bluesaxe;842841360 said:
Two completely unrelated topics there shocky. Last I heard there is no game this week/month/Spring-Summer.
sluggo_Cal;842841409 said:
Why exactly would he be fired? Because of something he did at Iowa? UCLA knew what they were getting and they did not care. The LA Times says they are working on an extension. Recruiting is going great for them and they had a mostly successful season last year.
Sluggo
GB54;842841448 said:
The Maple Syrup and Meth local sustainable program at UVM extension
Shocky1;842841449 said:
my seat at haas is directly across from the opposing team coach, those who don't think i call steve alford a rapist enabler & dana altman a criminal when they visit berkeley are mistaken
Shocky1;842841450 said:
bluesaxe, there are recruiting battles being fought every single day right now 24/7
my buddy justin labagh (he gives me a rams t-shirt every now & then), the winningest head coach in the history of the game of basketball, once told me that championships are won in the summer months not march
the struggle that must be#:rant
Shocky1;842841476 said:
bluesaxe, i say a lot of stuff that don't make much sense in any context but that hasn't stopped me from successfully recruiting 2 nba lottery picks in ivan rabb & jaylen brown & hopefully a 3rd in jordan brown...all 3 were/are readers of the monster while in high school
[video=youtube;TKmCSOdVJMU][/video]
back to the bay#:gobears:
TheSouseFamily;842841486 said:
All true but your recruiting of potential grad transfers this cycle was pretty p!ss poor.
Shocky1;842841476 said:
bluesaxe, i say a lot of stuff that don't make much sense in any context but that hasn't stopped me from successfully recruiting 2 nba lottery picks in ivan rabb & jaylen brown & hopefully a 3rd in jordan brown...all 3 were/are readers of the monster while in high school
[video=youtube;TKmCSOdVJMU][/video]
back to the bay#:gobears:[/nQUOTE]
The Monster is always under attack by the no account elitists with their NPR tote bags and farmer's markets. It's the People's Board- full of blood and promise to a man with a steely eye and a steady trigger finger.
TheSouseFamily;842841486 said:
All true but your recruiting of potential grad transfers this cycle was pretty p!ss poor.
Shocky1;842841449 said:
my seat at haas is directly across from the opposing team coach, those who don't think i call steve alford a rapist enabler & dana altman a criminal when they visit berkeley are mistaken
FrankBear21;842841609 said:
Knell gone. States that Shocky's behavior deterred him from becoming a Bear.
ccajon;842841576 said:
Call them what you will. Both are winners. Cal will be buried in the depths of the conference for years to come. The blue chippers don't want to play at cal, for wj, or in Haas. You're just a white noise fan on a twenty loss team.
dal9;842841640 said:
with fans like these...
seriously, how sad are some of your lives that as cal fans you regularly troll a pro-cal thread? s#!t, my life isn't even that great, and I've never gotten the urge...
dal9;842841640 said:
with fans like these...
seriously, how sad are some of your lives that as cal fans you regularly troll a pro-cal thread? s#!t, my life isn't even that great, and I've never gotten the urge...
socaltownie;842841705 said:
Well.......
I think some of us remain fairly frustrated that Cal won't do "what it takes" to compete in the Pac-12 and yet still wants to BE in the Pac-12 (and is exceedingly happy to take our money).
Here is a fairly straight forward comparison. Cal is willing, indeed, does, do what it takes to remain a top 10 institution. In the modern world that means investing in labs, paying market rate for publishiing faculty, funding graduate student slots, etc. etc. Indeed, you could argue that the university's current challenges stem from the fact that it is willing to do that BROADLY as opposed to, for example, a school like UCSD that long ago decided that while it would play in all fields it wouldn't REALLY go all in - especially in the humanities - and would place its bets in the life sciences and applied physical ones (aka engineering disciplines).
But it won't show the same commitment in sports.
Now this isnt' a call for admitting "dumb azzezs" but it IS a call for at least a VERy hard look at our AD office and the hiring decisions. Programs that want to win find a way, somehow, to get Chris Peterson. Programs that don't hire first year coaches with no HC experience. It really ins't ANY more complicated than that.
PS. One of my abiding criticisms is the low expectations of Cal fans. They way "well Chris Peterson would never come to Cal because X." They never would say that about a top 10 academic publishing researcher even though SOME of the same constraints (high housing costs, admin that is disfunctional) exist.
Jeff82;842841721 said:
What if you told that researcher: "Because of our school's commitment to diversity, you have to accept graduate students whose ethnic and socioeconomic backgrounds match the demographics of the State of California, regardless of their academic abilities." That's the rough equivalent of what the coaches face, when they're given an academic restriction that limits who they can recruit, based on a factor unrelated to the recruit's playing abilities. I'm not saying that should change, since athletics is not the primary mission of the school, but it is a restriction. What I'm saying is that a lot of the assumption in the fan base is that some of the constraints can simply be papered over by paying the coach more. I'm not sure that's the case, based on what happened this time with Randy Bennett. I'm not sure he would have come to Cal, even if we offered him pay that the board agreed was too much, because he doesn't think he can win here, based on the other constraints that are institutional, and can't really be avoided. I see Peterson the same way. What Cal would have to "find a way" to do, to use your phrase, is to change the culture of the campus in terms of academic-to-athletic relations. I can't see how that happens, particularly after your previous explanations that contributions from individual whales are not all that meaningful in terms of financing academic programs. If the athletic department and the associated boosters have no effective levers to get academic attitudes to change, then you can't expect them to change. And for a lot of coaches, I suspect, that's a deal breaker.
Jeff82;842841726 said:
OK. At least I understand your thesis, which is that coaches and professors operate under the Churchill principal. ("Madam, we've already established what you are, now we're only haggling over price.") You also didn't really answer my question about how restrictions on who coaches can recruit might play into their willingness to coach at Cal, regardless of salary. Here's a question. Who do you think, in football and basketball, is another can't miss choice equivalent to Franklin? It has to be a can't miss choice, because if you pay that much for a coach, you're either stuck with them, or the program might never recover from the cost of the buyout.
socaltownie;842841730 said:
First I reject the premise of "can't never recover" but a quibble.
Second. My BIAS is that a good AA coach with a proven track record can actually do VERY well at Cal. So, for example, I think a guy like Shaka Smart would have rocked Cal. It is why I believed, STRONGLY that the deal maker if he had turned out to be sincere would have killed it over the long term. My HOPE is that WJ turns out to be that guy. However, next year is going to be pretty hard to watch and I worry that sets us WAY back for 2018 and beyond.
UrsaMajor;842841737 said:
Not sure about your last paragraph, SCT, but in academics, most of the new hires are newly-minted PhD's. In general we don't poach from other schools (can't afford it). We WILL pay to RETAIN top faculty (e.g., one of my closest friends), but for the most part, we do what IA did with Wyking--hire promising newcomers and hope they pan out. Of course, in academics it is easier to predict someone's career trajectory based on publication record as a grad student or young asst. prof.
Jeff82;842841743 said:
Except that your thesis, that money trumps it all, renders sincerity, or lack thereof, a non-factor. We basically have to pay the coach a premium for the other stuff he has to put up with at Cal, since we seemingly can't get rid of the other stuff and make it a more pleasant place to coach. Therefore, if Martin gets $3 million at Missouri, we probably have to pay $4 million to get him to stay here.
That, by the way, is exactly why I think we should have figured out a way to give Tedford a one-year sabbatical, then have him come back and try and resume his mojo. In the long run, that would have been a better option, based on his track record at Cal in toto, than the last three years, which have ended up being a giant step sideways.
caltagjohnson;842841768 said:
Bennett makes $575,000 at St Marys. If he had come to Cal he would have doubled his salary. You people don't seem to realize that Cal is an Ultra left wing school that bans freedom of speech and encourages violence against people who don't agree with you. You want your kid educated in that atmosphere? I am a Cal graduate (1959 - NCAA BB champion) and my oldest son is also a Cal graduate. Both Chem Engineers. I now have grandkids in college. Did I encourage them to consider Cal? Yoiu better believe I did Not! They are at Univ of Utah, thank you. Much better school. Cal is lucky to get the recruits that it does. If you think they are going to relax regulations to get better FB and BB players you need to go back to smoking something that gives you a high!
