Anyway, look at us! We're almost close to getting that first win against a truly historically bad p12 and avoid going winless.

Embarassing

Wow. That is embarrassing.

Sagarin has us as the #210 team (Predictor). By that measure we are the worst P5 team this year. WSU is #170. Wake Forrest is #154. Last year we were the worst too when we were #207.

However, I only had to go back two years to 2017 to find the Oregon State Beavers, 4-27 and ranked #223 to find a worse P5 team. So we definitely are not the worst of all time.

FWIW, the 2001 Cal football team was #121 in Sagarin (Predictor), the worst we ever finished. Three years later in 2004 we finished #2 and nearly could have finished #1.

I guess when I see an independent source like sbnation posting same, I must ask myself if we are even close to that bad what is the answer for next year? I know some think one way, some another, but is it really this bad, and if so, isn't one of the solutions obvious? What am I missing?

OdontoBear66 said:

---

I guess when I see an independent source like sbnation posting same, I must ask myself if we are even close to that bad what is the answer for next year? I know some think one way, some another, but is it really this bad, and if so, isn't one of the solutions obvious? What am I missing?

---

When I saw @CardChronicle I wondered if it might be a Stanford based writer. Turns out it was Louisville Cardinals. The writer apparently needs to hate on someone after his team blew that 23 point lead to lose to Duke.

"I'm not sure I've ever wanted anything more than for this team to win the Pac-12 tournament next month in Las Vegas."

Really wanted to hate on the whole Pac-12, on Valentines Day, no less.

Bleacher report and SB Nation is click bait

No time to write all the reasons why, but to summarize, it's all about how many eye balls they get on the page,

HoopDreams said:

---

Bleacher report and SB Nation is click bait

No time to write all the reasons why, but to summarize, it's all about how many eye balls they get on the page,

---

Right, because nothing gets more clicks than Cal content. Please....

socaliganbear said:

---

HoopDreams said:

---

Bleacher report and SB Nation is click bait

No time to write all the reasons why, but to summarize, it's all about how many eye balls they get on the page,

---

Right, because nothing gets more clicks than Cal content. Please....

---

that's not my point. they are just going after big headlines
they even use computers to generate key words that generate clicks based on analytics
not exactly a source of news

HoopDreams said:

---

socaliganbear said:

---

HoopDreams said:

---

Bleacher report and SB Nation is click bait

No time to write all the reasons why, but to summarize, it's all about how many eye balls they get on the page,

---

Right, because nothing gets more clicks than Cal content. Please....

---

that's not my point. they are just going after big headlines
they even use computers to generate key words that generate clicks based on analytics
not exactly a source of news

---

Well I don't know about SBN nation, but cgb has done a lot of analytical analysis on just how bad this cal team is. I forget exactly what metric they used (some sort of adjusted defensive efficiency metric) but it showed that cal was the worst p5 defense in history

HoopDreams said:

---

Bleacher report and SB Nation is click bait

No time to write all the reasons why, but to summarize, it's all about how many eye balls they get on the page,

---

Instead of shooting the messenger, take a look at the rationale given in the article. The Pac 12 has a good chance of being the first one bid power conference since the NCAA tournament expanded in 1985. Cal has a good chance of going winless in conference play. If both of those happen, I think there is a strong argument that this Cal team is one of the worst, if not the worst, power conference teams in modern history.

mdbear said:

---

HoopDreams said:

---

Bleacher report and SB Nation is click bait

No time to write all the reasons why, but to summarize, it's all about how many eye balls they get on the page,

---

Instead of shooting the messenger, take a look at the rationale given in the article. The Pac 12 has a good chance of being the first one bid power conference since the NCAA tournament expanded in 1985. Cal has a good chance of going winless in conference play. If both of those happen, I think there is a strong argument that this Cal team is one of the worst, if not the worst, power conference teams in modern history.

---

This is the point. This is going to be one of the worst years for any P5 conference ever. Cal is the worst of that bunch. This article is not hyperbole. It just sounds like it is because we are that bad.

ducky23 said:

---

HoopDreams said:

---

socaliganbear said:

---

HoopDreams said:

---

Bleacher report and SB Nation is click bait

No time to write all the reasons why, but to summarize, it's all about how many eye balls they get on the page,

---

Right, because nothing gets more clicks than Cal content. Please....

---

that's not my point. they are just going after big headlines
they even use computers to generate key words that generate clicks based on analytics
not exactly a source of news

---

Well I don't know about SBN nation, but cgb has done a lot of analytical analysis on just how bad this cal team is. I forget exactly what metric they used (some sort of adjusted defensive efficiency metric) but it showed that cal was the worst p5 defense in history

---

Minor pet peeve: People (not just you, Ducky) keep writing P5 conference or P5 team. In basketball, there areSIX (6) power conferences, not 5. The Big East should be added to the football 5 (unless you think that Villanova, Georgetown, Notre Dame, etc. are "mid-majors").

Notre Dame is in the ACC but you're right. There are six power leagues but it's getting harder and harder to make a case that the P12 belongs in that category. Not just with on-court performance, but attendance as well. There's a big and widening gap between the P12 and all the others.

It's okay guys. We are improving!!!!! Let's keep Wyking for another 5 years

TheSouseFamily said:

---

Notre Dame is in the ACC but you're right. There are six power leagues but it's getting harder and harder to make a case that the P12 belongs in that category. Not just with on-court performance, but attendance as well. There's a big and widening gap between the P12 and all the others.

---

We may not to like to hear this, but this post is right.

TheSouseFamily said:

---

Notre Dame is in the ACC but you're right. There are six power leagues but it's getting harder and harder to make a case that the P12 belongs in that category. Not just with on-court performance, but attendance as well. There's a big and widening gap between the P12 and all the others.

---

6 power conferences in basketball.
5 Power Conferences in football.

The Big East split up a several years ago with all the football schools joining other football conferences and some mid-majors filling out the basketball based group. It's a big difference between then and now.

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/standings/_/group/4
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/standings/_/season/2013/group/4

The Big East is good at basketball, but probably doesn't have the same political power in the NCAA as the big football+basketball schools.

R90 said:

---

TheSouseFamily said:

---

Notre Dame is in the ACC but you're right. There are six power leagues but it's getting harder and harder to make a case that the P12 belongs in that category. Not just with on-court performance, but attendance as well. There's a big and widening gap between the P12 and all the others.

---

6 power conferences in basketball.
5 Power Conferences in football.

The Big East split up a several years ago with all the football schools joining other football conferences and some mid-majors filling out the basketball based group. It's big difference between then and now.

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/standings/_/group/4
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/standings/_/season/2013/group/4

The Big East is good at basketball, but probably doesn't have the same political power in the NCAA as the big football+basketball schools.

---

You are right on this. But you should try following. It is a great league with every team this year having a chance to beat every other team. Lots of close games. Few blowouts. And the ten schools are all roughly the same size with good academics. G'town is the only one with off the charts academics and low percentage acceptance rates, but there is a parity. No WSU, ASU. UofA type disparity. I suggest you catch a Mullin (St. Johns) vs. Ewing (G'town) game for tradition and rivalry.

TheSouseFamily said:

---

Notre Dame is in the ACC but you're right. There are six power leagues but it's getting harder and harder to make a case that the P12 belongs in that category. Not just with on-court performance, but attendance as well. There's a big and widening gap between the P12 and all the others.

---

Completely agree. But I ponder if it is a cyclical thing (P12 was dominant in football not too long ago and one of the top bball conferences) or is it structural? Most likely a bit of both, but the widening suggests more of it is structural. I think the next 5-10 years will clarify it.

BeachedBear said:

---

Completely agree. But I ponder if it is a cyclical thing (P12 was dominant in football not too long ago and one of the top bball conferences) or is it structural? Most likely a bit of both, but the widening suggests more of it is structural. I think the next 5-10 years will clarify it.

---

I'd say mostly cyclical. Just 3 years ago, the Pac-12 had 7 teams in the tournament.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_NCAA_Division_I_Men's_Basketball_Tournament#Record_by_conference

In 2010 and 2012 only 2 Pac-12 teams got bids, with lousy seeds.

We won the conference in 2010, a down year, and were given an 8 seed. Washington won the conference tournament and got an 11 seed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/200910_California_Golden_Bears_men%27s_basketball_team

5 teams got bids in 2011.

In 2012, Colorado got an 11 seed and we lost a play-in game to South Florida.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/201112_California_Golden_Bears_men%27s_basketball_team

This year it'll be two again if someone besides Washington wins the conference tournament. Otherwise it'll be just Washington.


Part of the problem is that Pac-12 schools aren't abusing the other western conferences in pre-season games. It messes up the computer rankings.

Another part is they aren't doing enough predatory coach poaching or dominating the regional recruiting scene.

I agree with you guys that performance can be somewhat cyclical. If you look at the 2019 recruiting classes, P12 teams have 5 of the top 20 players and another 2 for which they co-lead. And USC already has the top prospect for 2020. This is a down year but I suspect it will improve in coming years. Some may depend on whether the ncaa decides to enforce the rather obvious violations at SC and Arizona (and lord knows Oregon is always vulnerable). So , we'll see.

I think the attendance and financial considerations may be a bigger issue in the coming years. We're closer to the Mountain West than any of the power conference teams in attendance. TV viewership is poor and the P12 network is obviously a disaster, just as the ACC Network is about to launch using a similar model as the successful SEC Network. Time will tell but right now, it's a pretty ugly status of affairs in the conference. For me, it feels like we occupy a unique position, sandwiched between the power conferences and the mid-major conferences.

touchdownbears43 said:

---

Blood is on Knowlton's hands at this point. No reason to let this dying animal that is Cal basketball continue to wither

---

+1

touchdownbears43 said:

---

Blood is on Knowlton's hands at this point. No reason to let this dying animal that is Cal basketball continue to wither

---

I just noticed that the SB Nation article and your comment were written BEFORE Cal lost to USC by 20+ points (wire to wire, trailing by 30+ points until garbage time).

What would SB Nation and you say after last night's disaster?

Go Bears!

R90 said:

---

BeachedBear said:

---

Completely agree. But I ponder if it is a cyclical thing (P12 was dominant in football not too long ago and one of the top bball conferences) or is it structural? Most likely a bit of both, but the widening suggests more of it is structural. I think the next 5-10 years will clarify it.

---

I'd say mostly cyclical. Just 3 years ago, the Pac-12 had 7 teams in the tournament.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_NCAA_Division_I_Men's_Basketball_Tournament#Record_by_conference

In 2010 and 2012 only 2 Pac-12 teams got bids, with lousy seeds.

We won the conference in 2010, a down year, and were given an 8 seed. Washington won the conference tournament and got an 11 seed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/200910_California_Golden_Bears_men%27s_basketball_team

5 teams got bids in 2011.

In 2012, Colorado got an 11 seed and we lost a play-in game to South Florida.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/201112_California_Golden_Bears_men%27s_basketball_team

This year it'll be two again if someone besides Washington wins the conference tournament. Otherwise it'll be just Washington.


Part of the problem is that Pac-12 schools aren't abusing the other western conferences in pre-season games. It messes up the computer rankings.

Another part is they aren't doing enough predatory coach poaching or dominating the regional recruiting scene.

---

Good post R90. Lots of solid information to back up your opinions. I am not sure which is more mind-blowing: that the Pac-12 may go from seven teams in the tournament to one team in just three years, or that during the same time period Cal has gone from a four seed (its best ever in the modern tournament era) to possibly being winless in conference. The speed of our decline is astounding and has been painful to observe.

mdbear said:

---

The speed of our decline is astounding and has been painful to observe.

---

One saving grace of basketball is that decline could be reversed just as quickly. If the right steps are taken.

stu said:

---

mdbear said:

---

The speed of our decline is astounding and has been painful to observe.

---

One saving grace of basketball is that decline could be reversed just as quickly. If the right steps are taken.

---

+1

With the right coach, we will be competitive in one or two years.

Go Bears!

stu said:

---

mdbear said:

---

The speed of our decline is astounding and has been painful to observe.

---

One saving grace of basketball is that decline could be reversed just as quickly. If the right steps are taken.

---

Like when Braun brought in Carlisle and Kilgore. It was a quick fix. Dudes could ball.

bearister said:

---

stu said:

---

mdbear said:

---

The speed of our decline is astounding and has been painful to observe.

---

One saving grace of basketball is that decline could be reversed just as quickly. If the right steps are taken.

---

Like when Braun brought in Carlisle and Kilgore. It was a quick fix. Dudes could ball.

---

+1

bearister said:

---

stu said:

---

mdbear said:

---

The speed of our decline is astounding and has been painful to observe.

---

One saving grace of basketball is that decline could be reversed just as quickly. If the right steps are taken.

---

Like when Braun brought in Carlisle and Kilgore. It was a quick fix. Dudes could ball.

---

Agreed, though Braun's best year was his first year.

calumnus said:

---

bearister said:

---

stu said:

---

mdbear said:

---

The speed of our decline is astounding and has been painful to observe.

---

One saving grace of basketball is that decline could be reversed just as quickly. If the right steps are taken.

---

Like when Braun brought in Carlisle and Kilgore. It was a quick fix. Dudes could ball.

---

Agreed, though Braun's best year was his first year.

---

Similar to Rock bands and their first albums, which are always the best.

R90 said:

---

BeachedBear said:

---

Completely agree. But I ponder if it is a cyclical thing (P12 was dominant in football not too long ago and one of the top bball conferences) or is it structural? Most likely a bit of both, but the widening suggests more of it is structural. I think the next 5-10 years will clarify it.

---

I'd say mostly cyclical. Just 3 years ago, the Pac-12 had 7 teams in the tournament.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2016_NCAA_Division_I_Men's_Basketball_Tournament#Record_by_conference

In 2010 and 2012 only 2 Pac-12 teams got bids, with lousy seeds.

We won the conference in 2010, a down year, and were given an 8 seed. Washington won the conference tournament and got an 11 seed.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/200910_California_Golden_Bears_men%27s_basketball_team

5 teams got bids in 2011.

In 2012, Colorado got an 11 seed and we lost a play-in game to South Florida.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/201112_California_Golden_Bears_men%27s_basketball_team

This year it'll be two again if someone besides Washington wins the conference tournament. Otherwise it'll be just Washington.


Part of the problem is that Pac-12 schools aren't abusing the other western conferences in pre-season games. It messes up the computer rankings.

Another part is they aren't doing enough predatory coach poaching or dominating the regional recruiting scene.

---

I'm wondering how much the big recruiting scandal has affected PAC12 recruiting, because several PAC12 teams are involved in the shady dealings. Arizona's recruiting has taken a hit. Maybe the recruits who expect that "little extra cash" bonus when signing aren't so interested in getting caught up in scandals. For certain, coaches worry about getting caught dishing out payola, so they are probably reluctant to violate any rules when the heat is still on, at least until the trial has been over for a while. That's a good way to get fired, and end up in limbo, or in a lesser place, like our very own Todd Bozeman. So if the 5 star recruits are going elsewhere, then the PAC12 gets weaker. And players want to go to strong programs, so that might chase away a lot of the 4-star recruits as well. There are some good, proven coaches in this conference, so the talent level has very likely dropped from previous years. Geographically, basketball talent runs in cycles as well. When I was a kid, the midwest and the east had most of the best high school players, then it was the Bay Area, and then back to the midwest again, and on and on. As for Cal. I would assume our coaches have been under the tightest scrutiny since Bozeman to run a squeaky clean ship, which gives a number of PAC12 schools an edge over Cal in recruiting.

SFCB - I wish what you were saying is true and that the programs implicated by the FBI scandals were taking a hit to recruiting but that's not happening, at least not yet. Arizona has the #1 class in the country, USC has the #3 recruiting class and perpetually dirty Oregon has the #8 class. Basically, it's business as usual. The ncaa could spend 5 minutes investigating these programs and find sufficient evidence to blow them up, but I don't think anyone has confidence in the ncaa's ability to do much of anything in addressing the obviously massive issues with respect to recruiting, not just wirh the shoe companies but with agents and even dirty college staffs.

The fact that DeAndre Ayton was able to keep playing, that "Impermissible Bennie" Boatwright is still playing, that Joe Pasternack is still allowed to coach, that Sean Miller still has the support of the university should tell you everything you need to know that literally nothing has changed.

https://247sports.com/Season/2019-Basketball/CompositeTeamRankings/

TheSouseFamily said:

---

SFCB - I wish what you were saying is true and that the programs implicated by the FBI scandals were taking a hit to recruiting but that's not happening, at least not yet. Arizona has the #1 class in the country, USC has the #3 recruiting class and perpetually dirty Oregon has the #8 class. Basically, it's business as usual. The ncaa could spend 5 minutes investigating these programs and find sufficient evidence to blow them up, but I don't think anyone has confidence in the ncaa's ability to do much of anything in addressing the obviously massive issues with respect to recruiting, not just wirh the shoe companies but with agents and even dirty college staffs.

The fact that DeAndre Ayton was able to keep playing, that "Impermissible Bennie" Boatwright is still playing, that Joe Pasternack is still allowed to coach, that Sean Miller still has the support of the university should tell you everything you need to know that literally nothing has changed.

https://247sports.com/Season/2019-Basketball/CompositeTeamRankings/

---

It sounds like you are right, but I was writing in answer to those who wondering why the PAC12 conference was so bad this year. You presented the 2019 class ranking, the next class, with players who have not entered the PAC12 yet, and will do so this Fall. There has to be a reason why the PAC12 is bad this season, and if there has been no dropoff in the number of top-ranked recruits flowing into the PAC12 over the last few seasons, then perhaps there are more incompetent coaches in the PAC12 this year than in past years. Maybe Wyking Jones has some company. UCLA is a young team,as are Utah and Cal, and that presents problems for a coach. Oregon would be better with Bol Bol, but why has Arizona suddenly gone mediocre?

bearister said:

---

stu

mdbear said:

---

The speed of our decline is astounding and has been painful to observe.

---

One saving grace of basketball is that decline could be reversed just as quickly. If the right steps are taken.


Like when Braun brought in Carlisle and Kilgore. It was a quick fix. Dudes could ball.

---

Geno Carlisle, the self-proclaimed 2nd best basketball player in Chicago!