Another Bear said:

---

socaltownie said:

---

Another Bear said:

---

Big C said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

stu said:

---

tsubamoto2001 said:

---

On Kidd:
I'm a huge Jason Kidd fan as a player probably my favorite all-time, but does he actually want to be a college coach? I'm not certain of that. College coaching is much different than the NBA. You wear more hats and it's an around the clock jobno days off. Does he really want that? I'm not convinced, personally.

---

+1

I'd rather we hire a proven college coach. The last Cal legend coaching hire I remember, Joe Kapp, didn't work out all that well.

---

Kidd comes in with several years of high level head coaching experience, not the case with Kapp.

I think he would be a good choice if his motivation is there. He might not be the top candidate in player development, but would probably be the best recruiter at Cal since Bozeman, minus the baggage of course. Getting top talent is about 2/3 the challenge in college basketball today.

Turner looks great as well.

---

No question it's quite a bit different than the Kapp situation?. But how different is it coaching NBA players, as opposed to the players we get?

---

I'd say coaching pros vs. college is very different because of players, expectations and needs. Kidd is ideally suited to coach pros because it's about player/personality management and him being a former star, now in HOF gives him instant respect. Have to know hoops but also how to handle millionaire players. In college is' about teaching, development and systems...and Cal needs plenty.

---

Back from swamis. Not very good form today but I got a paddle. I disagree about Kidd and NBA. Coaching in the show is about managing guys who want minutes, shots, points, etc. It is something but I am not sure it is Coaching. I actually think Kidd COULD be better at college than NBA but who knows.

First choice is Turner. Second is Kidd+practice facility.

---

Right, managing minutes and EGOS, millionaire egos. I'm also not sure it's coaching either and that's why I'm wondering if he can make the jump to college....which requires coaching, development, teaching. Sure he could hire some of that, but he's not connected to the college game. However I agree Kidd might do better in college, mostly because he didn't do all that well in the NBA. Sort of a Pete Carroll going to SC but it would have to a near perfect set up.

I hear UCLA has zeroed in on Turner...his wife is a MD and UCLA has a medical school (like UCI). Cal does not.

---

Many do not realize the degree to which the college game has changed. It is much more like the way you describe the NBA than the old school approach many fondly remember. There was a good article on Coach K posted here recently that describes the radical changes he has had to make in the way he operates in order to be successful in the modern world of college basketball.

tsubamoto2001 said:

---

OBear073akaSMFan said:

---

No love for Randy Bennett? Think he gets alot out of his player.

---

That ship has sailed. He's had his chances to be the guy at Cal and he doesn't want to. Time to move on.

---

Oh was he offered before Wkying?

pingpong2 said:

---

Is it possible a big donor forced his hand, and that the players are being used as scapegoats? I imagine it's not a good look for an AD to be bought by a donor (even though we all knows this is how it works in the the world).

---

No - what happened is that 3 Dads of players (one starter and two backups) complained to Jim that their son's were not developing and said if retained, they would seriously consider transferring. Jim has said that he is concerned about decreasing donor support (true) and that was the reason for the termination.
However at WJ review mtg, he told WJ that he was supporting another season. WJ asked for an public statement to stop other coaches from attempting to poach his players. Jim agreed to send out the statement - however with the Dad's conference call and an tepid player mtg (nothing negative stated but not strong support from the players - the 3 players did not speak out, since they did not want to create friction with their teammates.) the decision changed with Jim.

Big C said:

---

LACalFan said:

---

I'd love to see them roll the dice with Kidd. Let's get some excitement back into MBB.

---

I will say, it would be a direct injection of adrenaline (which had slowly been seeping away the past 2-3 years.

---

Glad Wyking is out. Didn't think it could get any worse than an 8 win season last year and we went ahead and matched it. Whomever we get to replace him, just hope it's a Cal guy who can recruit on top of knowing the X's and O's. Always liked Theo Robertson as an assistant.

calumnus said:

---

Another Bear said:

---

socaltownie said:

---

Another Bear said:

---

Big C said:

---

Cal88 said:

---

stu said:

---

tsubamoto2001 said:

---

On Kidd:
I'm a huge Jason Kidd fan as a player probably my favorite all-time, but does he actually want to be a college coach? I'm not certain of that. College coaching is much different than the NBA. You wear more hats and it's an around the clock jobno days off. Does he really want that? I'm not convinced, personally.

---

+1

I'd rather we hire a proven college coach. The last Cal legend coaching hire I remember, Joe Kapp, didn't work out all that well.

---

Kidd comes in with several years of high level head coaching experience, not the case with Kapp.

I think he would be a good choice if his motivation is there. He might not be the top candidate in player development, but would probably be the best recruiter at Cal since Bozeman, minus the baggage of course. Getting top talent is about 2/3 the challenge in college basketball today.

Turner looks great as well.

---

No question it's quite a bit different than the Kapp situation?. But how different is it coaching NBA players, as opposed to the players we get?

---

I'd say coaching pros vs. college is very different because of players, expectations and needs. Kidd is ideally suited to coach pros because it's about player/personality management and him being a former star, now in HOF gives him instant respect. Have to know hoops but also how to handle millionaire players. In college is' about teaching, development and systems...and Cal needs plenty.

---

Back from swamis. Not very good form today but I got a paddle. I disagree about Kidd and NBA. Coaching in the show is about managing guys who want minutes, shots, points, etc. It is something but I am not sure it is Coaching. I actually think Kidd COULD be better at college than NBA but who knows.

First choice is Turner. Second is Kidd+practice facility.

---

Right, managing minutes and EGOS, millionaire egos. I'm also not sure it's coaching either and that's why I'm wondering if he can make the jump to college....which requires coaching, development, teaching. Sure he could hire some of that, but he's not connected to the college game. However I agree Kidd might do better in college, mostly because he didn't do all that well in the NBA. Sort of a Pete Carroll going to SC but it would have to a near perfect set up.

I hear UCLA has zeroed in on Turner...his wife is a MD and UCLA has a medical school (like UCI). Cal does not.

---

Many do not realize the degree to which the college game has changed. It is much more like the way you describe the NBA than the old school approach many fondly remember. There was a good article on Coach K posted here recently that describes the radical changes he has had to make in the way he operates in order to be successful in the modern world of college basketball.

---

For Coach K (and other elite programs), you're right...the talent he brings in is basically top flight pros, just stopping over before the draft given the NBA age restriction. So it's similar to the pros, managing minutes, egos, working on chemistry.

For a program like Cal, who might get one elite player every so often, I'm not so sure. Lesser talent means more development, teaching. I don't think Coach K's style or a pro coach would work if the talent needs development and coaching, like the players Cal usually gets, or a bottom feeding P12 team. If Cal got 4-5 Jaylen Browns every year or so, that would be different.

4thGenCal said:

---

pingpong2 said:

---

Is it possible a big donor forced his hand, and that the players are being used as scapegoats? I imagine it's not a good look for an AD to be bought by a donor (even though we all knows this is how it works in the the world).

---

No - what happened is that 3 Dads of players (one starter and two backups) complained to Jim that their son's were not developing and said if retained, they would seriously consider transferring. Jim has said that he is concerned about decreasing donor support (true) and that was the reason for the termination.
However at WJ review mtg, he told WJ that he was supporting another season. WJ asked for an public statement to stop other coaches from attempting to poach his players. Jim agreed to send out the statement - however with the Dad's conference call and an tepid player mtg (nothing negative stated but not strong support from the players - the 3 players did not speak out, since they did not want to create friction with their teammates.) the decision changed with Jim.

---

I am guessing that one was Kelly. He had lost his starting job, and played very few minutes per game after that. When he did play, his body language did not look good to me. He seemed be in a doghouse, and no player likes that. I don't know the reasons for him losing his starting job, and I don't know why he was not given many scoring opportunities in the low post as a starter. I felt something was going on that we did not know about. That kid is too talented and has too much potential, to be allowed to sulk on the bench, unless there was good reason. If it was Kelly, his dad was right. There was little development, and probably some regression. He did not look happy. Strange. I am hoping everyone will stay now, and that McNeill will reconsider his transfer.

The only thing I don't like too much is the way it was handled, if true. First a statement saying he is staying, and then a couple days later, a statement firing him. I don't much like parents getting involved in college player's lives. I didn't like it when Jordan Mathews' father got involved, and he transferred out of Cal. I didn't like it when Jason Kidd and some others may have tried to get Lou Campanelli fired, if that was true. They are young boys supposed to be maturing into men while at Cal, and their fathers step in and get a coach fired. This is not Little League, where parents interfere on everything, trying to get the best for their kids, and the most aggressive parents are hard for a coach to deal with. This is college. Let go of them and let them become men. I did say a while back that the feelings of the players and their relationship with the coach needed to be considered, when making a decision to fire the coach, not just won loss record. I'm not comfortable with 18 and 19 year-olds making a multimillion dollar decision to get a coach fired.

Other than that, I'm glad it is finally done, because it is what nearly all fans wanted, and it will be best for Cal basketball in the future. I'm glad that Knowlton based his decision on more things than just won-loss record, which is the way it should be done, IMO. Retaining and growing donor support is a biggie. Hopefully we can all embrace this new life for the Cal program, beginning with hiring an effective coach, and we can go from depression and sniping at fellow Cal fans to optimism for the next season and beyond.

SFCityBear said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

pingpong2 said:

---

Is it possible a big donor forced his hand, and that the players are being used as scapegoats? I imagine it's not a good look for an AD to be bought by a donor (even though we all knows this is how it works in the the world).

---

No - what happened is that 3 Dads of players (one starter and two backups) complained to Jim that their son's were not developing and said if retained, they would seriously consider transferring. Jim has said that he is concerned about decreasing donor support (true) and that was the reason for the termination.
However at WJ review mtg, he told WJ that he was supporting another season. WJ asked for an public statement to stop other coaches from attempting to poach his players. Jim agreed to send out the statement - however with the Dad's conference call and an tepid player mtg (nothing negative stated but not strong support from the players - the 3 players did not speak out, since they did not want to create friction with their teammates.) the decision changed with Jim.

---

I am guessing that one was Kelly. He had lost his starting job, and played very few minutes per game after that. When he did play, his body language did not look good to me. He seemed be in a doghouse, and no player likes that. I don't know the reasons for him losing his starting job, and I don't know why he was not given many scoring opportunities in the low post as a starter. I felt something was going on that we did not know about. That kid is too talented and has too much potential, to be allowed to sulk on the bench, unless there was good reason. If it was Kelly, his dad was right. There was little development, and probably some regression. He did not look happy. Strange. I am hoping everyone will stay now, and that McNeill will reconsider his transfer.

The only thing I don't like too much is the way it was handled, if true. First a statement saying he is staying, and then a couple days later, a statement firing him. I don't much like parents getting involved in college player's lives. I didn't like it when Jordan Mathews' father got involved, and he transferred out of Cal. I didn't like it when Jason Kidd and some others may have tried to get Lou Campanelli fired, if that was true. They are young boys supposed to be maturing into men while at Cal, and their fathers step in and get a coach fired. This is not Little League, where parents interfere on everything, trying to get the best for their kids, and the most aggressive parents are hard for a coach to deal with. This is college. Let go of them and let them become men. I did say a while back that the feelings of the players and their relationship with the coach needed to be considered, when making a decision to fire the coach, not just won loss record. I'm not comfortable with 18 and 19 year-olds making a multimillion dollar decision to get a coach fired.

Other than that, I'm glad it is finally done, because it is what nearly all fans wanted, and it will be best for Cal basketball in the future. I'm glad that Knowlton based his decision on more things than just won-loss record, which is the way it should be done, IMO. Retaining and growing donor support is a biggie. Hopefully we can all embrace this new life for the Cal program, beginning with hiring an effective coach, and we can go from depression and sniping at fellow Cal fans to optimism for the next season and beyond.

---

There was never a "statement" Wyking was staying.
Outside sources reported that but Cal never issued a statement on Jones' status until today.

4thGenCal said:

---

pingpong2 said:

---

Is it possible a big donor forced his hand, and that the players are being used as scapegoats? I imagine it's not a good look for an AD to be bought by a donor (even though we all knows this is how it works in the the world).

---

No - what happened is that 3 Dads of players (one starter and two backups) complained to Jim that their son's were not developing and said if retained, they would seriously consider transferring. Jim has said that he is concerned about decreasing donor support (true) and that was the reason for the termination.
However at WJ review mtg, he told WJ that he was supporting another season. WJ asked for an public statement to stop other coaches from attempting to poach his players. Jim agreed to send out the statement - however with the Dad's conference call and an tepid player mtg (nothing negative stated but not strong support from the players - the 3 players did not speak out, since they did not want to create friction with their teammates.) the decision changed with Jim.

---

Can you tell us more? Who were the three players whose dad talked to JK? Were there other players who were on the verge of transferring?

Go Bears!

ducky23 said:

---

BeachedBear said:

---

bearmanpg said:

---

I'm not sure that the Kidd supporters here realize that recruiting is a whole lot more than calling a kid and saying "Hi, I'm Jason Kidd and I want you to play for me"....there are probably kids out there who have heard of Kidd but his last pro game was when the players he is recruiting were in 6th grade.....recruiting is a year round job, especially during the summer months with all the AAU tournaments being played nationwide...I'm not convinced that Kidd would want to put in the necessary commitment to compete....

---

Kidd would need a staff of assistants that would do most of the recruiting leg work. Then he would be the closer - similar to how Monty and other experienced D1 coaches do it. However, I'm guessing that Kidd would be a better closer for more recruits than Monty was at the end of his career.

Similarly, Kidd's assistants could help in player development as well. For me, it comes down to how Kidd could 'run the program' and in that facet, his NBA experience may or may not be applicable.

I'm dubious that Kidd is going to be the next coach K, but I think he would do better than Jones and he does have a definite Cal connection that is unique. He is the only 'unqualified' candidate that may be worth taking a flyer if he gives us the Cal discount.

---

Dennis gates man.

Could you believe the turn around from not firing wyking to hiring Kidd with gates as his top assistant?

---

I like the way you're thinking. Our defensive metrics would have to improve to at least top 200.

BeachedBear said:

---

He is the only 'unqualified' candidate that may be worth taking a flyer if he gives us the Cal discount.

---

What makes Kidd unqualified?

UCBerkGrad said:

---

BeachedBear said:

---

He is the only 'unqualified' candidate that may be worth taking a flyer if he gives us the Cal discount.

---

What makes Kidd unqualified?

---

I meant that in terms on proven HC record at D1 level (or at least top assistant at a top 20 program). NOT referring to any perceived moral fallibility.

For example, Jones was not qualified because he had never been a HC at any level, nor was he a top assistant at a Top 20 program. Hiring him was taking a flyer that it might work out. DeCuire, Turner, Rice Smith are all qualified. Martin, Monty, Braun, Campanelli were all qualified. Even Bozeman had a remarkable run as the interim coach.

BeachedBear said:

---

UCBerkGrad said:

---

BeachedBear said:

---

He is the only 'unqualified' candidate that may be worth taking a flyer if he gives us the Cal discount.

---

What makes Kidd unqualified?

---

I meant that in terms on proven HC record at D1 level (or at least top assistant at a top 20 program). NOT referring to any perceived moral fallibility.

For example, Jones was not qualified because he had never been a HC at any level, nor was he a top assistant at a Top 20 program. Hiring him was taking a flyer that it might work out. DeCuire, Turner, Rice Smith are all qualified. Martin, Monty, Braun, Campanelli were all qualified. Even Bozeman had a remarkable run as the interim coach.

---

That would've made Pete Carroll unqualified

Look I'm not saying Kidd is gojng to be the next Pete Carroll, but I've always maintained its harder for a coach to succeed at the pro level compared to the college level.

I'd love to see a list of guys who started at the nfl/nba level and couldn't cut it, but then went to coach college. I'd wager that the vast majority of those guys became successful in college.

BeachedBear said:

---

UCBerkGrad said:

---

BeachedBear said:

---

He is the only 'unqualified' candidate that may be worth taking a flyer if he gives us the Cal discount.

---

What makes Kidd unqualified?

---

I meant that in terms on proven HC record at D1 level (or at least top assistant at a top 20 program). NOT referring to any perceived moral fallibility.

For example, Jones was not qualified because he had never been a HC at any level, nor was he a top assistant at a Top 20 program. Hiring him was taking a flyer that it might work out. DeCuire, Turner, Rice Smith are all qualified. Martin, Monty, Braun, Campanelli were all qualified. Even Bozeman had a remarkable run as the interim coach.

---

I would say coaching in the highest level on the planet makes him qualified.

Regarding Kidd potentially coming back to coach--here is a long list of Hall of Fame level players who returned to coach their former team: http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/24049622/hall-fame-level-players-returned-coach-their-former-team

UCBerkGrad said:

---

BeachedBear said:

---

UCBerkGrad said:

---

BeachedBear said:

---

He is the only 'unqualified' candidate that may be worth taking a flyer if he gives us the Cal discount.

---

What makes Kidd unqualified?

---

I meant that in terms on proven HC record at D1 level (or at least top assistant at a top 20 program). NOT referring to any perceived moral fallibility.

For example, Jones was not qualified because he had never been a HC at any level, nor was he a top assistant at a Top 20 program. Hiring him was taking a flyer that it might work out. DeCuire, Turner, Rice Smith are all qualified. Martin, Monty, Braun, Campanelli were all qualified. Even Bozeman had a remarkable run as the interim coach.

---

I would say coaching in the highest level on the planet makes him qualified.

---

Personally, I agree - and Jason is my first choice for many reasons - which is why I said take a flyer. My adjective in quotes was reflecting the general view observed on the board over the last two years about Jones.

ducky23 said:

---

BeachedBear said:

---

UCBerkGrad said:

---

BeachedBear said:

---

He is the only 'unqualified' candidate that may be worth taking a flyer if he gives us the Cal discount.

---

What makes Kidd unqualified?

---

I meant that in terms on proven HC record at D1 level (or at least top assistant at a top 20 program). NOT referring to any perceived moral fallibility.

For example, Jones was not qualified because he had never been a HC at any level, nor was he a top assistant at a Top 20 program. Hiring him was taking a flyer that it might work out. DeCuire, Turner, Rice Smith are all qualified. Martin, Monty, Braun, Campanelli were all qualified. Even Bozeman had a remarkable run as the interim coach.

---

That would've made Pete Carroll unqualified

Look I'm not saying Kidd is gojng to be the next Pete Carroll, but I've always maintained its harder for a coach to succeed at the pro level compared to the college level.

I'd love to see a list of guys who started at the nfl/nba level and couldn't cut it, but then went to coach college. I'd wager that the vast majority of those guys became successful in college.

---

Hey. I agree Jason is worth the flyer, if he is willing. We can speculate how his coaching experience will transfer to college (I think it will), but he will bring people back to Haas (like he did before).

Can't say I agree. There's a lot more to being a head coach at the college level. College head coaches not only have to manage the product on the floor and have a vast knowledge of x's and o's, be adept tacticians, and be able to motivate, they also have to manage what happens off the floor with recruiting, academics, dealing with boosters and donors, dealing with the administration, etc.

And even when it comes to the floor product, much of success in the NBA more so than college is about having the best players. Bo Ryan and Brad Stevens can get teams to the National Title game in college even with a deficit in talent. That doesn't happen in the NBA.

Multiple NBA guys recently have fallen flat on their faces as college head coaches. Off the top of my head I can think of Mike Dunleavy, Avery Johnson, Terry Porter...and there are probably more.

ducky23 said:

---

BeachedBear said:

---

UCBerkGrad said:

---

BeachedBear said:

---

He is the only 'unqualified' candidate that may be worth taking a flyer if he gives us the Cal discount.

---

What makes Kidd unqualified?

---

I meant that in terms on proven HC record at D1 level (or at least top assistant at a top 20 program). NOT referring to any perceived moral fallibility.

For example, Jones was not qualified because he had never been a HC at any level, nor was he a top assistant at a Top 20 program. Hiring him was taking a flyer that it might work out. DeCuire, Turner, Rice Smith are all qualified. Martin, Monty, Braun, Campanelli were all qualified. Even Bozeman had a remarkable run as the interim coach.

---

That would've made Pete Carroll unqualified

Look I'm not saying Kidd is gojng to be the next Pete Carroll, but I've always maintained its harder for a coach to succeed at the pro level compared to the college level.

I'd love to see a list of guys who started at the nfl/nba level and couldn't cut it, but then went to coach college. I'd wager that the vast majority of those guys became successful in college.

---

tsubamoto2001 said:

---

Can't say I agree. There's a lot more to being a head coach at the college level. College head coaches not only have to manage the product on the floor and have a vast knowledge of x's and o's, be adept tacticians, and be able to motivate, they also have to manage what happens off the floor with recruiting, academics, dealing with boosters and donors, dealing with the administration, etc.

And even when it comes to the floor product, much of success in the NBA more so than college is about having the best players. Bo Ryan and Brad Stevens can get teams to the National Title game in college even with a deficit in talent. That doesn't happen in the NBA.

Multiple NBA guys recently have fallen flat on their faces as college head coaches. Off the top of my head I can think of Mike Dunleavy, Avery Johnson, Terry Porter...and there are probably more.

---

Isiah Thomas, Donyell Marshall (no surprise there), Clyde Drexler, Reggie Theus, Mark Price also.

No JKidd for me, loved him as a player but no college level experience. I don't know if Steve Kerr would be an effective college basketball head coach either.

GBear4Life said:

---

oskirules said:

---

No JKidd for me, loved him as a player but no college level experience. I don't know if Steve Kerr would be an effective college basketball head coach either.

---

LOL Greg Popovich has no college experience, would you tell him to go away with a straight face? What about Pat Riley? Phil Jackson? Doc Rivers? Or the hundreds (thousands?) of reputable NBA coaches who have never coached in college.

If you're gonna be critical of hiring J Kidd, you won't be right but at least avoid objectively specious arguments.

---

I'd probably say no to both Riley and PJax, actually. Both are way too old for the grind. Riley hasn't coached in...a decade?

GBear4Life said:

---

oskirules said:

---

No JKidd for me, loved him as a player but no college level experience. I don't know if Steve Kerr would be an effective college basketball head coach either.

---

LOL Greg Popovich has no college experience, would you tell him to go away with a straight face? What about Pat Riley? Phil Jackson? Doc Rivers? Or the hundreds (thousands?) of reputable NBA coaches who have never coached in college.

If you're gonna be critical of hiring J Kidd, you won't be right but at least avoid objectively specious arguments.

---

He coached at Pomona-Pitzer from 1979-86 with results that were "meh" at best. Guess you learn over time and get better. Having Tim Duncan doesn't hurt though.

GBear4Life said:

---

oskirules said:

---

No JKidd for me, loved him as a player but no college level experience. I don't know if Steve Kerr would be an effective college basketball head coach either.

---

LOL Greg Popovich has no college experience, would you tell him to go away with a straight face? What about Pat Riley? Phil Jackson? Doc Rivers? Or the hundreds (thousands?) of reputable NBA coaches who have never coached in college.

If you're gonna be critical of hiring J Kidd, you won't be right but at least avoid objectively specious arguments.

---

What does Greg Popovich, Pat Riley, Phil Jackson, and Doc Rivers have anything to do with Kidd? Did they coach at the college level before? I don't know. Kidd has 5 years of mediocre NBA coaching experience, all I'm saying is I'd rather have someone with some success coaching college ball.

I think Jason would be a great sugar rush but as AD for the day I probably pass _IF_ I can get a mid major coach like Turner or Smith that has a solid resume. It becomes a LOT harder if they say no.

But I will be honest - If AD for the day I hire whomever the donor(s) that will build the practice facility want. That is the critical issue right now. We compete at a disadvantage against the rest of the conference. It will help both mens and womens. It will have value to the university far beyond the hoops team as a frees us Haas for additional uses (as well as the facility itself),

2-3 more years in the wilderness for that is a trade off I would be willing to make. So if DG or others want Kidd I am offering. Because the facility is a necessary condition for any long term prospects.

oskirules said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

oskirules said:

---

No JKidd for me, loved him as a player but no college level experience. I don't know if Steve Kerr would be an effective college basketball head coach either.

---

LOL Greg Popovich has no college experience, would you tell him to go away with a straight face? What about Pat Riley? Phil Jackson? Doc Rivers? Or the hundreds (thousands?) of reputable NBA coaches who have never coached in college.

If you're gonna be critical of hiring J Kidd, you won't be right but at least avoid objectively specious arguments.

---

What does Greg Popovich, Pat Riley, Phil Jackson, and Doc Rivers have anything to do with Kidd? Did they coach at the college level before? I don't know. Kidd has 5 years of mediocre NBA coaching experience, all I'm saying is I'd rather have someone with some success coaching college ball.

---

Kidd may not be the answer, but if he had been the coach of the Warriors for the last 5 years instead of the Nets and the Bucks you wouldn't be using the adjective mediocre.

bearister said:

---

oskirules said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

oskirules said:

---

No JKidd for me, loved him as a player but no college level experience. I don't know if Steve Kerr would be an effective college basketball head coach either.

---

LOL Greg Popovich has no college experience, would you tell him to go away with a straight face? What about Pat Riley? Phil Jackson? Doc Rivers? Or the hundreds (thousands?) of reputable NBA coaches who have never coached in college.

If you're gonna be critical of hiring J Kidd, you won't be right but at least avoid objectively specious arguments.

---

What does Greg Popovich, Pat Riley, Phil Jackson, and Doc Rivers have anything to do with Kidd? Did they coach at the college level before? I don't know. Kidd has 5 years of mediocre NBA coaching experience, all I'm saying is I'd rather have someone with some success coaching college ball.

---

Kidd may not be the answer, but if he had been the coach of the Warriors for the last 5 years instead of the Nets and the Bucks you wouldn't be using the adjective mediocre.

---

The Bucks are not mediocre now -- they have the best record in the NBA, 5 wins better than the Warriors.

Last season, at the time Kidd was fired, they were only one game above .500.

BearSD said:

---

bearister said:

---

oskirules said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

oskirules said:

---

No JKidd for me, loved him as a player but no college level experience. I don't know if Steve Kerr would be an effective college basketball head coach either.

---

LOL Greg Popovich has no college experience, would you tell him to go away with a straight face? What about Pat Riley? Phil Jackson? Doc Rivers? Or the hundreds (thousands?) of reputable NBA coaches who have never coached in college.

If you're gonna be critical of hiring J Kidd, you won't be right but at least avoid objectively specious arguments.

---

What does Greg Popovich, Pat Riley, Phil Jackson, and Doc Rivers have anything to do with Kidd? Did they coach at the college level before? I don't know. Kidd has 5 years of mediocre NBA coaching experience, all I'm saying is I'd rather have someone with some success coaching college ball.

---

Kidd may not be the answer, but if he had been the coach of the Warriors for the last 5 years instead of the Nets and the Bucks you wouldn't be using the adjective mediocre.

---

The Bucks are not mediocre now -- they have the best record in the NBA, 5 wins better than the Warriors.

Last season, at the time Kidd was fired, they were only one game above .500.

---

Different team this year. The more fair comparison: After firing Kidd last year, they improved a small amount (23-22 vs 21-16) the rest of the season.

GMP said:

---

BearSD said:

---

bearister said:

---

oskirules said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

oskirules said:

---

No JKidd for me, loved him as a player but no college level experience. I don't know if Steve Kerr would be an effective college basketball head coach either.

---

LOL Greg Popovich has no college experience, would you tell him to go away with a straight face? What about Pat Riley? Phil Jackson? Doc Rivers? Or the hundreds (thousands?) of reputable NBA coaches who have never coached in college.

If you're gonna be critical of hiring J Kidd, you won't be right but at least avoid objectively specious arguments.

---

What does Greg Popovich, Pat Riley, Phil Jackson, and Doc Rivers have anything to do with Kidd? Did they coach at the college level before? I don't know. Kidd has 5 years of mediocre NBA coaching experience, all I'm saying is I'd rather have someone with some success coaching college ball.

---

Kidd may not be the answer, but if he had been the coach of the Warriors for the last 5 years instead of the Nets and the Bucks you wouldn't be using the adjective mediocre.

---

The Bucks are not mediocre now -- they have the best record in the NBA, 5 wins better than the Warriors.

Last season, at the time Kidd was fired, they were only one game above .500.

---

Different team this year. The more fair comparison: After firing Kidd last year, they improved a small amount (23-22 vs 21-16) the rest of the season.

---

Last year they brought in an assistant who had no training camp or time to do anything. This year, with a good NBA coach and training camp to implement his system, you see how much they improved. Jason Kidd was a terrible NBA coach. Watching his Milwaukee team in the playoffs in 2017 was painful.

All of which should not matter because he punched his wife in the face.

Sluggo

Alkiadt said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

pingpong2 said:

---

Is it possible a big donor forced his hand, and that the players are being used as scapegoats? I imagine it's not a good look for an AD to be bought by a donor (even though we all knows this is how it works in the the world).

---

No - what happened is that 3 Dads of players (one starter and two backups) complained to Jim that their son's were not developing and said if retained, they would seriously consider transferring. Jim has said that he is concerned about decreasing donor support (true) and that was the reason for the termination.
However at WJ review mtg, he told WJ that he was supporting another season. WJ asked for an public statement to stop other coaches from attempting to poach his players. Jim agreed to send out the statement - however with the Dad's conference call and an tepid player mtg (nothing negative stated but not strong support from the players - the 3 players did not speak out, since they did not want to create friction with their teammates.) the decision changed with Jim.

---

I am guessing that one was Kelly. He had lost his starting job, and played very few minutes per game after that. When he did play, his body language did not look good to me. He seemed be in a doghouse, and no player likes that. I don't know the reasons for him losing his starting job, and I don't know why he was not given many scoring opportunities in the low post as a starter. I felt something was going on that we did not know about. That kid is too talented and has too much potential, to be allowed to sulk on the bench, unless there was good reason. If it was Kelly, his dad was right. There was little development, and probably some regression. He did not look happy. Strange. I am hoping everyone will stay now, and that McNeill will reconsider his transfer.

The only thing I don't like too much is the way it was handled, if true. First a statement saying he is staying, and then a couple days later, a statement firing him. I don't much like parents getting involved in college player's lives. I didn't like it when Jordan Mathews' father got involved, and he transferred out of Cal. I didn't like it when Jason Kidd and some others may have tried to get Lou Campanelli fired, if that was true. They are young boys supposed to be maturing into men while at Cal, and their fathers step in and get a coach fired. This is not Little League, where parents interfere on everything, trying to get the best for their kids, and the most aggressive parents are hard for a coach to deal with. This is college. Let go of them and let them become men. I did say a while back that the feelings of the players and their relationship with the coach needed to be considered, when making a decision to fire the coach, not just won loss record. I'm not comfortable with 18 and 19 year-olds making a multimillion dollar decision to get a coach fired.

Other than that, I'm glad it is finally done, because it is what nearly all fans wanted, and it will be best for Cal basketball in the future. I'm glad that Knowlton based his decision on more things than just won-loss record, which is the way it should be done, IMO. Retaining and growing donor support is a biggie. Hopefully we can all embrace this new life for the Cal program, beginning with hiring an effective coach, and we can go from depression and sniping at fellow Cal fans to optimism for the next season and beyond.

---

There was never a "statement" Wyking was staying.
Outside sources reported that but Cal never issued a statement on Jones' status until today.

---

We got the information from 4thGenCal.(See his post above) He seems to have inside information, judging from this and from some of his other posts. Did I read his post wrong? He says that Knowlton told Wyking in a meeting the he supported another season. That is one statement, albeit not public. Then he told Wyking he would issue a public statement (of support). That is another statement of support, a promise to issue a public statement, which he told Wyking personally. If what you say is true, that the statement of support was never issued publicly, then at least Knowlton did handle the firing better in public than I had assumed.

If what 4thGenCal said is true, I am troubled a bit by the way Knowlton handled the personal side of it with Wyking Jones. First telling your coach you are supporting him, then granting his request for a public statement supporting him, and promising to issue a public statement of support, then not issuing the statement as promised and turning around and firing him. That might lead one to believe that Knowlton's word could not be trusted. Wyking Jones may be better off not being retained. Cal fans feel we are better off now. I guess it is a win-win all around, but behind the scenes, I still don't like the way it was handled between AD and Coach, if what 4thGenCal said was true. Firings are seldom handled well. Usually a messy business.

Knowlton had to act quickly. He has to name a new coach quickly, to have the best chance of holding on to the recruits who have committed. And a new coach has little chance of signing any impact players. They almost never do. If he can't hold onto these players and keep others from leaving, we could be back right where we started two years ago when Cuonzo left.

tsubamoto2001 said:

---

Can't say I agree. There's a lot more to being a head coach at the college level. College head coaches not only have to manage the product on the floor and have a vast knowledge of x's and o's, be adept tacticians, and be able to motivate, they also have to manage what happens off the floor with recruiting, academics, dealing with boosters and donors, dealing with the administration, etc.

And even when it comes to the floor product, much of success in the NBA more so than college is about having the best players. Bo Ryan and Brad Stevens can get teams to the National Title game in college even with a deficit in talent. That doesn't happen in the NBA.

Multiple NBA guys recently have fallen flat on their faces as college head coaches. Off the top of my head I can think of Mike Dunleavy, Avery Johnson, Terry Porter...and there are probably more.

---

Good to see you back on the board, by the way.

sluggo said:

---

GMP said:

---

BearSD said:

---

bearister said:

---

oskirules said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

oskirules said:

---

No JKidd for me, loved him as a player but no college level experience. I don't know if Steve Kerr would be an effective college basketball head coach either.

---

LOL Greg Popovich has no college experience, would you tell him to go away with a straight face? What about Pat Riley? Phil Jackson? Doc Rivers? Or the hundreds (thousands?) of reputable NBA coaches who have never coached in college.

If you're gonna be critical of hiring J Kidd, you won't be right but at least avoid objectively specious arguments.

---

What does Greg Popovich, Pat Riley, Phil Jackson, and Doc Rivers have anything to do with Kidd? Did they coach at the college level before? I don't know. Kidd has 5 years of mediocre NBA coaching experience, all I'm saying is I'd rather have someone with some success coaching college ball.

---

Kidd may not be the answer, but if he had been the coach of the Warriors for the last 5 years instead of the Nets and the Bucks you wouldn't be using the adjective mediocre.

---

The Bucks are not mediocre now -- they have the best record in the NBA, 5 wins better than the Warriors.

Last season, at the time Kidd was fired, they were only one game above .500.

---

Different team this year. The more fair comparison: After firing Kidd last year, they improved a small amount (23-22 vs 21-16) the rest of the season.

---

Last year they brought in an assistant who had no training camp or time to do anything. This year, with a good NBA coach and training camp to implement his system, you see how much they improved. Jason Kidd was a terrible NBA coach. Watching his Milwaukee team in the playoffs in 2017 was painful.

All of which should not matter because he punched his wife in the face.

Sluggo

---

Again, I don't follow the Bucks (or really the East) to understand the difference. It is true that the Bucks didn't make many moves - and so a big strike on JK's resume is that Budenholzer is getting so much more out of a pretty similar roster than JK was able to get.

socaltownie said:

---

sluggo said:

---

GMP said:

---

BearSD said:

---

bearister said:

---

oskirules said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

oskirules said:

---

No JKidd for me, loved him as a player but no college level experience. I don't know if Steve Kerr would be an effective college basketball head coach either.

---

LOL Greg Popovich has no college experience, would you tell him to go away with a straight face? What about Pat Riley? Phil Jackson? Doc Rivers? Or the hundreds (thousands?) of reputable NBA coaches who have never coached in college.

If you're gonna be critical of hiring J Kidd, you won't be right but at least avoid objectively specious arguments.

---

What does Greg Popovich, Pat Riley, Phil Jackson, and Doc Rivers have anything to do with Kidd? Did they coach at the college level before? I don't know. Kidd has 5 years of mediocre NBA coaching experience, all I'm saying is I'd rather have someone with some success coaching college ball.

---

Kidd may not be the answer, but if he had been the coach of the Warriors for the last 5 years instead of the Nets and the Bucks you wouldn't be using the adjective mediocre.

---

The Bucks are not mediocre now -- they have the best record in the NBA, 5 wins better than the Warriors.

Last season, at the time Kidd was fired, they were only one game above .500.

---

Different team this year. The more fair comparison: After firing Kidd last year, they improved a small amount (23-22 vs 21-16) the rest of the season.

---

Last year they brought in an assistant who had no training camp or time to do anything. This year, with a good NBA coach and training camp to implement his system, you see how much they improved. Jason Kidd was a terrible NBA coach. Watching his Milwaukee team in the playoffs in 2017 was painful.

All of which should not matter because he punched his wife in the face.

Sluggo

---

Again, I don't follow the Bucks (or really the East) to understand the difference. It is true that the Bucks didn't make many moves - and so a big strike on JK's resume is that Budenholzer is getting so much more out of a pretty similar roster than JK was able to get.

---

Watching a Kidd coached Bucks team was like watching a Jones coached Cal team. It looked different, of course, but somehow the same. Like there was no plan and no one knew what to do.

But again, who cares, because he should not be considered for other reasons, right?

Sluggo

sluggo said:

---

socaltownie said:

---

sluggo said:

---

GMP said:

---

BearSD said:

---

bearister said:

---

oskirules said:

---

GBear4Life said:

---

oskirules said:

---

No JKidd for me, loved him as a player but no college level experience. I don't know if Steve Kerr would be an effective college basketball head coach either.

---

LOL Greg Popovich has no college experience, would you tell him to go away with a straight face? What about Pat Riley? Phil Jackson? Doc Rivers? Or the hundreds (thousands?) of reputable NBA coaches who have never coached in college.

If you're gonna be critical of hiring J Kidd, you won't be right but at least avoid objectively specious arguments.

---

What does Greg Popovich, Pat Riley, Phil Jackson, and Doc Rivers have anything to do with Kidd? Did they coach at the college level before? I don't know. Kidd has 5 years of mediocre NBA coaching experience, all I'm saying is I'd rather have someone with some success coaching college ball.

---

Kidd may not be the answer, but if he had been the coach of the Warriors for the last 5 years instead of the Nets and the Bucks you wouldn't be using the adjective mediocre.

---

The Bucks are not mediocre now -- they have the best record in the NBA, 5 wins better than the Warriors.

Last season, at the time Kidd was fired, they were only one game above .500.

---

Different team this year. The more fair comparison: After firing Kidd last year, they improved a small amount (23-22 vs 21-16) the rest of the season.

---

Last year they brought in an assistant who had no training camp or time to do anything. This year, with a good NBA coach and training camp to implement his system, you see how much they improved. Jason Kidd was a terrible NBA coach. Watching his Milwaukee team in the playoffs in 2017 was painful.

All of which should not matter because he punched his wife in the face.

Sluggo

---

Again, I don't follow the Bucks (or really the East) to understand the difference. It is true that the Bucks didn't make many moves - and so a big strike on JK's resume is that Budenholzer is getting so much more out of a pretty similar roster than JK was able to get.

---

Watching a Kidd coached Bucks team was like watching a Jones coached Cal team. It looked different, of course, but somehow the same. Like there was no plan and no one knew what to do.

But again, who cares, because he should not be considered for other reasons, right?

Sluggo

---

I will not disagree with you about "other reasons" being a legit basis not to consider him. On coaching ability, I am more ambivalent, given that he did turn the Bucks around big time in his first season there and was the third highest vote-getter for Coach of the Year, for which the voters are sportswriters. I guess he failed your eye test, but others thought they saw good coaching.