MSaviolives said:

---

I don't recall Harmon Gym looking like this--maybe a bit before my time

---

That's the original. That was torn down.
The second version was built in 1933(?)

From Wikipedia

Quote:

---

The original Harmon Gymnasium was a gymnasium on the campus of the University of California in Berkeley, California. It was the fourth building built on campus, after North Hall, South Hall and Bacon Hall, and the first built with funds from a private donor. In 1878, Albion Keith Paris Harmon, an Oakland businessman, donated $15,000 ($412 thousand in 2019 dollars[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmon_Gym_(1879)#cite_note-inflation-US-1][1][/url]) to the University for the construction of a gymnasium and assembly hall, which was to be named in his honor.[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmon_Gym_(1879)#cite_note-sb_nation-2][2][/url] In 1879 the octagonal wooden building opened, north of Strawberry Creek.

The building served as a gymnasium, a theater, assembly hall, dance hall and the headquarters of the military cadet corps. In 1892, it was the site of the first competitive collegiate women's basketball game, between the University's women and Miss Head's School.[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmon_Gym_(1879)#cite_note-sb_nation-2][2][/url] By 1900 the needs of the campus had outgrown the gymnasium, so the decision was made to expand the building, by cutting the octagon in half, moving one half and building the new gymnasium between the two halves. The expanded Harmon Gym held 1,400 by the time the California Golden Bears men's basketball team started competing in 1907. However, even this expansion proved to not be enough for the growing interest in college basketball. By 1925 only lesser non-conference games were held in the gym, with conference games and important games being held in the Oakland Civic Auditorium. In 1931 construction was started on its replacement, the current Haas Pavilion, which would eventually share the same name as its predecessor from 1959 to 1999. The building was torn down not long after the completion of the new Men's Gymnasium, and in 1950 Dwinelle Hall was built on the site.[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmon_Gym_(1879)#cite_note-sb_nation-2][2][/url]

---

MSaviolives said:

---

From Wikipedia

Quote:

---

The original Harmon Gymnasium was a gymnasium on the campus of the University of California in Berkeley, California. It was the fourth building built on campus, after North Hall, South Hall and Bacon Hall, and the first built with funds from a private donor. In 1878, Albion Keith Paris Harmon, an Oakland businessman, donated $15,000 ($412 thousand in 2019 dollars[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmon_Gym_(1879)#cite_note-inflation-US-1][1][/url]) to the University for the construction of a gymnasium and assembly hall, which was to be named in his honor.[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmon_Gym_(1879)#cite_note-sb_nation-2][2][/url] In 1879 the octagonal wooden building opened, north of Strawberry Creek.

The building served as a gymnasium, a theater, assembly hall, dance hall and the headquarters of the military cadet corps. In 1892, it was the site of the first competitive collegiate women's basketball game, between the University's women and Miss Head's School.[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmon_Gym_(1879)#cite_note-sb_nation-2][2][/url] By 1900 the needs of the campus had outgrown the gymnasium, so the decision was made to expand the building, by cutting the octagon in half, moving one half and building the new gymnasium between the two halves. The expanded Harmon Gym held 1,400 by the time the California Golden Bears men's basketball team started competing in 1907. However, even this expansion proved to not be enough for the growing interest in college basketball. By 1925 only lesser non-conference games were held in the gym, with conference games and important games being held in the Oakland Civic Auditorium. In 1931 construction was started on its replacement, the current Haas Pavilion, which would eventually share the same name as its predecessor from 1959 to 1999. The building was torn down not long after the completion of the new Men's Gymnasium, and in 1950 Dwinelle Hall was built on the site.[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmon_Gym_(1879)#cite_note-sb_nation-2][2][/url]

---

---

If Harmon gym was the 4th building to be built on campus, Cal certainly had a different set of priorities back then. The tearing down of Edwards Field is a tragedy, and baseball may be next. At least basketball has a home for a while, but I sure wish more Cal students would take an interest in their basketball team.

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

MSaviolives said:

---

From Wikipedia

Quote:

---

The original Harmon Gymnasium was a gymnasium on the campus of the University of California in Berkeley, California. It was the fourth building built on campus, after North Hall, South Hall and Bacon Hall, and the first built with funds from a private donor. In 1878, Albion Keith Paris Harmon, an Oakland businessman, donated $15,000 ($412 thousand in 2019 dollars[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmon_Gym_(1879)#cite_note-inflation-US-1][1][/url]) to the University for the construction of a gymnasium and assembly hall, which was to be named in his honor.[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmon_Gym_(1879)#cite_note-sb_nation-2][2][/url] In 1879 the octagonal wooden building opened, north of Strawberry Creek.

The building served as a gymnasium, a theater, assembly hall, dance hall and the headquarters of the military cadet corps. In 1892, it was the site of the first competitive collegiate women's basketball game, between the University's women and Miss Head's School.[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmon_Gym_(1879)#cite_note-sb_nation-2][2][/url] By 1900 the needs of the campus had outgrown the gymnasium, so the decision was made to expand the building, by cutting the octagon in half, moving one half and building the new gymnasium between the two halves. The expanded Harmon Gym held 1,400 by the time the California Golden Bears men's basketball team started competing in 1907. However, even this expansion proved to not be enough for the growing interest in college basketball. By 1925 only lesser non-conference games were held in the gym, with conference games and important games being held in the Oakland Civic Auditorium. In 1931 construction was started on its replacement, the current Haas Pavilion, which would eventually share the same name as its predecessor from 1959 to 1999. The building was torn down not long after the completion of the new Men's Gymnasium, and in 1950 Dwinelle Hall was built on the site.[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmon_Gym_(1879)#cite_note-sb_nation-2][2][/url]

---

---

If Harmon gym was the 4th building to be built on campus, Cal certainly had a different set of priorities back then. The tearing down of Edwards Field is a tragedy, and baseball may be next. At least basketball has a home for a while, but I sure wish more Cal students would take an interest in their basketball team.

---

Why should they? When Cal hired Wyking Jones, they made it very clear they didn't care to be competitive. Are we to believe something has changed since that sad day?

---

And who is "they"? The Cal administration which hired Wyking Jones most likely did not know what they were doing. It is not unheard of to hire a successful coach's oldest or most experienced assistant to be the next head coach, and certainly possible given that the acting head of the athletic department had little experience in that profession, and no experience in evaluating coaching candidates. By hiring the most veteran of the assistant coaches on Cuonzo's staff, he may have hoped to get some continuity and keep some veterans and newly signed recruits from leaving. I think Wyking's hiring was a matter of the AD having no real idea of how to evaluate a candidate. Whoever hired the acting AD is largely responsible for the debacle in both football and basketball.

So, "they" are a different administration now, with different people in place, and clearly they are better at evaluating coaches than the previous AD. Whether "better" means they have more of a commitment to be competitive, I don't know. Fox's teams are an improvement over Wyking's teams, but the question remains as to what Fox's ceiling will be. It is a new day, a new admin, a new coach, and new players. You don't like them? Fine. You can give up on them. Or you can follow them to see how this all turns out. If you see nothing positive, you can always follow some other team or some other sport, or follow nothing at all. Frankly, I don't think we care what you do, except that I've enjoyed some of your posts and I'm disappointed in this one.

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

MSaviolives said:

---

From Wikipedia

Quote:

---

The original Harmon Gymnasium was a gymnasium on the campus of the University of California in Berkeley, California. It was the fourth building built on campus, after North Hall, South Hall and Bacon Hall, and the first built with funds from a private donor. In 1878, Albion Keith Paris Harmon, an Oakland businessman, donated $15,000 ($412 thousand in 2019 dollars[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmon_Gym_(1879)#cite_note-inflation-US-1][1][/url]) to the University for the construction of a gymnasium and assembly hall, which was to be named in his honor.[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmon_Gym_(1879)#cite_note-sb_nation-2][2][/url] In 1879 the octagonal wooden building opened, north of Strawberry Creek.

The building served as a gymnasium, a theater, assembly hall, dance hall and the headquarters of the military cadet corps. In 1892, it was the site of the first competitive collegiate women's basketball game, between the University's women and Miss Head's School.[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmon_Gym_(1879)#cite_note-sb_nation-2][2][/url] By 1900 the needs of the campus had outgrown the gymnasium, so the decision was made to expand the building, by cutting the octagon in half, moving one half and building the new gymnasium between the two halves. The expanded Harmon Gym held 1,400 by the time the California Golden Bears men's basketball team started competing in 1907. However, even this expansion proved to not be enough for the growing interest in college basketball. By 1925 only lesser non-conference games were held in the gym, with conference games and important games being held in the Oakland Civic Auditorium. In 1931 construction was started on its replacement, the current Haas Pavilion, which would eventually share the same name as its predecessor from 1959 to 1999. The building was torn down not long after the completion of the new Men's Gymnasium, and in 1950 Dwinelle Hall was built on the site.[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Harmon_Gym_(1879)#cite_note-sb_nation-2][2][/url]

---

---

If Harmon gym was the 4th building to be built on campus, Cal certainly had a different set of priorities back then. The tearing down of Edwards Field is a tragedy, and baseball may be next. At least basketball has a home for a while, but I sure wish more Cal students would take an interest in their basketball team.

---

Why should they? When Cal hired Wyking Jones, they made it very clear they didn't care to be competitive. Are we to believe something has changed since that sad day?

---

And who is "they"? The Cal administration which hired Wyking Jones most likely did not know what they were doing. It is not unheard of to hire a successful coach's oldest or most experienced assistant to be the next head coach, and certainly possible given that the acting head of the athletic department had little experience in that profession, and no experience in evaluating coaching candidates. By hiring the most veteran of the assistant coaches on Cuonzo's staff, he may have hoped to get some continuity and keep some veterans and newly signed recruits from leaving. I think Wyking's hiring was a matter of the AD having no real idea of how to evaluate a candidate. Whoever hired the acting AD is largely responsible for the debacle in both football and basketball.

So, "they" are a different administration now, with different people in place, and clearly they are better at evaluating coaches than the previous AD. Whether "better" means they have more of a commitment to be competitive, I don't know. Fox's teams are an improvement over Wyking's teams, but the question remains as to what Fox's ceiling will be. It is a new day, a new admin, a new coach, and new players. You don't like them? Fine. You can give up on them. Or you can follow them to see how this all turns out. If you see nothing positive, you can always follow some other team or some other sport, or follow nothing at all. Frankly, I don't think we care what you do, except that I've enjoyed some of your posts and I'm disappointed in this one.

---

***** please. You said: "I sure wish more Cal students would take an interest in their basketball team." And, I gave you one solid reason why Cal students, particularly juniors and seniors who tend to set the tone and culture of the student fan experience and who lived through the disgraceful experience under the prior coach, might choose to stay away.

Not to mention that one of the team's leaders has the body shape of a pear, a profile typically used by doctors to show a propensity for heart disease in women. I kid, I kid. Only partially. We need better athletes. Not pear-shaped softies.

Look, when only 500 students, if that many, show up at games, there is obviously a problem with the athletic department and how it is conducting its basketball program. I am disappointed in YOUR post, since you chose to point a finger at the current students, and then me, instead of pointing the finger at the very recent history of the athletic department.

I'm not sure why I do this...there's little upside for me in this argument. I'm still a huge Cal fan. But I see reality. As others have noted, there are maybe 15 hard-core defenders of the basketball program left on this website. That speaks volumes. Watching Paris Austin play floats your boat. Great! But apparently his level of play doesn't float many other boats.

Happy Boxing Day!

---

First off, I don't appreciate the racist slur opener. You want to attack this old Bear, have at it, but leave race out of it, especially when it is a non-sequitur in this discussion. Irrelevant. Capice?

Instead of debating my point that the admin that hired Jones is not the admin that hired Fox, you choose to go back to my earlier post about my wishing there were more students at the games, feeling that nothing has changed in admin policy from the Mike Williams days to now, and that Cal either doesn't want to compete in basketball, or they don't care about basketball. I'm saying that you are judging Fox much more quickly than I am willing to do. You can judge a coach's ability to coach over a series of games, by looking at whether his players improve individually and collectively. Recruiting also needs time to evaluate. Every first year coach is faced with a short window from March to Fall practice to land his class. Most coaches don't land much in year one, especially coming to a school which has just had the two worst seasons in its history. Sean Miller would have had a hard time coming to Cal when Fox did and likely not done much better, in my opinion. You are a very impatient man, and you may have your reasons. Now we have seen a few games in the 2nd year of Fox, a year of the virus, cancelled practices, cancelled games, and you want it all to be much better. Who doesn't want that? You say you see only reality. I think you don't see reality at all. You don't see how hard it is to recruit to a rock bottom program, and how hard it is for a team to ditch the idea of being losers. Do you still support the team in any way? If you don't, and just want to sit back and rag on this fan for wanting to enjoy the season for what it is, no matter how little you think there is to enjoy, then fine.

I never "pointed my finger at the students." You totally misunderstood my point. My schtick from day one on this board is the state of basketball today does not attract students because most universities want first and foremost to make lots of money from basketball, not to provide a bonding between students and their basketball team, an excitement around each game. Most of the majors and mid-majors and more all now have these puny little rooting sections in a narrow band on one side of the court. Cheerleaders are almost useless. No matter how hard they try, they can't get that long narrow rooting section to make any sort of real noise. So they need an expensive sound system to make some noise. The old Harmon had a rooting section built close to the halfcourt line and what, 50 rows deep, with the straw hat band right in it, and it was really loud. Sit close to it, and after the game, you thought you had gone deaf, because you couldn't hear what your friends were saying until you were halfway home. No, it is not the university's choice of coaches and design of the program that keeps the students away, it is just not fun to sit with 500 people in that narrow section. The university has decided they would rather have most of the seats on the sides of the court be reserved for well-heeled alumni, who will fork over the big bucks for the chairbacks, and make us a profit.

Deciding what kind of program the basketball program will be is another matter. The university has successfully tried on three occasions to have a competitive program. With Pete Newell, they hired a coach who had already won a national title, the NIT, which in 1949 was somewhat more prestigious than the NCAA. With Todd Bozeman, they hired an outstanding recruiter, who was willing to bend the rules to get players, and while he had some success in the NCAA, his disregard for the rules put Cal on probation, followed by many years of average or slightly above average teams. I don't know if Cal was hoping for huge success with Mike Montgomery. I think it was the fact that he would be an upgrade over Braun, and was the best coach available who was a good fit. His teams were competitive, but he lacked the desire to compete for the best modern recruits. The examples in the PAC12 of the best recruiters are Miller, Romar, and Altman. To do battle with those guys, I think a coach has to bend the rules, like Bozeman had done. I don't want Cal to take that risk and hire another Bozeman. And I'll bet there are some in the chain of command who don't want to take that risk either. If that is something you can accept or condone, you and I will disagree forever. It is why I focus more on getting a good coach, because a good coach can keep you competitive in years when you don't get the best recruits. Montgomery was like that.

Paris Austin did not "float my boat" Where in the heck did I say that? He was acceptable on offense, but didn't get serious about defense until Fox arrived, and not until the last few games of his career. And talking about pointing fingers, I am very tired of you and other "huge Cal fans" who go to such great length to ridicule the shape or the looks of Cal players. They get scholarships so I guess that entitles you to make derogatory comments about them. Kelly is the best post player we have. I choose to live with him as the center playing the key minutes. And I cheer when he does something good, which is often enough to keep Cal competitive in most games for the period when he is in the game. He is raw, needs to learn more, and make his free throws. Have I seen better at Cal? Heck, yes. I can name at least 20 Cal post players off the top of my head who were better. But none of them has any eligibility left. Kelly is the best we have now, and I will root for him.