OneTopOneChickenApple said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

UrsaMajor said:

---

There was never any evidence that he was intending to keep WJ except for Jeff Goodman and the Comical. Consider the sources.

---

Have to disagree, but that is something we can discuss privately. Eric for example indicated Jones was being retained.

I hope what changed is Kidd.

BTW, I support JK's decision, but would have understood and accepted the reasons for another year (the prominent (one being the lack of a desirable replacement at the right price).

---

Can I ask whether you (or other donors or even the AD) are at all concerned with kidd's alleged off court indiscretions. I'm just curious whether this is going to play any role in the decision.

I'm also mildly surprised you're a Kidd guy. What are some reasons you prefer him over a guy like turner?

---

Donors want wins is my guess and access to the coach. My guess is donors changed the original decision on the basis of pulling /providing support, and JK blinked. So yes, donors want Kidd.

I'm not sure what impact his off the court indiscretions will have. He has made the rounds at Berkeley for various events recently and has been well received. On the domestic abuse side, this Chancellor's support would help. If you are asking me, he is very different that the guy that was a player (nothing like being on the management side to get a different perspective).

As for coaching, in his last gig, the Bucks turned from one of the worst to one of the best defenses in the Association. Cal needs huge help in this area. He has been very good at developing guards and wings, and hired the right guy to help on bigs. I think recruiting would get stronger. You are a five star guard and he comes in the door and talks guard fundamental - you listen. He seems modest enough to know his weaknesses and hire guys that can do the other work. If he takes the Cal job, he likes stays. Other coaches it is a stepping stone to places that pay more like Martin. Kidd doesn't need the money. For some reason, we don't account for coaches actually getting smarter and developing in their own right. Kidd had done that which is why the Lakers also are interest. he was a smart player and now is a smart coach. One thing he does is spend a lot of time in practice on fundamentals, which bodes well for college.

I don't dislike Turner. Turner is somewhat unproven (one post-season NCAA victory), he probably has to have a long distance relationship with his family as his wife has a successful career, which is not good for retention. purposes. He served under some really good coaches as an assistant. I don't know if he is a D1 coach or a D! recruiter. He is very good with coaching bigs. He is not the exciting hire that Kidd would be. He is a southern guy, not a Bay Area guy like Kidd, but he did just fine at Furd. Just think the wow factor, Kidd knowing Cal and the Bay Area, plus Kidd's experience both as a player and coach at the highest level, makes him a more disable fit from a Cal, donor, recruiting, excitement, and basketball standpoint. Turner certainly doesn't have the baggage Kidd brings from when he was a player. But I'm looking at Kidd and Turner as they are now.

---

I just don't see Kidd, if hired, staying very long. He would always have an eye out for the next NBA job. We need a ten-year coach and stability.

---

+1. I just think Kidd sees himself as an NBA guy. And if he is in play for the Lakers job - Lebron! Tinseltown! Showtime! - if he doesn't get it, taking the Cal job would look and feel like a major letdown. Not to mention the large difference in pay.

If we have to wait until the end of the NBA season to get a decision made, that would seem to give strong evidence he prefers an NBA job.

Has Kidd ever been rumored to be a potential NBA color commentator? That's a lot easier money than begging 17-year-old kids to join your program.

Cal needs a long-term program builder.

Cal needs a long-term program builder with a mile long masochistic streak.

BGGB2 said:

---

OneTopOneChickenApple said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

UrsaMajor said:

---

There was never any evidence that he was intending to keep WJ except for Jeff Goodman and the Comical. Consider the sources.

---

Have to disagree, but that is something we can discuss privately. Eric for example indicated Jones was being retained.

I hope what changed is Kidd.

BTW, I support JK's decision, but would have understood and accepted the reasons for another year (the prominent (one being the lack of a desirable replacement at the right price).

---

Can I ask whether you (or other donors or even the AD) are at all concerned with kidd's alleged off court indiscretions. I'm just curious whether this is going to play any role in the decision.

I'm also mildly surprised you're a Kidd guy. What are some reasons you prefer him over a guy like turner?

---

Donors want wins is my guess and access to the coach. My guess is donors changed the original decision on the basis of pulling /providing support, and JK blinked. So yes, donors want Kidd.

I'm not sure what impact his off the court indiscretions will have. He has made the rounds at Berkeley for various events recently and has been well received. On the domestic abuse side, this Chancellor's support would help. If you are asking me, he is very different that the guy that was a player (nothing like being on the management side to get a different perspective).

As for coaching, in his last gig, the Bucks turned from one of the worst to one of the best defenses in the Association. Cal needs huge help in this area. He has been very good at developing guards and wings, and hired the right guy to help on bigs. I think recruiting would get stronger. You are a five star guard and he comes in the door and talks guard fundamental - you listen. He seems modest enough to know his weaknesses and hire guys that can do the other work. If he takes the Cal job, he likes stays. Other coaches it is a stepping stone to places that pay more like Martin. Kidd doesn't need the money. For some reason, we don't account for coaches actually getting smarter and developing in their own right. Kidd had done that which is why the Lakers also are interest. he was a smart player and now is a smart coach. One thing he does is spend a lot of time in practice on fundamentals, which bodes well for college.

I don't dislike Turner. Turner is somewhat unproven (one post-season NCAA victory), he probably has to have a long distance relationship with his family as his wife has a successful career, which is not good for retention. purposes. He served under some really good coaches as an assistant. I don't know if he is a D1 coach or a D! recruiter. He is very good with coaching bigs. He is not the exciting hire that Kidd would be. He is a southern guy, not a Bay Area guy like Kidd, but he did just fine at Furd. Just think the wow factor, Kidd knowing Cal and the Bay Area, plus Kidd's experience both as a player and coach at the highest level, makes him a more disable fit from a Cal, donor, recruiting, excitement, and basketball standpoint. Turner certainly doesn't have the baggage Kidd brings from when he was a player. But I'm looking at Kidd and Turner as they are now.

---

I just don't see Kidd, if hired, staying very long. He would always have an eye out for the next NBA job. We need a ten-year coach and stability.

---

+1. I just think Kidd sees himself as an NBA guy. And if he is in play for the Lakers job - Lebron! Tinseltown! Showtime! - if he doesn't get it, taking the Cal job would look and feel like a major letdown. Not to mention the large difference in pay.

If we have to wait until the end of the NBA season to get a decision made, that would seem to give strong evidence he prefers an NBA job.

Has Kidd ever been rumored to be a potential NBA color commentator? That's a lot easier money than begging 17-year-old kids to join your program.

Cal needs a long-term program builder.

---

Yeah, I think Kidd would be a great hire, but he has never shown interest that I've seen...
If he's dreaming NBA, then it's not gonna work.

socaltownie said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

socaltownie said:

---

Big C said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

Civil Bear said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

Civil Bear said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

UrsaMajor said:

---

There was never any evidence that he was intending to keep WJ except for Jeff Goodman and the Comical. Consider the sources.

---

Have to disagree, but that is something we can discuss privately. Eric for example indicated Jones was being retained.

I hope what changed is Kidd.

BTW, I support JK's decision, but would have understood and accepted the reasons for another year (the prominent (one being the lack of a desirable replacement at the right price).

---

Sounds like nobody actually confirmed with JK.

#MoreFakeNews.

---

go to the private board. JK let a lot of folks know Jones was coming back very recently. Getting ugly.

---

That's where I came from. All of it is hearsay as far as I can tell. Did JK tell you over dinner he was keeping Jones?

---

Right now Eric seems to be furious at the way this was handled and what the assistants were told. But I think Greg said it best. JK wanted to keep Jones, and keep telling everyone reasons for retaining Jones, so we all thought he was retaining Jones. Instead, he obviously got so much push back or something changed that when he was fully done with his process, he determined Jones must go. I hope this doesn't get deleted since there is such rampant speculation otherwise.

---

What I don't get about that timeline, is that Knowlton should have had ALL his homework done regarding players' (and their families) reactions before giving any sort of signal either way.

I still think there's a chance he's operating on another level and sent up the "Jones is staying" rumor as a trial balloon, to gauge real reactions from not only players, but also program supporters (including major donors). Of course, when have we ever had an AD that operates "on another level"?

(BearGreg, sorry, I am ALMOST ready to move on. Can you indulge our curiosity just a bit longer?)

---

1) Not sure the value of reading the deep state tea leaves.
2) We know we are done the night of the 11th if I recall correnctly. So it was 13 days from then to yesterday.
2.5) Probably a week too long but it also could have been that it took that long to get the Chancellor to approve - she DOES have other things on her plate ;-)
3) The football thing could have gotten in the way. I would not have done a press conference that day or the next to announce this as ALL the questions would have been about things that needed to be tightly focused for risk management.
4) and I do wonder about whether a LOT of the rumors were the result of how JK says he makes decisions - hearing the other person out, arguing the other side, and then seeing how the dialogue goes. I am not sure that rumor mongers like it but it is a solid way of trying to get more information to make a decision. Since I would guess 90% of input was "Fire him" 90% of the time he is taking the "Retain position" in the dialogue. People may have read WAY too much into that.....including Jones when he called the Comical.

5) And yes. Before you run something that says "Jones is retained" you should probably dial up the AD whose call that is. I am frankly floored reporters would do that but I am increasingly skeptical about oversight in the media and following basic journalistic principals (two sources, confirming with decision maker on background/off record if required, etc. etc. etc. )

---

---

Agreed on time to move forward, but important to make it clear that JK did tell WJ at the conclusion of their 2nd part review/staff assessment this past Thursday that "I am supporting another season with you." WJ then responded with I need a public statement from you as to your support, to stop other coaches from poaching my players. JK said he would and then within 2 days, he reversed his decision between him and WJ. WJ was then notified in person yesterday. Sad how the hiring came about, sad that WJ never had a full deck and sad how the end was handled. Let's get a great coach and one who has recruiting prowess and is a proven turn around coach. Go Bears!

---

Problem is that do you have that quote from JK directly? From Jones? Or from a friend of a friend. I went all journalist on shock for putting something in quotes. If you have it DIRECTLY from someone it is OK. Otherwise no one (journalist, poster, etc.) should because of what it means - a direct verbatim quote.

---

socaltownie said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

4thGenCal said:

---

socaltownie said:

---

Big C said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

Civil Bear said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

Civil Bear said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

UrsaMajor said:

---

There was never any evidence that he was intending to keep WJ except for Jeff Goodman and the Comical. Consider the sources.

---

Have to disagree, but that is something we can discuss privately. Eric for example indicated Jones was being retained.

I hope what changed is Kidd.

BTW, I support JK's decision, but would have understood and accepted the reasons for another year (the prominent (one being the lack of a desirable replacement at the right price).

---

Sounds like nobody actually confirmed with JK.

#MoreFakeNews.

---

go to the private board. JK let a lot of folks know Jones was coming back very recently. Getting ugly.

---

That's where I came from. All of it is hearsay as far as I can tell. Did JK tell you over dinner he was keeping Jones?

---

Right now Eric seems to be furious at the way this was handled and what the assistants were told. But I think Greg said it best. JK wanted to keep Jones, and keep telling everyone reasons for retaining Jones, so we all thought he was retaining Jones. Instead, he obviously got so much push back or something changed that when he was fully done with his process, he determined Jones must go. I hope this doesn't get deleted since there is such rampant speculation otherwise.

---

What I don't get about that timeline, is that Knowlton should have had ALL his homework done regarding players' (and their families) reactions before giving any sort of signal either way.

I still think there's a chance he's operating on another level and sent up the "Jones is staying" rumor as a trial balloon, to gauge real reactions from not only players, but also program supporters (including major donors). Of course, when have we ever had an AD that operates "on another level"?

(BearGreg, sorry, I am ALMOST ready to move on. Can you indulge our curiosity just a bit longer?)

---

1) Not sure the value of reading the deep state tea leaves.
2) We know we are done the night of the 11th if I recall correnctly. So it was 13 days from then to yesterday.
2.5) Probably a week too long but it also could have been that it took that long to get the Chancellor to approve - she DOES have other things on her plate ;-)
3) The football thing could have gotten in the way. I would not have done a press conference that day or the next to announce this as ALL the questions would have been about things that needed to be tightly focused for risk management.
4) and I do wonder about whether a LOT of the rumors were the result of how JK says he makes decisions - hearing the other person out, arguing the other side, and then seeing how the dialogue goes. I am not sure that rumor mongers like it but it is a solid way of trying to get more information to make a decision. Since I would guess 90% of input was "Fire him" 90% of the time he is taking the "Retain position" in the dialogue. People may have read WAY too much into that.....including Jones when he called the Comical.

5) And yes. Before you run something that says "Jones is retained" you should probably dial up the AD whose call that is. I am frankly floored reporters would do that but I am increasingly skeptical about oversight in the media and following basic journalistic principals (two sources, confirming with decision maker on background/off record if required, etc. etc. etc. )

---

---

Agreed on time to move forward, but important to make it clear that JK did tell WJ at the conclusion of their 2nd part review/staff assessment this past Thursday that "I am supporting another season with you." WJ then responded with I need a public statement from you as to your support, to stop other coaches from poaching my players. JK said he would and then within 2 days, he reversed his decision between him and WJ. WJ was then notified in person yesterday. Sad how the hiring came about, sad that WJ never had a full deck and sad how the end was handled. Let's get a great coach and one who has recruiting prowess and is a proven turn around coach. Go Bears!

---

Problem is that do you have that quote from JK directly? From Jones? Or from a friend of a friend. I went all journalist on shock for putting something in quotes. If you have it DIRECTLY from someone it is OK. Otherwise no one (journalist, poster, etc.) should because of what it means - a direct verbatim quote.

---

Good clarification/question and yes directly from the meeting - rather leave it at that.

Cal fires Wyking Jones: What took so long and what's next for the floundering program

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.mercurynews.com/2019/03/24/cal-fires-wyking-jones-what-took-so-long-and-whats-next-for-the-floundering-program/amp/

bearister said:

---

Cal fires Wyking Jones: What took so long and what's next for the floundering program

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.mercurynews.com/2019/03/24/cal-fires-wyking-jones-what-took-so-long-and-whats-next-for-the-floundering-program/amp/

---

Craig Smith.
Maybe a sleeper name to remember?
If a guy from The Dakotas and Logan, Utah wants to live in the Bay Area that is.

He will likely get better offers elsewhere I would think

Alkiadt said:

---

bearister said:

---

Cal fires Wyking Jones: What took so long and what's next for the floundering program

https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.mercurynews.com/2019/03/24/cal-fires-wyking-jones-what-took-so-long-and-whats-next-for-the-floundering-program/amp/

---

Craig Smith.
Maybe a sleeper name to remember?
If a guy from The Dakotas and Logan, Utah wants to live in the Bay Area that is.
I'd bet he's on WSU's list since he's lived in some pretty podunk places.

He will likely get better offers elsewhere I would think

---