MSaviolives said:

---

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.

---

It is not just the eye test. His teams ranked statistically in the middle defensively, despite great athletes and the big Greek guy. He played a blitzing defense that was considered a joke (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-bucks-great-defensive-experiment-is-over/). Now playing a standard switching defense the Bucks are ranked #1 in the NBA.

Bad coaches learn a system and stick to it because it is all they know. Cal's last two coaches have been bad in this way, and I would hate to have a third.

Sluggo

sluggo said:

---

MSaviolives said:

---

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.

---

It is not just the eye test. His teams ranked statistically in the middle defensively, despite great athletes and the big Greek guy. He played a blitzing defense that was considered a joke (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-bucks-great-defensive-experiment-is-over/). Now playing a standard switching defense the Bucks are ranked #1 in the NBA.

Bad coaches learn a system and stick to it because it is all they know. Cal's last two coaches have been bad in this way, and I would hate to have a third.

Sluggo

---

OK. And I know it sounds like I have Man love (I don't) but that isn't how I read that article at ALL.

Kidd tried something that didn't work. But it was "just do what you know and never change." Rather it was being stubborn - more like Dykes than Zo. Worth asking him about in an interview and what he learned from that experiment but not that he is brain dead. I can absolutely (like the writer) see the underlying concept - it is just that the NBA guys are simply SO skilled that they can pass or attack at will and so you need the switch and sag rather than attacking

(BTW - this is PRECISELY the sort of defense Oregon plays and it has worked out pretty well for them)

socaltownie said:

---

sluggo said:

---

MSaviolives said:

---

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.

---

It is not just the eye test. His teams ranked statistically in the middle defensively, despite great athletes and the big Greek guy. He played a blitzing defense that was considered a joke (https://fivethirtyeight.com/features/the-bucks-great-defensive-experiment-is-over/). Now playing a standard switching defense the Bucks are ranked #1 in the NBA.

Bad coaches learn a system and stick to it because it is all they know. Cal's last two coaches have been bad in this way, and I would hate to have a third.

Sluggo

---

OK. And I know it sounds like I have Man love (I don't) but that isn't how I read that article at ALL.

Kidd tried something that didn't work. But it was "just do what you know and never change." Rather it was being stubborn - more like Dykes than Zo. Worth asking him about in an interview and what he learned from that experiment but not that he is brain dead. I can absolutely (like the writer) see the underlying concept - it is just that the NBA guys are simply SO skilled that they can pass or attack at will and so you need the switch and sag rather than attacking

(BTW - this is PRECISELY the sort of defense Oregon plays and it has worked out pretty well for them)

---

My take is different than the writer of the piece. He learned the blitzing somewhere along the way where it probably worked. Then the NBA figured it out and he had not counter.

Sluggo

dal9 said:

---

concordtom said:

---

KenBurnski said:

---

Does this mean Shocky is back in?

---

Oh please.
Let's not start this up again.
The man is dead. We buried him and pissed on his grave.
Let's let him rot like any other corpse.

Only trump shall we dig up again and again in order to piss and shat on so that he never gets to Rest In Peace. Shocky is a step above that.
Respect to the dead.

---

you seriously sound ill sometimes

---

I've heard it called Trump Derangement Syndrome, and Tom sounds like he's got it real bad.

He also had Wyking Derangement, but that was an easier one to cure, just with a firing by the AD. It only took 3 Dads and a phone call to do get it done.

Methinks Senor Trump will not be so easily run out of town.

dal9 said:

---

concordtom said:

---

KenBurnski said:

---

Does this mean Shocky is back in?

---

Oh please.
Let's not start this up again.
The man is dead. We buried him and pissed on his grave.
Let's let him rot like any other corpse.

Only trump shall we dig up again and again in order to piss and shat on so that he never gets to Rest In Peace. Shocky is a step above that.
Respect to the dead.

---

you seriously sound ill sometimes

---

Lol.
Yes, this was one of my better posts, wasn't it?

SFCityBear said:

---

dal9 said:

---

concordtom said:

---

KenBurnski said:

---

Does this mean Shocky is back in?

---

Oh please.
Let's not start this up again.
The man is dead. We buried him and pissed on his grave.
Let's let him rot like any other corpse.

Only trump shall we dig up again and again in order to piss and shat on so that he never gets to Rest In Peace. Shocky is a step above that.
Respect to the dead.

---

you seriously sound ill sometimes

---

I've heard it called Trump Derangement Syndrome, and Tom sounds like he's got it real bad.

He also had Wyking Derangement, but that was an easier one to cure, just with a firing by the AD. It only took 3 Dads and a phone call to do get it done.

Methinks Senor Trump will not be so easily run out of town.

---

You are correct in the first, but not on Wyking.
I just didn't really care much anymore.

SFCityBear said:

---

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.

---

True SFCity Bear, handled poorly but the pressure from the 3 Dad's (and yes to your earlier guess as to whom) coupled with majority donor pressure swung the change of mind. One question I did not know, but very possible was the overall lack of player confidence in the #1 assistant who often took a lead role in time outs - thus somewhat confusing who the main voice/coach was. Agreed on this subject to be buried and focus on getting the best candidate to lead the program going forward. However also fair to say the review/termination process was not run smoothly and as forthright as it should have been.
Separate key subject (brought up recently by SCT) is the extreme importance of an practice facility. The disgruntled parents who emphasized "lack of development" should realize that extra time to develop/improve is much easier to attain with easy access to additional court time. The competing recruiters harp on our lack of such an facility, as a huge hurdle to improving one's game and a lack of commitment to basketball by the university.

Kidd, Turner, Muss, Gates... these all seem like such uninspired coaches. Sort of like the search that led to Dykes where the alternatives were Mac, Hue Jackson, and Gary Andersen.

We can and have gotten a HC from other P5 conferences as have other schools. Anything short of a successful P5 or highly successful mid major coach or NBA coach would be disappointing.

Go out and get a Gregg Marshall, Chris Beard, or Mike White. Both Marshall and Beard should know they're at schools that can't sustain a winning program long term. White's on the hot seat from their fanbase just like Cuonzo was at Tennessee.

Please none of this Kyle Smith garbage. We don't need the coach from the 4th place WCC team.

kingpindonuts said:

---

Kidd, Turner, Muss, Gates... these all seem like such uninspired coaches. Sort of like the search that led to Dykes where the alternatives were Mac, Hue Jackson, and Gary Andersen.

We can and have gotten a HC from other P5 conferences as have other schools. Anything short of a successful P5 or highly successful mid major coach or NBA coach would be disappointing.

Go out and get a Gregg Marshall, Chris Beard, or Mike White. Both Marshall and Beard should know they're at schools that can't sustain a winning program long term. White's on the hot seat from their fanbase just like Cuonzo was at Tennessee.

Please none of this Kyle Smith garbage. We don't need the coach from the 4th place WCC team.

---

Please pass the pipe cause that is some GOOOD stuff.

We have gotten ONE former P-5 coach that was a winner in a 1/2 century (and really probably in the last 70 years). A guy that flamed out with the Warriors when he decided he wanted to see what the NBA was like (and also probably was sick of recruiting (red flag!)).

And while wouldn't it be cool to get Gregg Marshall (****, lets go get Coach K!!!) that isn't our M.O. and has NEVER been.

socaltownie said:

---

kingpindonuts said:

---

Kidd, Turner, Muss, Gates... these all seem like such uninspired coaches. Sort of like the search that led to Dykes where the alternatives were Mac, Hue Jackson, and Gary Andersen.

We can and have gotten a HC from other P5 conferences as have other schools. Anything short of a successful P5 or highly successful mid major coach or NBA coach would be disappointing.

Go out and get a Gregg Marshall, Chris Beard, or Mike White. Both Marshall and Beard should know they're at schools that can't sustain a winning program long term. White's on the hot seat from their fanbase just like Cuonzo was at Tennessee.

Please none of this Kyle Smith garbage. We don't need the coach from the 4th place WCC team.

---

Please pass the pipe cause that is some GOOOD stuff.

We have gotten ONE former P-5 coach that was a winner in a 1/2 century (and really probably in the last 70 years). A guy that flamed out with the Warriors when he decided he wanted to see what the NBA was like (and also probably was sick of recruiting (red flag!)).

And while wouldn't it be cool to get Gregg Marshall (****, lets go get Coach K!!!) that isn't our M.O. and has NEVER been.

---

2 actually. Martin was 32-20 at UT.

Cal likely won't get into a bidding war for a coach, which limits the options. Guys likely Beard, Marshall command $5M per year minimum. Heck, Kidd likely couldn't come unless he took a discount.

The draw with Turner and Muss is that they have ties to the area. They also dominated their conferences over a decent period of time, which isn't easy to do, even in a smaller conference.

kingpindonuts said:

---

Kidd, Turner, Muss, Gates... these all seem like such uninspired coaches. Sort of like the search that led to Dykes where the alternatives were Mac, Hue Jackson, and Gary Andersen.

We can and have gotten a HC from other P5 conferences as have other schools. Anything short of a successful P5 or highly successful mid major coach or NBA coach would be disappointing.

Go out and get a Gregg Marshall, Chris Beard, or Mike White. Both Marshall and Beard should know they're at schools that can't sustain a winning program long term. White's on the hot seat from their fanbase just like Cuonzo was at Tennessee.

Please none of this Kyle Smith garbage. We don't need the coach from the 4th place WCC team.

---

Amazing how little we demand and expect. Must be the decades of losing. Battered wife syndrome i guess.

kingpindonuts said:

---

Kidd, Turner, Muss, Gates... these all seem like such uninspired coaches. Sort of like the search that led to Dykes where the alternatives were Mac, Hue Jackson, and Gary Andersen.

We can and have gotten a HC from other P5 conferences as have other schools. Anything short of a successful P5 or highly successful mid major coach or NBA coach would be disappointing.

Go out and get a Gregg Marshall, Chris Beard, or Mike White. Both Marshall and Beard should know they're at schools that can't sustain a winning program long term. White's on the hot seat from their fanbase just like Cuonzo was at Tennessee.

Please none of this Kyle Smith garbage. We don't need the coach from the 4th place WCC team.

---

Chris Beard, lol. His next job will either be at an elite hoops program like Kansas or Arizona (heck, maybe even this off-season) or he will cash in and get $6 million/year to try to win in Austin after the Horns boosters get tired of Shaka Smart (which also might happen this off-season).

The Koch brothers are paying Gregg Marshall $3.5 million/year to coach at Wichita State.

Mike White makes almost as much at Florida, and he's not going to leave that job unless he's half an inch away from getting fired, which is not the case.

This is a program that paid its last coach $1M/season which is bottom barrel for a high-major. We don't have a practice facility. There's challenges here.

Marshall has rejected overtures from programs with better resources. And geography will always be a factor in these coaching searches. We could have had Chris Mack a few years ago, had geography not been an issue. For guys like Beard (Texas guy) and White (Southern guy), Cal doesn't seem like a fit.

kingpindonuts said:

---

Amazing how little we demand and expect. Must be the decades of losing. Battered wife syndrome i guess.

---

Don't sleep on Eran Ganot. He checks so many boxes yet has gotten little publicity.

calfanz said:

---

Don't sleep on Eran Ganot. He checks so many boxes yet has gotten little publicity.

---

Probably because one good season and a lot of mediocre ones?

kingpindonuts said:

---

Amazing how little we demand and expect. Must be the decades of losing. Battered wife syndrome i guess.

---

And you are donating how much?

Travis DeCuire has also dominated his Mid Major conference.....

calfanz said:

---

Don't sleep on Eran Ganot. He checks so many boxes yet has gotten little publicity.

---

Ganot has potential, but he had one good season with the previous coach's players. If he's garnering consideration, what would put him over Turner or Pasternack, who have both performed better in the Big West the last 2 seasons? Not saying he won't turn out to be a good coach, but these next couple of years he needs to show that he can win that conference.

LOUMFSG2 said:

---

tsubamoto2001 said:

---

This is a program that paid its last coach $1M/season which is bottom barrel for a high-major. We don't have a practice facility. There's challenges here.

Marshall has rejected overtures from programs with better resources. And geography will always be a factor in these coaching searches. We could have had Chris Mack a few years ago, had geography not been an issue. For guys like Beard (Texas guy) and White (Southern guy), Cal doesn't seem like a fit.

kingpindonuts said:

---

Amazing how little we demand and expect. Must be the decades of losing. Battered wife syndrome i guess.

---

---

One slight correction. We paid $2.5M per season for Wyking in the end, including the buyout. Which is why I hate the short sighted approach to finances. We can't afford to pay $2 million a year for a quality coach, so we try to go cheap with an unknown quantity, and wind up paying more. So frustrating.

---

The money was not there to pay more, at the time. The University will not subsidize IA. Period.

Someone stepped in with a cash infusion, and zero guarantee of any return. Thanks, and good luck.

tsubamoto2001 said:

---

calfanz said:

---

Don't sleep on Eran Ganot. He checks so many boxes yet has gotten little publicity.

---

Ganot has potential, but he had one good season with the previous coach's players. If he's garnering consideration, what would put him over Turner or Pasternack, who have both performed better in the Big West the last 2 seasons? Not saying he won't turn out to be a good coach, but these next couple of years he needs to show that he can win that conference.

---

Good points. IMO, Pasternak is way too much of a risk. It may turn out that he skates on the UofA scandal, but there's too much risk that it might catch him (there is a tape, supposedly) and blow up in our face.

Yeah, he's pretty much unhireable unless his name gets cleared from that whole thing.

UrsaMajor said:

---

tsubamoto2001 said:

---

calfanz said:

---

Don't sleep on Eran Ganot. He checks so many boxes yet has gotten little publicity.

---

Ganot has potential, but he had one good season with the previous coach's players. If he's garnering consideration, what would put him over Turner or Pasternack, who have both performed better in the Big West the last 2 seasons? Not saying he won't turn out to be a good coach, but these next couple of years he needs to show that he can win that conference.

---

Good points. IMO, Pasternak is way too much of a risk. It may turn out that he skates on the UofA scandal, but there's too much risk that it might catch him (there is a tape, supposedly) and blow up in our face.

---

tsubamoto2001 said:

---

calfanz said:

---

Don't sleep on Eran Ganot. He checks so many boxes yet has gotten little publicity.

---

Ganot has potential, but he had one good season with the previous coach's players. If he's garnering consideration, what would put him over Turner or Pasternack, who have both performed better in the Big West the last 2 seasons? Not saying he won't turn out to be a good coach, but these next couple of years he needs to show that he can win that conference.

---

Ganot has a harder recruiting job than Turner and Pasternak. So Cal kids know most of the UCs and would easily go to Irvine or SB as a viable choice. I know going to Hawaii sounds like a dream, but it's not. Only certain types of kids would want to spend 4 years in Hawaii, believe it or not. So he does the St. Mary's thing he learned from his boss Bennett and recruits Australia. He's gotten a couple of solid contributors that way. But yah his recruiting prowess is still to be determined, and he doesn't have a dynamic personality (his predecessor Gibb Arnold did and got some talent to Hawaii), but he coaches them up with the best of them. And I would think John Montgomery would follow him back to Cal.