OaktownBear said:
Not buying it. You didn't know any more or have any more proof when Martin was here and you criticized him constantly. You defend and defend and defend and then you try not to take responsibility for it by saying "I am not saying anything (for 10 pages). I'm just saying I don't know."
There were a handful of posters that became knows as the great Holmoe apologists. You will go down as one of the great Jones apologists no matter how much you try to weasel out of it.
I could care less whether you buy it. I'm not writing here to please you. I write about Cal basketball what I think, and I write it for general consumption or rejection. With you and me, it is personal. Always has been. I wish it wasn't. There are a number of fine Cal fans here on the BI who probably hate my guts. It's a free country.
As to Martin, I did not criticize HIM constantly. I criticized HIS offensive philosophy over and over. I did have proof of what his offensive philosophy was, because he explained it to the press, and I listened to it, and saw with my eyes that he had implemented it. It was not until after Martin had thrown in the towel vs Bakersfield, and left Cal, that I criticized him on personal level for being an opportunist. Do I have proof of that? No, but I think it was a good guess. I criticized Martin again lately, when the contempt and hatred for Wyking Jones on this board became hard to take. I wrote that no other Cal coach in history had been given less of a roster to start with than Wyking Jones. And yes I have proof of that, from the old Cal website and from the rosters of years past, posted on sports-reference.com. It was a failed attempt to bring some perspective to the discussion of whether a coach should be retained or fired. If we think that the roster a new coach starts with has nothing to do with his success in his first two years, then we know nothing about college basketball.
I can endure your insults, and your accusations (without proof, I'd add). Exposing my thoughts to Cal fans here has given me a thicker skin than when I first posted here. It is a characteristic of many people to try and pigeonhole others into categories, and make it easier to deal with them. Once they decide you are this or that kind of person, then they can ascribe qualities to you that others in that category have exhibited. In politics, for example, if you say someone is a Republican, then he must also be a supporter of the President, when many Republicans don't support the President at all, and some even try to undermine him. The same is true on the Left side of the political spectrum.
I will try and state it again. I wanted to counter calbear80 and all the Jones critics and haters who had made up their minds to crucify Jones in the media without a fair trial. If you only can understand this by accusing me of being a Jones apologist, then have at it. I never ever defended Jones' style of play, his record, his recruiting. In fact, if you and everyone had read my posts, I said at the beginning Jones would not be the best hire. I wanted someone with some HC experience in college. I criticized his decision to use a full court press with his deficient roster. I criticized his decision to name Coleman as the "go-to guy on offense". I criticised his offensive sets. I criticized his decision to switch defenses when his players hadn't mastered one style. I criticized his use of zone at all, because his players needed to learn fundamental individual man defense first, so they should be playing man D. I could be wrong about all these statements, but I stand by them, and they were all critical of Wyking Jones. Where do you see any "apology" for Jones in any of those statements I made on the BI?
What happened was calbear80 began to lead the charge to get Jones fired, with no evidence other than wins and losses. More and more of you joined the chorus and it became a high-tech electronic media lynching of a coach, without any kind of a fair trial. You are a lawyer. You know how the system works. What I did was write a series of posts to counter calbear80's constant calls to lynch without a trial, DEFENDING WYKING JONES RIGHT TO A FAIR HEARING WITH HIS BOSS, Jim Knowlton, the AD, behind closed doors Let Jones plead his case, with all his own facts, for another year. You and the rest of the mob could not allow that. You people can look at me as an apologist. Call me whatever you want. But you need to take a hard look at yourselves and ask why you joined a mob to fire this coach, simply because he was not winning enough games for you. Instant gratification in your choice of entertainment is that important to you?
Finally, I apologize again for the long posts. I don't think in Tweets or one line e-mails very often, as I like to go a little deeper into things. If you don't like reading what I write, you do have a choice to read me or not, unlike you all who didn't (and still don't) want to give AD Knowlton the choice to make his own decision to hire or fire Wyking Jones. The mob is probably already beginning to form in some minds to fire the AD.
SFCityBear
