Story Poster
Photo by KLCfotos
Cal Basketball

The Decision to Hire Mark Fox

March 29, 2019
54,340

In the course of fewer than six days, Cal terminated the least successful head coach in its basketball program’s history and hired a coach with more than 250 career wins to replace him.   

The obvious initial take when discussing Mark Fox is that he is in every respect an upgrade over his predecessor.   An experienced hand who’s well-respected by his peers, Fox will bring a depth of experience and presence that Cal has not had since Mike Montgomery retired in 2012.

That said, it is not a hire that wins the hearts and minds of Cal fans when they first hear the news.  His tenure at Georgia may be impressive in some respects. yet it ended after nine years in his being terminated.  And while his successes at Georgia were relatively unprecedented for the Bulldog program, in absolute terms he failed to make the school a consistent top-tier SEC power, much less relevant on the national stage.

Juxtapose this with the unsoiled promise of a mid-major coach who has yet to prove himself one way or the other at a Power 6 school.  That type of hire brings with it a sense of unlimited upside with the vacuum of those candidates experience creating an almost irrational sense of hope and little consideration of downside.   Thus, it is not surprising that upon first take most Cal fans are left mildly disappointed with the appointment of Fox.

The staff here at Bear Insider understands and sympathizes with that sentiment, as it’s not far off our initial reactions.   One of the criteria we laid out for the hire was generating excitement and energy around the program and that’s not something that Fox provides simply by signing his name on a contract.    As we’ve had the chance to dig deeper and talk to some of the most prominent and well-respected voices in college basketball, we find ourselves reconsidering the gut reaction with an ever-increasing feeling of optimism.

The obvious wins with the hire of Fox are firstly the instant improvement in the leadership from where we were less than a week ago.  Secondly, we’ve hired someone with tremendous character and integrity which are essential at Cal and even more so in the current climate in college basketball, where the FBI has uncovered what can best be reflected as the tip of the iceberg when it comes to under the table payments to recruits and their families.   Lastly, Fox represents a very high floor.  The chances of his not having a measure of success in Berkeley is exceptionally low given his fourteen-year resume as a head man.    

Context is important here in two regards.  First, the decision to terminate Wyking Jones after only two seasons came with a cost to Cal.   Jim Knowlton and Carol Christ have an ambitious vision for Cal athletics including a transformation of the development approach and team to fully unlock the value of Cal’s alumni base as donors.  They are less than 12 months into that process with the new Chief of Development, Brian Mann, having only been in Berkeley for less than 6 weeks.   The ability to break the bank and reach for the stars in a basketball head coach is clearly an aspiration for the department, but one that will take time and hard work to fully realize.  Secondly, Cal has work to do with regard to overall student athletic facilities and specifically a dedicated basketball practice facility to even be on marginally even footing with the rest of the Pac-12.   The net is that Cal was not in a position to hire the “perfect” coach.   What it could do was make the decision to terminate a struggling head coach after only two seasons (which is exceptionally rare) and clearly upgrade the position.

The alternatives to Cal’s choice of Fox all had their set of risks and warts.   Principally among them was betting on a successful low or mid-major coach.   A step up in competition, the premium on recruiting (even to the level that Fox achieved) and the data that shows that most of these coaches clearly fail at Power 6 schools were an obvious factor in the choice of Fox.  While there were some compelling candidates, especially when filtered through a criterion of selling hope, objectively they represented a far lower floor and more risk.   This at a time when Cal is coming off a head coach that represented huge risk given his lack of a resume.

While looking at Fox’s tenure at Georgia, context also plays a role.  Georgia has been a deserted wasteland for college basketball for decades.   Since 1950, no Georgia head coach who lasted longer than one season posted a winning career record in Athens other than Hugh Durham and Mark Fox.  In the five seasons preceding Fox taking over Georgia, the team had won a total of 22 SEC games.  Georgia is a program without tradition or any sustained period of success.   Against that backdrop, Fox’s record at Georgia may not be viewed as exceptional but certainly is impressive. 

Mark Fox’s resume as it relates to scheme, teaching and player development are strong.  His teams consistently played top-tier defense, and defense wins in college basketball.  He’s a coach with a chip on his shoulder, hungry to wipe the exit at Georgia from his resume.   His X’s and O’s and teaching pedigree are endorsed in fulsome fashion with his recent tenure with Team USA and the praise he received from coaching luminaries in today's press release.   Bear Insider has had a chance to source further references from a half dozen industry experts and the praise has been universal and unstinting.  Folks who know Pac-12 basketball exceptionally well and have no affiliation with Cal or with Coach Fox have been effusive in their praise of Fox and the fit at Cal.   

His inability to keep Georgia at the top of the SEC and part of the national discussion can be traced squarely to his inability to recruit enough talent, especially talent that can score.   That capped his upside in Athens and will be his biggest challenge in Berkeley, especially after spending the last decade on the East Coast.   His choice of former Stanford head coach Trent Johnson as his top assistant is a self-aware action from Fox as Johnson cannot only provide sage advice as a long time head coach but unlike Fox, Johnson's reputation as a recruiter is well established.   If Fox can fill in the remaining two assistant positions with at least one strong recruiter with a West Coast network, there’s a real possibility that Cal could hit a home run with their choice of Mark Fox.  

The news of Wyking Jones departure and Mark Fox’s hire are not the beginning and end of this story.  Expect to hear some very good news with regard to donations and facilities upgrades in the near future.   Cal’s basketball brand has been diminished in the past two seasons and needs to be rebuilt.  That starts with experienced. competent leadership and continues with substantial donations that benefit not only basketball but the athletic department as a whole. 

In short, we are cautiously optimistic.

Discussion from...

The Decision to Hire Mark Fox

51,793 Views | 187 Replies | Last: 2 yr ago by SanseiBear
oskidunker
How long do you want to ignore this user?
So what are the chances Fox gets fired? I dont need to hear how screwed up Cal admin is. That has been covered in endless posts.
Go Bears!
KoreAmBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
parentswerebears said:

OTB knows basketball. Definitely missed. Along with a number of others who posted when Cal was interesting.
Yes and so did tsubamoto. I think both were so tired of it they left out of frustration. I hope they both come back one day.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
oskidunker said:

So what are the chances Fox gets fired? I dont need to hear how screwed up Cal admin is. That has been covered in endless posts.


The Musgrave and DeClure firings, though late, were Wilcox's decision.

With Jones, Knowlton keep saying he would do an evaluation only after the season. Then his initial indication was he would bring Jones back until he received massive negative feedback from the big donors. He extended Wilcox five years despite the losing and ignored complaints of racism and abuse from swimmers and their parents to give McKeever a big raise and contract extension because the donors liked the results.

My assessment is he would prefer to do nothing but wants to please the powerful donors so he would make a move only if they turn on Fox.

Big C
How long do you want to ignore this user?
OaktownBear said:

BeachedBear said:

OaktownBear said:

Limited counter points, removing the wordy discourse for appearance sake.


Quote:

Beached:

Thanks for a thoughtful response. That's all I ask. I don't agree with everything, but you don't have to agree with everything I say. Some responses

Ditto. I enjoy rational discourse with intelligent people I respect. Personal attacks are only fun in person

Quote:

. . . While he didn't need to tell us his decision in February, the decision should have been made before season end. There is no excuse in the decision not being made, the decision then being that he was going to keep him, not knowing the blowback that was going to cause, and the fact that he let that info out before intended. He handled this badly. All of which I would excuse if he got the hire right.
Personally, I would say how he handled it is my biggest criticism of Knowlton so far.



Quote:

I assume that Decuire has other interests. Understand, I'm not mad it is not Decuire. Decuire is the embodiment of what we should be looking for. It didn't have to be Decuire, but it should have been somebody like him. It should not have been someone with Fox's profile.

See, the thing is that most of you say that or some variation. Why doesn't it matter to you? Seems like even the people arguing to wait and see don't like this hire.
I can't speak for 'most of you', only me. It matters, but I probably don't feel FOX is as bad a hire as you do. I generally prefer Thai to Indian cuisine, but I'm Ok with Indian. But I really like good Sushi. I really don't like Pizza Hut. Fox=Indian, DeCuire=Thai, Craig Smith-Sushi, Jones=Pizza Hut, Dykes = Domino's, Kyle Smith = Round Table.

The thing is, I'm not at the donor level where I get to choose where I eat. I never will be and don't recommend anyone contribute as much to do so. It's more like a family member invited me to dinner and served mediocre Indian. Didn't like it. I mentioned to the host in a very tactful way that next time he plans to service mediocre Indian, invite me over for dessert and drinks afterward (actually worded it clearer than that - more like: If you continue to serve Pizza, we're no longer family)



Quote:

Confirmation bias. You guys knew the answer when it happened, but you don't like the answer. So you hear all the reasons from the administration about why this is actually good and since you aren't getting the other side, it starts to sound good. And let's be honest, you want it to be good. I sympathize.
Perhaps that is the case with most. But I'm leaving the option open that not all information is perceived through blue colored glasses.

Quote:

We will only know a lot in year 1 if it is a disaster or a colossal success. Jones was not ready. Fox isn't great, but he is experienced. We should see marked improvement, which will not be evidence that this is the right hire, long term. Doubtful we do something like go 14-4. Unlikely we don't improve. I went through Dykes' first year. I guarantee that if we don't improve, the story will be that it is because Jones left the program in tatters. I also have to say that almost every year I hear that "we'll know this year". And we never do.

- - - No need to wait 9 years - - -

I suspect that is exactly how long we will wait. I give it a 5% chance that Fox blows out expectations. I give it a 20% chance he pulls a Braun at Rice or Walt Harris at Stanford. I give it a 75% chance that we see something like 6-12, 8-10, 8-10, 10-8, 12-6, 9-9, 8-10, 6-12, 4-14. And if that is what we get, at what point do you suppose Cal will do anything. Yup. year 9.
I fear you may be right. I lobbied to can Dykes after his first year and was not heard. Comes with the territory. If I was AD, I would be looking for FOX in year one for colossal success and consider year two accordingly if not. I think your percentages are about right.

Quote:

My suspicion is they don't think that we can succeed in revenue sports. I think they are putting more effort in football because that is where the money is. Honestly, I think they are trying to run in place just enough so that their motion looks like they are trying so they won't kill off the donations, but I don't see actions that actually lead to success.

Unfortunately, I agree with this assessment. I would support Cal if we were out of the arms race and competing in a different conference. I accept that this won't happen soon, if ever. For the last 5 years or so, I have considered my renewals on a yearly basis and have come close to shutting down. Wasn't that way at all for the prior few decades. I feel like Cal (as an institution) is competing in 1999 revenue sports, not realizing how much has changed in 20 years.

See I feel like Cal is always 20 years behind. I feel like the history goes like this:

What do you mean a football coach makes $200K. That is more than the professors. No way!
No.
No.
No.
No.
Okay, okay, I guess we have to pay $200K. Here.
Wait. They make $500K now? No way!
No.
No.
No.
No.
Okay, Okay. Fine! Sheesh. Wait. It's a million now? No way in hell is that ever going to happen.
No!
No!
No!
Okay. Okay. You are really trying my patience. IT'S $2m NOW!!!!!!??????? I JUST GAVE YOU THE MILLION!!!!!! ***!!!! But I'm not paying for anything else and you are taking buses to Los Angeles.

And on and on.

I think they have spent virtually the maximum amount they could and still not support enough to win. At this point, I'd be fine with going whole hog on being cheap. (I'm an A's fan for goodness sake!) Accept it. Own it. Or don't. But don't go middle ground where you just pay too much for bottom of the barrel.

This is part of what I mean about a plan. I think Cal fans are smart. They get it. They get that we will always be outbid. Decide what WE CAN PAY. Then think outside the box to maximize those dollars.

I would love to see some investment in analytics to determine where money returns the best value. In football, what kind of offense and defense schemes maximize success with the types of players we can recruit.

I have a by the seat of my pants hypothesis that I would love to analyze if it were my job on football coaching salaries. That is this. Cal can't afford big name head coaches. So I wonder. Would it be best for Cal to do something different with coaching salaries. Rather than maximize head coaching salaries and still not being competitive, pay a head coach at the low end of the scale, pay coordinators at the middle range, and go out and get the best position coaches money can buy to develop the players. Not saying it would work. But I'd like to see Cal look at alternative ways of doing things. Instead, we just do things the same way everyone else does, but we invest a lot less in everything.

As I said, I'm an A's fan. Cal has got to find it's Moneyball approach. We have brilliant young alums, some of whom turn out to be leaders in sports management. We have to do more than we are doing.



Yeah, I really miss OaktownBear here, too. His post right above was one of my favs on this thread. Hope he returns.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
In re-reading the thread I see that Civil also saw clearly how bad a hire Fox was. I will extend him an apology as somehow in the last two or three years I came to see him as one of the Fox apologists on this board.
BeachedBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

In re-reading the thread I see that Civil also saw clearly how bad a hire Fox was. I will extend him an apology as somehow in the last two or three years I came to see him as one of the Fox apologists on this board.
Are there any Fox apologists left? Haven't seen any for over a year. There were a number like me, that were SOOO glad to see Wyking replaced that we were willing to look past the glaring flaws and hope (didn't like the hire, but thought it would be much better than it turned out). But most, if not all turned around and wanted FOX gone after year 2 (that is when I engaged with JK and staff and stopped financial support after JK convinced me that he would do nothing). There were a few left in year 3. but I feel like almost all of them changed their opinion when FOX was not replaced after year 3.
PtownBear1
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BeachedBear said:

calumnus said:

In re-reading the thread I see that Civil also saw clearly how bad a hire Fox was. I will extend him an apology as somehow in the last two or three years I came to see him as one of the Fox apologists on this board.
Are there any Fox apologists left? Haven't seen any for over a year. There were a number like me, that were SOOO glad to see Wyking replaced that we were willing to look past the glaring flaws and hope (didn't like the hire, but thought it would be much better than it turned out). But most, if not all turned around and wanted FOX gone after year 2 (that is when I engaged with JK and staff and stopped financial support after JK convinced me that he would do nothing). There were a few left in year 3. but I feel like almost all of them changed their opinion when FOX was not replaced after year 3.
Based on the front page survey, there are 6.3 of them still
eastcoastcal
How long do you want to ignore this user?
What strikes me as a new poster (relatively) is how many posters have quit in the last few years. Seems like there used to be so much more interest in the program. I scrolled through and so many accounts stopped posting over the past few years.
parentswerebears
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yep. This place is a ghost town. I'm not sure why I keep coming back since I haven't been to or watched a game since Fox was hired. There is nothing to talk about.
BeachedBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
eastcoastcal said:

What strikes me as a new poster (relatively) is how many posters have quit in the last few years. Seems like there used to be so much more interest in the program. I scrolled through and so many accounts stopped posting over the past few years.


The adage holds true that winning is the best way to bring in fans. But the opposite is that the quickest way to chase away loyal fans is not losses, but demonstrating that one doesn't care. In this case, Knowlton (and Fox) have not done anything different in 3 years to right a sinking ship. So most have jumped in the liferafts.

It's the attitude, not the losses.
CAL4LIFE
How long do you want to ignore this user?
As my good friend YogiBear pointed out so many times before - stop paying for this crap!

Until alums, and especially the big checkbooks, stop supporting this ****show the school will continue to reap what it sows,

Hires like Knowlton should never happen and should never be just be a Chancellor only decision. The hiring and firing of coaches should not just be an AD only decision.

The athletes, especially in the revenue sports who shoulder the biggest spotlight, deserve better leadership from everyone at Cal.

As I have have said a zillion times on any and all Cal boards across the worldwide web: the only thing that stops Cal from being successful in football and basketball is Cal.










SanseiBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
CAL4LIFE said:

As my good friend YogiBear pointed out so many times before - stop paying for this crap!












If you do see YogiBear, tell him the old guy from Hawaii misses his posts!
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.