the Gaels when he was within earshot of my son and the St. Mary's band. 2 missed FT's in Moraga and one in Las Vegas. Mathews couldn't hit a FT when either my son's sole voice or a group of voices from the band scripted by my son were harassing him for leaving Cal. That stat says nothing about Martin's coaching, and perhaps 0-3 isn't statistically significant, but still, in spite of the fact that there was perhaps unkind behavior towards a Cal grad, it gives me an odd sense of satisfaction.

---

Sorry, but I think that's pretty damn weak. So, your son goes to St. Mary's, and perhaps is in the band or friends with band members?
He must be a sophomore, right? Cause that's pretty sophomoric behavior.
Sadder yet is that you think it's funny or cool.

I hope Jordan makes it to the finals, and perhaps, just maybe, wins on a last second shot the way Villanova's Jenkins won it last year.
I take it your family will be boo'ing him and rooting for the other teams.

I was sad that he left, for sure. But to dog the person.... NC, man. NC.

concordtom;842827013 said:

---

Sorry, but I think that's pretty damn weak. So, your son goes to St. Mary's, and perhaps is in the band or friends with band members?
He must be a sophomore, right? Cause that's pretty sophomoric behavior.
Sadder yet is that you think it's funny or cool.

I hope Jordan makes it to the finals, and perhaps, just maybe, wins on a last second shot the way Villanova's Jenkins won it last year.
I take it your family will be boo'ing him and rooting for the other teams.

I was sad that he left, for sure. But to dog the person.... NC, man. NC.

---

+1

socaltownie;842826914 said:

---

Because, in the end, it should be about the kids. I know it costs us W's because other schools do not see it this way but ask yourself - is it right.

---

+1

concordtom;842827013 said:

---

Sorry, but I think that's pretty damn weak. So, your son goes to St. Mary's, and perhaps is in the band or friends with band members?
He must be a sophomore, right? Cause that's pretty sophomoric behavior.
Sadder yet is that you think it's funny or cool.

I hope Jordan makes it to the finals, and perhaps, just maybe, wins on a last second shot the way Villanova's Jenkins won it last year.
I take it your family will be boo'ing him and rooting for the other teams.

I was sad that he left, for sure. But to dog the person.... NC, man. NC.

---

-1

I've been to a few hundred games at Haas/Harmon and personal harassment of opposing players has always been well within the bounds of the college basketball vibe. Exceptions: Foul language, racial stuff or anything just in really bad taste (such as what ASU fans said to Steve Kerr). Also: Insults that are acceptable coming from the student section or the Straw Hat Band might not be appropriate in the chairbacks.

Big C_Cal;842826107 said:

---

Thank you for posting here, Mrs. Gates, and I'm glad YOU would like your son to return to Cal, even though he has never shown much interest himself. (I'm the same way with my kids... I know what's best for them!)

You might suggest to him that he do two things to increase his chances:
1) Take a job as a Head Coach somewhere and show everybody that he can succeed at things like implementing his own system and hiring a staff.
2) Failing that, at least come out west here to work, showing a little enthusiasm for the Pac 12, in general, and Cal, in particular. That way, we can get a closer look at the job he's doing as an Assistant Coach.

Would he be willing to work at Cal as an Assistant? We seem to be promoting assistants lately!

Maybe then, the next time we're looking for a Head Coach, it'll be time to call "The Sheriff"!

Go Bears!

---

Gates served as an assistant for Cal in the 2000s. So he has shown some interest in the past. Assistant coaches tend to bounce around a lot; they go where the opportunities are, not where their geographic preferences lie. Florida State is a good program in a great conference, so it's hard to begrudge Gates wanting to build his resume there.

As for the notion that Gates should prove himself as a head coach first, I'd say that you could say the same of Wyking Jones.

Yours truly,
Mrs. Gates

Big C_Cal;842827108 said:

---

-1

I've been to a few hundred games at Haas/Harmon and personal harassment of opposing players has always been well within the bounds of the college basketball vibe. Exceptions: Foul language, racial stuff or anything just in really bad taste (such as what ASU fans said to Steve Kerr). Also: Insults that are acceptable coming from the student section or the Straw Hat Band might not be appropriate in the chairbacks.

---

Red hair? No hair? SOME HAIR.

concordtom;842827013 said:

---

Sorry, but I think that's pretty damn weak. So, your son goes to St. Mary's, and perhaps is in the band or friends with band members?
He must be a sophomore, right? Cause that's pretty sophomoric behavior.
Sadder yet is that you think it's funny or cool.

I hope Jordan makes it to the finals, and perhaps, just maybe, wins on a last second shot the way Villanova's Jenkins won it last year.
I take it your family will be boo'ing him and rooting for the other teams.

I was sad that he left, for sure. But to dog the person.... NC, man. NC.

---

I understand, you object to doing thing to help the team win if those things are less than kind. You probably haven't liked a few antics of Cal students/the Straw Hat band over the years. Man, the Gabe Pruitt/Victoria catfishing episode 11 years was pretty bad, poor Gabe Pruitt got harassed by friends and teammates for years, but other hand, Pruitt went 3 for 13, committed 6 turnovers, and the Bears beat USC. You probably don't like the Tuna, especially when done properly. "Hey, let's not make fun of the lamest player in the regular rotation for being lame. Even if it helps us win, it might hurt his feelings." Or funny alterations to the Tuna. "Hey, let's not make fun of a guy for having red/no hair, that's sophomoric, even if it might help us win." Good thing you're a Cal fan and not, say, a Duke fan, where they are always cruel, almost beyond belief. You probably wouldn't like it if the St. Mary's band says during a FT attempt by Santa Clara, "Remember when you used to be our rival?" Oh, such rude sophomoric behavior in an effort to help the team win.

Harassing is probably overstating the behavior towards Mathews. Is yelling "Go Bears!!" harassment? Maybe if you are Jordan Mathews playing for Gonzaga against St. Mary's, it is. Does chanting, "Traitor!!" on the next FT attempt after the "Go Bears!" constitute harassment? In a sense, yes, but not "crossing the line" harassment. I don't think a tiny number of things said or chanted during 2 trips to the line over the course of two games, involving a total of 3 FT's constitutes "dogging" someone, and it isn't anywhere near crossing the line. I do think it is funny/cool that Mathews went 0-3 when he was shooting FT's at the band's end of the court when they were "harassing" him for leaving Cal. What wasn't funny is that when Mathews missed the 2 FT's in Moraga, after the second miss, the Zags got the rebound and putback for 2 points anyway.

Me, personally, I'm rooting for Gonzaga to go all the way, I hope Mathews plays better than he did against West Virginia. I would never boo Cal grad Jordan Mathews. Heck, my son is even reluctantly rooting for Gonzaga to win, even if they (and not the Santa Clara Broncos) are the Gael's #1 rival these days -- the more wins for the Zags, the more money for each team in the conference, and the more respect for the conference (which hasn't had a Final Four team since USF in 1957).

Cal is my team, not St. Mary's, even if I have paid St. Mary's way too much tuition, and I personally wouldn't harass Mathews in an effort to help St. Mary's beat Gonzaga. I cannot, however, object to fans/students/band members of teams who touch a sensitive spot of an opposing player in a manner that is not out of bounds (even if sophomoric) to help their team win. ASU students chanting "PLO" at Steve Kerr was WAY out of bounds, that wasn't sophomoric, it was horrible and cruel behavior (and it only backfired on them anyway). Displaying Gabe Pruitt's cell phone number was over the line, but otherwise, was the Cal student catfishing prank of a USC player over the line? I'm not sure.

But here's one thing I'm sure of. A member of the St. Mary's band yelling "Go Bears!!" at Gonzaga's Jordan Mathews while he shoots a FT is NOT over the line. Yelling "Go Bears" is NEVER sophomoric, and it is funny and cool when Mathews then misses the FT.

Bobodeluxe;842827130 said:

---

Red hair? No hair? SOME HAIR.

---

Thanks for reminding me of that one: A classic! I remember being there, but I don't recall the year (or even the decade... '90s?) or the opponent, no less the 1st or 2nd player. Does anybody? I do remember that it was VERY audible!