parentswerebears said:

---

JK should be waiting at this point, especially because the best candidates, those that we really should want, are still engaged in the season. Even Pat Forde mentions that DeCuire should be the coach at Cal. Travis just seems like the most logical choice to me at this juncture, if he'll come.

---

Familiarity doesn't mean logical. You know of him, and that's great. But its the AD's job to know of guys that we don't.

HKBear97! said:

---

socaliganbear said:

---

Prediction:

We keep him.
Out realistic options get better jobs this year.
He wins games in the low teens next year, but it's improvement. He's fired after failing to make the NIT after 4 years. We try to rebuild our dead brand two years from now.

---

This is my predication as well, with one important addition. Next year we'll win around 15 games and the apologists will point to "progress". However, he'll be in year three of a five year contract and he "simply can't recruit when he's only assured of two more years!!", so he'll get an extension. This being Cal, the extension will likely be incredibly unfavorable for Cal. When he barely gets above .500 in year four, he'll get fired, only this time the buyout will be even larger. Look no further than Tedford and Dykes for comparison.

---

I sure don't see a ton of apologists. People here who think he will stay, but aren't arguing that he should. I don't think the AD should think for a second that there is any kind of interest/ground-swell/momentum in having him back.

Those who aren't arguing that he should stay are not arguing because at this point, discussion of the issue has been completely exhausted.

calbear80 said:

---

Ernie Kent is indeed a vast improvement over the current coach even if Ernie is the second worst coach in the Pac-12.

. Ernie Kent has won over 60 Pac-15 games (an average of around 6 per a year). Can someone please look up the correct numbers?

. Jones has won a grand total of 5 Pac-12 games (an average of 2.5 per a year).

Go Bears!

---

Just curious...

Why can't you look up the numbers?

Just Wikipedia Ernie Kent and you will find the info. you seek.

I sure don't see a ton of apologists. People here who think he will stay, but aren't arguing that he should. I don't think the AD should think for a second that there is any kind of interest/ground-swell/momentum in having him back.

Thank you mbbear.

If you want to be depressed about Cal athletics and Cal in general, write an email to Jim Knowlton. You'll get a stock response that'll confirm your worst suspicious about what the university thinks about revenue sports.

Actually it's not depressing. It's liberating. You'll stop banging your head against the wall and accept the reality that Cal sucks and is committed to sucking forever.

Bottom line, Cal will NEVER be good at football or MBB again. Those magical seasons when Cal finished in the top 10 in football or made it to the Sweet Sixteen are gone for good.

Forget about a Rose Bowl. Final Four - LOL, NEVER.

The school wants 7 wins in football and and NIT MBB team *at best* and the *DO NOT* want excellence. If they have to, they will cut the teams down to avoid excellence. I'm not exaggerating. If FB gets more than 8 wins, they'll push Wilcox out the door before the team gets good.

Wyking won't be fired, because he's EXACTLY what the university wants - a lousy coach. But if by some accident Cal found a good coach and started winning, the school would sabotage him too.

Don't waste money on this athletic program. If you care about quality athletics, don't donate one dime to the university, and tell them explicitly why you're not donating. It won't make much of a difference, but at least it'll bring you some clarity.

Cal won't change - they'll never support even above-average revenue sports anymore. I won't change, either - I believe an elite school like Cal should insist on elite revenue sports. So I'm walking away. I'm not going to let a university that insists on taking people's money only so it can keep its collective head up its arse forever get the best of me. If you care about quality athletics, you should let it go. It won't happen at Cal. Ever.

If you genuinely like 7-win football seasons and mediocre-or-worse basketball, you can be a Cal fan or buy a lifetime supply of Clippers season tickets, it's the same thing.

Sad...

Uthaithani said:

---

If you want to be depressed about Cal athletics and Cal in general, write an email to Jim Knowlton. You'll get a stock response that'll confirm your worst suspicious about what the university thinks about revenue sports.

Actually it's not depressing. It's liberating. You'll stop banging your head against the wall and accept the reality that Cal sucks and is committed to sucking forever.

Bottom line, Cal will NEVER be good at football or MBB again. Those magical seasons when Cal finished in the top 10 in football or made it to the Sweet Sixteen are gone for good.

Forget about a Rose Bowl. Final Four - LOL, NEVER.

The school wants 7 wins in football and and NIT MBB team *at best* and the *DO NOT* want excellence. If they have to, they will cut the teams down to avoid excellence. I'm not exaggerating. If FB gets more than 8 wins, they'll push Wilcox out the door before the team gets good.

Wyking won't be fired, because he's EXACTLY what the university wants - a lousy coach. But if by some accident Cal found a good coach and started winning, the school would sabotage him too.

Don't waste money on this athletic program. If you care about quality athletics, don't donate one dime to the university, and tell them explicitly why you're not donating. It won't make much of a difference, but at least it'll bring you some clarity.

Cal won't change - they'll never support even above-average revenue sports anymore. I won't change, either - I believe an elite school like Cal should insist on elite revenue sports. So I'm walking away. I'm not going to let a university that insists on taking people's money only so it can keep its collective head up its arse forever get the best of me. If you care about quality athletics, you should let it go. It won't happen at Cal. Ever.

If you genuinely like 7-win football seasons and mediocre-or-worse basketball, you can be a Cal fan or buy a lifetime supply of Clippers season tickets, it's the same thing.

---

Hey, the clippers will make the playoffs and Cal PG Tyrone Wallace is getting some run there

Uthaithani said:

---

If you want to be depressed about Cal athletics and Cal in general, write an email to Jim Knowlton. You'll get a stock response that'll confirm your worst suspicious about what the university thinks about revenue sports.

Actually it's not depressing. It's liberating. You'll stop banging your head against the wall and accept the reality that Cal sucks and is committed to sucking forever.

Bottom line, Cal will NEVER be good at football or MBB again. Those magical seasons when Cal finished in the top 10 in football or made it to the Sweet Sixteen are gone for good.

Forget about a Rose Bowl. Final Four - LOL, NEVER.

The school wants 7 wins in football and and NIT MBB team *at best* and the *DO NOT* want excellence. If they have to, they will cut the teams down to avoid excellence. I'm not exaggerating. If FB gets more than 8 wins, they'll push Wilcox out the door before the team gets good.

Wyking won't be fired, because he's EXACTLY what the university wants - a lousy coach. But if by some accident Cal found a good coach and started winning, the school would sabotage him too.

Don't waste money on this athletic program. If you care about quality athletics, don't donate one dime to the university, and tell them explicitly why you're not donating. It won't make much of a difference, but at least it'll bring you some clarity.

Cal won't change - they'll never support even above-average revenue sports anymore. I won't change, either - I believe an elite school like Cal should insist on elite revenue sports. So I'm walking away. I'm not going to let a university that insists on taking people's money only so it can keep its collective head up its arse forever get the best of me. If you care about quality athletics, you should let it go. It won't happen at Cal. Ever.

If you genuinely like 7-win football seasons and mediocre-or-worse basketball, you can be a Cal fan or buy a lifetime supply of Clippers season tickets, it's the same thing.

---

At the end of yet another amazing post, Uthaithani says he's "walking away"...

This seems like one of the all-time great set-up lines. I generously leave it for anyone else who wants to run with it...

NOBODY leaves. EVERYONE eats it. Uth got me fired up. I need some White Cheddar CI.

KenBurnski said:

---

NOBODY leaves. EVERYONE eats it. Uth got me fired up. I need some White Cheddar CI.

---

Except McNeill

(so far)

mbBear said:

---

HKBear97! said:

---

socaliganbear said:

---

Prediction:

We keep him.
Out realistic options get better jobs this year.
He wins games in the low teens next year, but it's improvement. He's fired after failing to make the NIT after 4 years. We try to rebuild our dead brand two years from now.

---

This is my predication as well, with one important addition. Next year we'll win around 15 games and the apologists will point to "progress". However, he'll be in year three of a five year contract and he "simply can't recruit when he's only assured of two more years!!", so he'll get an extension. This being Cal, the extension will likely be incredibly unfavorable for Cal. When he barely gets above .500 in year four, he'll get fired, only this time the buyout will be even larger. Look no further than Tedford and Dykes for comparison.

---

I sure don't see a ton of apologists. People here who think he will stay, but aren't arguing that he should. I don't think the AD should think for a second that there is any kind of interest/ground-swell/momentum in having him back.

---

Perhaps we define "apologists" differently. When I see posters (SFCityBear, for example) saying that no other coach would have won more games than Jones has to date, that to me is an apologist.

And you were right about lack of any interest/ground-swell/momentum - we lost all of that when Cuonzo left and we hired Wyking. Fresh off two 20+ wins seasons, Cuonzo was hired away and for once Cal received buyout money. Instead of making a hire that might bring the program to the next level, we made a colossal mistake and hired Wyking for all the wrong reasons. Back-to-back terrible seasons, plummeting attendance and a discouraged donor base have killed this program. It will take a miracle for it to recover, if it ever does.

HKBear97! said:

---

mbBear said:

---

HKBear97! said:

---

socaliganbear said:

---

Prediction:

We keep him.
Out realistic options get better jobs this year.
He wins games in the low teens next year, but it's improvement. He's fired after failing to make the NIT after 4 years. We try to rebuild our dead brand two years from now.

---

This is my predication as well, with one important addition. Next year we'll win around 15 games and the apologists will point to "progress". However, he'll be in year three of a five year contract and he "simply can't recruit when he's only assured of two more years!!", so he'll get an extension. This being Cal, the extension will likely be incredibly unfavorable for Cal. When he barely gets above .500 in year four, he'll get fired, only this time the buyout will be even larger. Look no further than Tedford and Dykes for comparison.

---

I sure don't see a ton of apologists. People here who think he will stay, but aren't arguing that he should. I don't think the AD should think for a second that there is any kind of interest/ground-swell/momentum in having him back.

---

Perhaps we define "apologists" differently. When I see posters (SFCityBear, for example) saying that no other coach would have won more games than Jones has to date, that to me is an apologist.

And you were right about lack of any interest/ground-swell/momentum - we lost all of that when Cuonzo left and we hired Wyking. Fresh off two 20+ wins seasons, Cuonzo was hired away and for once Cal received buyout money. Instead of making a hire that might bring the program to the next level, we made a colossal mistake and hired Wyking for all the wrong reasons. Back-to-back terrible seasons, plummeting attendance and a discouraged donor base have killed this program. It will take a miracle for it to recover, if it ever does.

---

Agree that if we had hired the right guy when Cuonzo left, we would have been fine. Moreover, there was no reason to give Jones a 5 year contract with such unfavorable buyout provisions. I am coming around to thinking this next year under Jones is just a further consequence of those bad decisions.

As long as the buyout decreases/we build up money for a new coach, and we get the right guy, we can recover. Doesn't mean we will. We are just going to have to ride this out. The danger is if we show marginal improvement and people argue that deserves an extension.

calumnus said:

---

HKBear97! said:

---

mbBear said:

---

HKBear97! said:

---

socaliganbear said:

---

Prediction:

We keep him.
Out realistic options get better jobs this year.
He wins games in the low teens next year, but it's improvement. He's fired after failing to make the NIT after 4 years. We try to rebuild our dead brand two years from now.

---

This is my predication as well, with one important addition. Next year we'll win around 15 games and the apologists will point to "progress". However, he'll be in year three of a five year contract and he "simply can't recruit when he's only assured of two more years!!", so he'll get an extension. This being Cal, the extension will likely be incredibly unfavorable for Cal. When he barely gets above .500 in year four, he'll get fired, only this time the buyout will be even larger. Look no further than Tedford and Dykes for comparison.

---

I sure don't see a ton of apologists. People here who think he will stay, but aren't arguing that he should. I don't think the AD should think for a second that there is any kind of interest/ground-swell/momentum in having him back.

---

Perhaps we define "apologists" differently. When I see posters (SFCityBear, for example) saying that no other coach would have won more games than Jones has to date, that to me is an apologist.

And you were right about lack of any interest/ground-swell/momentum - we lost all of that when Cuonzo left and we hired Wyking. Fresh off two 20+ wins seasons, Cuonzo was hired away and for once Cal received buyout money. Instead of making a hire that might bring the program to the next level, we made a colossal mistake and hired Wyking for all the wrong reasons. Back-to-back terrible seasons, plummeting attendance and a discouraged donor base have killed this program. It will take a miracle for it to recover, if it ever does.

---

As long as the buyout decreases/we build up money for a new coach, and we get the right guy, we can recover. Doesn't mean we will. We are just going to have to ride this out. The danger is if we show marginal improvement and people argue that deserves an extension.

---

that is my fear. That with Justin as a Junior and VC improving before he leaves after year 2 (or perhaps 3) you get say 6 conference wins. Then all the people committed to losing will point at that and say "well we have stadium debt so we can't afford to swtich and hey, we ALMOST made the NIT"

Some of you don't get it. we like BASKETBALL _MORE_ than football. Oh we will enjoy the game that is bashing young men's brains to mush but we LIVE for March. The fact that the Bears have been exiled to deepest siberia this time of year makes SOME of us really irritated and cranky.

I hope with all this there is some understanding of lack of trust in the donor community. They guys I know said we want to see action, not words. Do you feel with the football and basketball programs you have seen action?

Jim Knowlton is listening as we speak.

wifeisafurd said:

---

I hope with all this there is some understanding of lack of trust in the donor community. They guys I know said we want to see action, not words. Do you feel with the football and basketball programs you have seen action?

---

i know you are upset with football but I am not (or at least willing to cut slack). Our OC has a PROVEN track record of putting up points and understanding the game. There were some BIZZARE play calls and things that didn't make sense but I am also willing to understand that without speed at the WO and QBs unable to hit the outfade it was very simple to scheme Cal. I alot of what I saw was trying to throw pasta on the wall. Again, a track record of getting it done leads me to give some slack. Plus we made a change at QB coach and I think that was smart. I know a lot of folks wanted to see the OC canned. I would have been "meh" but not that upset by it.

It is Jones that is driving me crazy.