Bears Add Commitment From Hart QB Johnson

Blueblood said:

---

NVBear78 said:

---

FuzzyWuzzy said:

---

MoragaBear said:

---

I just hope Johnson or his family didn't read this "commitment" thread

---

Seriously. Let's delete the thread and have a do-over.

---

Excellent idea

---

Well....I guess doing such would make us all feel good because we (this thread shows that it got over 11,000 hits?) can all pretend Johnson's family didn't read any of this thread or at least they could pretend that they never read it!!

---

OH great. Using Shocky logic. How far you have fallen.

But are his hands big enough?
They need to be bigger than Goff's hands, which are clearly not big enough to be successful as a QB

Goobear said:

---

MoragaBear said:

---

I just hope Johnson or his family didn't read this "commitment" thread

---

Well, let me say to the fans here: The players hardly ever read the boards, and if they do they think most of it is entertainment (mostly incorrect/lack of real info with respect to inner workings of the team) at best and that is being kind. As a parent of a player (now graduated) you cannot be affected by what is said good or bad. That is how I approached it. I can say this, if it was your kid or grandkid that is spoken about on the board you would have a different perspective. Nevertheless when a player signs on being criticized is part of it as well. These guys are football players and can handle it just fine.

---

I agree with your sentiments above.

The problem here is some of the guys (especially some Premium Board members) can't handle it at all!

petalumabear said:

---

Blueblood said:

---

NVBear78 said:

---

FuzzyWuzzy said:

---

MoragaBear said:

---

I just hope Johnson or his family didn't read this "commitment" thread

---

Seriously. Let's delete the thread and have a do-over.

---

Excellent idea

---

Well....I guess doing such would make us all feel good because we (this thread shows that it got over 11,000 hits?) can all pretend Johnson's family didn't read any of this thread or at least they could pretend that they never read it!!

---

OH great. Using Shocky logic. How far you have fallen.

---

Oh the shock!

Well how about you Premium Board members using any kind of logic.

Well at least I haven't fallen as far as you have! AHHAHHAHAHAHHHH

heartofthebear said:

---

But are his hands big enough?
They need to be bigger than Goff's hands, which are clearly not big enough to be successful as a QB

---

I think that you, in time, will realize hand size will increasingly become more and more important! (if you don't
believe me, go ask AunBear89.)

Blueblood said:

---

petalumabear said:

---

Blueblood said:

---

NVBear78 said:

---

FuzzyWuzzy said:

---

MoragaBear said:

---

I just hope Johnson or his family didn't read this "commitment" thread

---

Seriously. Let's delete the thread and have a do-over.

---

Excellent idea

---

Well....I guess doing such would make us all feel good because we (this thread shows that it got over 11,000 hits?) can all pretend Johnson's family didn't read any of this thread or at least they could pretend that they never read it!!

---

OH great. Using Shocky logic. How far you have fallen.

---

Oh the shock!

Well how about you Premium Board members using any kind of logic.

Well at least I haven't fallen as far as you have! AHHAHHAHAHAHHHH

---

Thanks for making my point again.
Every post you make exposes you further.
sad........

petalumabear said:

---

Blueblood said:

---

petalumabear said:

---

Blueblood said:

---

NVBear78 said:

---

FuzzyWuzzy said:

---

.....eeeeer.

---

---

Well....I guess doing such would make us all feel good because we (this thread shows that it got over 11,000 hits?) can all pretend Johnson's family didn't read any of this thread or at least they could pretend that they never read it!!

---

OH great. Using Shocky logic. How far you have fallen.

---

Oh the shock!

Well how about you Premium Board members using any kind of logic.

Well at least I haven't fallen as far as you have! AHHAHHAHAHAHHHH

---

Thanks for making my point again. [Well for gosh sakes someone has to!]

Every post you make exposes you further. [Well I'm down to my socks and shorts as I've already taken my shirt and pants off...so I guess I can't go on too much longer with this discussion...unless I go commando!]
sad....[Sad? Why, have you've seen me before without my clothes on? Anyway, it's Sunday, shouldn't you be at your prayer meetng?]....

---

I was just having fun.
BTW
Congrats Mr. Johnson and good luck at Cal.

heartofthebear said:

---

I was just having fun.
BTW
Congrats Mr. Johnson and good luck at Cal.

---

Keep your head turned away as I realize that this post exposes me further!

Well I'll be! So was I or is it so was me? (I get nervous as AunBear89 is dogging my grammar!)

Goobear said:

---

MoragaBear said:

---

I just hope Johnson or his family didn't read this "commitment" thread

---

Well, let me say to the fans here: The players hardly ever read the boards, and if they do they think most of it is entertainment (mostly incorrect/lack of real info with respect to inner workings of the team) at best and that is being kind. As a parent of a player (now graduated) you cannot be affected by what is said good or bad. That is how I approached it. I can say this, if it was your kid or grandkid that is spoken about on the board you would have a different perspective. Nevertheless when a player signs on being criticized is part of it as well. These guys are football players and can handle it just fine.

---

Thank you. I've read too many versions of the above sentiment over the years.

Blueblood said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

I was just having fun.
BTW
Congrats Mr. Johnson and good luck at Cal.

---

Keep your head turned away as I realize that this post exposes me further!

Well I'll be! So was I or is it so was me? (I get nervous as AunBear89 is dogging my grammar!)

---

At least you're not in denial.
I wonder if some of those that are offended by your posts are just irritated that you have burst their euphoric bubble of preseason sunshine. I burned out on hope a long time ago. I find your posts refreshingly honest, even if they don't always prove to be accurate. Being honest about how we feel about recruits is a dangerous business here and I choose to keep my thoughts to myself.

I'll give you this, I don't see a huge difference between Wilcox (Defensive guy) and Dykes (offensive guy). I do think Wilcox has more upside and Justin did not lay a big stinking egg his first season like Dykes did but there are some stunning mirror images:

• Dykes elevated a bad offense to tops in the nation almost immediately. Wilcox did the same on defense.
• Each coach accomplished the above at the expense of the other side of the ball.
• Each coach was able to secure above average coordinates on the side of the ball they resurrected.
• Each coach was unable to secure quality coordinators on the other side of the ball, regardless of name recognition or prior resume.
• Each coach recruits mostly 3 star talent, with the exception of the position they know the most (Wilcox = LB, Dykes = WR). Those exceptions include 4 star talent.
• Each coach showed that the are capable of getting to a bowl game in one of the first 3 years.
• Each coach made headways in surprising out of conference teams (Dykes vs. Texas, Wilcox vs. North Carolina)
• Neither coach has had much success against the big 5 conference schools (Furd, Washington, USC, UCLA and Oregon) although Cal broke through against USC under Wilcox.
• Each coach has shown they are capable of playing and losing close conference games.
• Each coach has kept the academics at Cal a focus.
• Each coach has made good use of walk ons.
• Each coach has made recruiting inroads (Dykes in Texas and Wilcox with local high schools)
• Each coach has had huge attrition at positions that had been deep at Cal (Dykes at LB, Wilcox at WR)

I do have more hope with Wilcox in place because I think he has more overall coaching connections nationwide and is better respected by those coaches. I also think he is more competent overall. Plus Wilcox is coaching under a better administration at Cal. But, like I said, I'm kind of burned out on hope.

heartofthebear said:

---

Blueblood said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

I was just having fun.
BTW
Congrats Mr. Johnson and good luck at Cal.

---

Keep your head turned away as I realize that this post exposes me further!

Well I'll be! So was I or is it so was me? (I get nervous as AunBear89 is dogging my grammar!)

---

At least you're not in denial.
I wonder if some of those that are offended by your posts are just irritated that you have burst their euphoric bubble of preseason sunshine. I burned out on hope a long time ago. I find your posts refreshingly honest, even if they don't always prove to be accurate. Being honest about how we feel about recruits is a dangerous business here and I choose to keep my thoughts to myself.

I'll give you this, I don't see a huge difference between Wilcox (Defensive guy) and Dykes (offensive guy). I do think Wilcox has more upside and Justin did not lay a big stinking egg his first season like Dykes did but there are some stunning mirror images:

• Dykes elevated a bad offense to tops in the nation almost immediately. Wilcox did the same on defense.
• Each coach accomplished the above at the expense of the other side of the ball.
• Each coach was able to secure above average coordinates on the side of the ball they resurrected.
• Each coach was unable to secure quality coordinators on the other side of the ball, regardless of name recognition or prior resume.
• Each coach recruits mostly 3 star talent, with the exception of the position they know the most (Wilcox = LB, Dykes = WR). Those exceptions include 4 star talent.
• Each coach showed that the are capable of getting to a bowl game in one of the first 3 years.
• Each coach made headways in surprising out of conference teams (Dykes vs. Texas, Wilcox vs. North Carolina)
• Neither coach has had much success against the big 5 conference schools (Furd, Washington, USC, UCLA and Oregon) although Cal broke through against USC under Wilcox.
• Each coach has shown they are capable of playing and losing close conference games.
• Each coach has kept the academics at Cal a focus.
• Each coach has made good use of walk ons.
• Each coach has made recruiting inroads (Dykes in Texas and Wilcox with local high schools)
• Each coach has had huge attrition at positions that had been deep at Cal (Dykes at LB, Wilcox at WR)

I do have more hope with Wilcox in place because I think he has more overall coaching connections nationwide and is better respected by those coaches. I also think he is more competent overall. Plus Wilcox is coaching under a better administration at Cal. But, like I said, I'm kind of burned out on hope.

---

When you've lost hope, you had better stop being a Cal fan because that's a miserable existence.

"When you've lost hope, you had better stop being a Cal fan because that's a miserable existence." BRILLIANT!

Every fall my wife asks me why in the heck I put myself through it (being a CAL fan) every year. I always say- this could be the year (Rose Bowl) and I don't want to miss it!!!

76BearsFly said:

---

"When you've lost hope, you had better stop being a Cal fan because that's a miserable existence." BRILLIANT!

Every fall my wife asks me why in the heck I put myself through it (being a CAL fan) every year. I always say- this could be the year (Rose Bowl) and I don't want to miss it!!!

---

Ditto....Since 1959

OdontoBear66 said:

---

76BearsFly said:

---

"When you've lost hope, you had better stop being a Cal fan because that's a miserable existence." BRILLIANT!

Every fall my wife asks me why in the heck I put myself through it (being a CAL fan) every year. I always say- this could be the year (Rose Bowl) and I don't want to miss it!!!

---

Ditto....Since 1959

---

Same here. Since 1959 as a HS Freshman (older brother in the Cal Band)
I rarely have hopes of a RB but I have seen enough thrilling moments of Cal football to keep me coming back.
Why ?
You never know if today's game will be one of those classic games. And I don't want to miss it.

GivemTheAxe said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Blueblood said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

I was just having fun.
BTW
Congrats Mr. Johnson and good luck at Cal.

---

Keep your head turned away as I realize that this post exposes me further!

Well I'll be! So was I or is it so was me? (I get nervous as AunBear89 is dogging my grammar!)

---

At least you're not in denial.
I wonder if some of those that are offended by your posts are just irritated that you have burst their euphoric bubble of preseason sunshine. I burned out on hope a long time ago. I find your posts refreshingly honest, even if they don't always prove to be accurate. Being honest about how we feel about recruits is a dangerous business here and I choose to keep my thoughts to myself.

I'll give you this, I don't see a huge difference between Wilcox (Defensive guy) and Dykes (offensive guy). I do think Wilcox has more upside and Justin did not lay a big stinking egg his first season like Dykes did but there are some stunning mirror images:

• Dykes elevated a bad offense to tops in the nation almost immediately. Wilcox did the same on defense.
• Each coach accomplished the above at the expense of the other side of the ball.
• Each coach was able to secure above average coordinates on the side of the ball they resurrected.
• Each coach was unable to secure quality coordinators on the other side of the ball, regardless of name recognition or prior resume.
• Each coach recruits mostly 3 star talent, with the exception of the position they know the most (Wilcox = LB, Dykes = WR). Those exceptions include 4 star talent.
• Each coach showed that the are capable of getting to a bowl game in one of the first 3 years.
• Each coach made headways in surprising out of conference teams (Dykes vs. Texas, Wilcox vs. North Carolina)
• Neither coach has had much success against the big 5 conference schools (Furd, Washington, USC, UCLA and Oregon) although Cal broke through against USC under Wilcox.
• Each coach has shown they are capable of playing and losing close conference games.
• Each coach has kept the academics at Cal a focus.
• Each coach has made good use of walk ons.
• Each coach has made recruiting inroads (Dykes in Texas and Wilcox with local high schools)
• Each coach has had huge attrition at positions that had been deep at Cal (Dykes at LB, Wilcox at WR)

I do have more hope with Wilcox in place because I think he has more overall coaching connections nationwide and is better respected by those coaches. I also think he is more competent overall. Plus Wilcox is coaching under a better administration at Cal. But, like I said, I'm kind of burned out on hope.

---

Oh come on now
Wilcox went to a bowl game in his 2nd season Sonny in his 3rd. Saying that both went to a bowl within 3 years is correct but misleading
Wilcox beat both USC and UW in his 2nd season.
Sonny dominated poor teams and was clobbered by the good teams. Yes Wilcox lost to some good teams but he also beat some good teams and was rarely clobbered.
Sonny also had the advantage of the best QB in college football at the time (according to the NFL draft) to make his offense a success.
Wilcox is winning by building a strong TEAM and not relying on superstars.
No I would not say that Wilcox is the same as Sonny
Yes I see a reason to hope

---

Thanks, I realized after posting that I had forgotten that Wilcox has only been here 2 years.
But give Dykes/Franklin some credit. Would Goff had become one of the best all time under Baldwin?
Would Goff had developed in a system that did not have a high octane passing scheme?
And Dykes had his share of upsets.
He also beat Washington under Petersen.

76BearsFly said:

---

"When you've lost hope, you had better stop being a Cal fan because that's a miserable existence." BRILLIANT!

Every fall my wife asks me why in the heck I put myself through it (being a CAL fan) every year. I always say- this could be the year (Rose Bowl) and I don't want to miss it!!!

---

Thanks
I'll decide when I stop being a Cal fan.
And, I think Blueblood would agree, just because we are not hypnotized by pre-season or recruiting hype anymore does not mean we don't root for the Bears every year.

heartofthebear said:

---

GivemTheAxe said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Blueblood said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

I was just having fun.
BTW
Congrats Mr. Johnson and good luck at Cal.

---

Keep your head turned away as I realize that this post exposes me further!

Well I'll be! So was I or is it so was me? (I get nervous as AunBear89 is dogging my grammar!)

---

At least you're not in denial.
I wonder if some of those that are offended by your posts are just irritated that you have burst their euphoric bubble of preseason sunshine. I burned out on hope a long time ago. I find your posts refreshingly honest, even if they don't always prove to be accurate. Being honest about how we feel about recruits is a dangerous business here and I choose to keep my thoughts to myself.

I'll give you this, I don't see a huge difference between Wilcox (Defensive guy) and Dykes (offensive guy). I do think Wilcox has more upside and Justin did not lay a big stinking egg his first season like Dykes did but there are some stunning mirror images:

• Dykes elevated a bad offense to tops in the nation almost immediately. Wilcox did the same on defense.
• Each coach accomplished the above at the expense of the other side of the ball.
• Each coach was able to secure above average coordinates on the side of the ball they resurrected.
• Each coach was unable to secure quality coordinators on the other side of the ball, regardless of name recognition or prior resume.
• Each coach recruits mostly 3 star talent, with the exception of the position they know the most (Wilcox = LB, Dykes = WR). Those exceptions include 4 star talent.
• Each coach showed that the are capable of getting to a bowl game in one of the first 3 years.
• Each coach made headways in surprising out of conference teams (Dykes vs. Texas, Wilcox vs. North Carolina)
• Neither coach has had much success against the big 5 conference schools (Furd, Washington, USC, UCLA and Oregon) although Cal broke through against USC under Wilcox.
• Each coach has shown they are capable of playing and losing close conference games.
• Each coach has kept the academics at Cal a focus.
• Each coach has made good use of walk ons.
• Each coach has made recruiting inroads (Dykes in Texas and Wilcox with local high schools)
• Each coach has had huge attrition at positions that had been deep at Cal (Dykes at LB, Wilcox at WR)

I do have more hope with Wilcox in place because I think he has more overall coaching connections nationwide and is better respected by those coaches. I also think he is more competent overall. Plus Wilcox is coaching under a better administration at Cal. But, like I said, I'm kind of burned out on hope.

---

Oh come on now
Wilcox went to a bowl game in his 2nd season Sonny in his 3rd. Saying that both went to a bowl within 3 years is correct but misleading
Wilcox beat both USC and UW in his 2nd season.
Sonny dominated poor teams and was clobbered by the good teams. Yes Wilcox lost to some good teams but he also beat some good teams and was rarely clobbered.
Sonny also had the advantage of the best QB in college football at the time (according to the NFL draft) to make his offense a success.
Wilcox is winning by building a strong TEAM and not relying on superstars.
No I would not say that Wilcox is the same as Sonny
Yes I see a reason to hope

---

Thanks, I realized after posting that I had forgotten that Wilcox has only been here 2 years.
But give Dykes/Franklin some credit. Would Goff had become one of the best all time under Baldwin?
Would Goff had developed in a system that did not have a high octane passing scheme?
And Dykes had his share of upsets.
He also beat Washington under Petersen.

---

Goff would have been a 5th round steal under Baldwin.

heartofthebear said:

---

76BearsFly said:

---

"When you've lost hope, you had better stop being a Cal fan because that's a miserable existence." BRILLIANT!

Every fall my wife asks me why in the heck I put myself through it (being a CAL fan) every year. I always say- this could be the year (Rose Bowl) and I don't want to miss it!!!

---

Thanks
I'll decide when I stop being a Cal fan.
And, I think Blueblood would agree, just because we are not hypnotized by pre-season or recruiting hype anymore does not mean we don't root for the Bears every year.

---

Yes, I do wholeheartedly agree with you.

NYCGOBEARS is putz.

heartofthebear said:

---

GivemTheAxe said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Blueblood said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

I was just having fun.
BTW
Congrats Mr. Johnson and good luck at Cal.

---

Keep your head turned away as I realize that this post exposes me further!

Well I'll be! So was I or is it so was me? (I get nervous as AunBear89 is dogging my grammar!)

---

At least you're not in denial.
I wonder if some of those that are offended by your posts are just irritated that you have burst their euphoric bubble of preseason sunshine. I burned out on hope a long time ago. I find your posts refreshingly honest, even if they don't always prove to be accurate. Being honest about how we feel about recruits is a dangerous business here and I choose to keep my thoughts to myself.

I'll give you this, I don't see a huge difference between Wilcox (Defensive guy) and Dykes (offensive guy). I do think Wilcox has more upside and Justin did not lay a big stinking egg his first season like Dykes did but there are some stunning mirror images:

• Dykes elevated a bad offense to tops in the nation almost immediately. Wilcox did the same on defense.
• Each coach accomplished the above at the expense of the other side of the ball.
• Each coach was able to secure above average coordinates on the side of the ball they resurrected.
• Each coach was unable to secure quality coordinators on the other side of the ball, regardless of name recognition or prior resume.
• Each coach recruits mostly 3 star talent, with the exception of the position they know the most (Wilcox = LB, Dykes = WR). Those exceptions include 4 star talent.
• Each coach showed that the are capable of getting to a bowl game in one of the first 3 years.
• Each coach made headways in surprising out of conference teams (Dykes vs. Texas, Wilcox vs. North Carolina)
• Neither coach has had much success against the big 5 conference schools (Furd, Washington, USC, UCLA and Oregon) although Cal broke through against USC under Wilcox.
• Each coach has shown they are capable of playing and losing close conference games.
• Each coach has kept the academics at Cal a focus.
• Each coach has made good use of walk ons.
• Each coach has made recruiting inroads (Dykes in Texas and Wilcox with local high schools)
• Each coach has had huge attrition at positions that had been deep at Cal (Dykes at LB, Wilcox at WR)

I do have more hope with Wilcox in place because I think he has more overall coaching connections nationwide and is better respected by those coaches. I also think he is more competent overall. Plus Wilcox is coaching under a better administration at Cal. But, like I said, I'm kind of burned out on hope.

---

Oh come on now
Wilcox went to a bowl game in his 2nd season Sonny in his 3rd. Saying that both went to a bowl within 3 years is correct but misleading
Wilcox beat both USC and UW in his 2nd season.
Sonny dominated poor teams and was clobbered by the good teams. Yes Wilcox lost to some good teams but he also beat some good teams and was rarely clobbered.
Sonny also had the advantage of the best QB in college football at the time (according to the NFL draft) to make his offense a success.
Wilcox is winning by building a strong TEAM and not relying on superstars.
No I would not say that Wilcox is the same as Sonny
Yes I see a reason to hope

---

Thanks, I realized after posting that I had forgotten that Wilcox has only been here 2 years.
But give Dykes/Franklin some credit. Would Goff had become one of the best all time under Baldwin?
Would Goff had developed in a system that did not have a high octane passing scheme?
And Dykes had his share of upsets.
He also beat Washington under Petersen.

---

The biggest gripes I have heard about Baldwin are that 1. he cannot "coach up" 3* talent. 2. His play calling became conservative and predictable (IMO this was ordered by Wilcox when the available QBs became turnover-machines)

IMO if Goff had played for Wilcox he would have been the star QB of a top 20 (top 10?) team.
Admittedly his OL would have underperformed but this was also true for Sonny Dykes. (Have we already forgotten how harassed Goff was as the Cal QB all of his time at Cal). Yet Goff was able to put up a ton of points.

With a few more TDs per game Wilcox's Bears would have been amazing.

Admittedly Goff's passing yards and TD's would not have been as high under Wilcox as they were under Sonny. But his winning percentage would have been much higher

His draft status would not have suffered.

GivemTheAxe said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

GivemTheAxe said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Blueblood said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

I was just having fun.
BTW
Congrats Mr. Johnson and good luck at Cal.

---

Keep your head turned away as I realize that this post exposes me further!

Well I'll be! So was I or is it so was me? (I get nervous as AunBear89 is dogging my grammar!)

---

At least you're not in denial.
I wonder if some of those that are offended by your posts are just irritated that you have burst their euphoric bubble of preseason sunshine. I burned out on hope a long time ago. I find your posts refreshingly honest, even if they don't always prove to be accurate. Being honest about how we feel about recruits is a dangerous business here and I choose to keep my thoughts to myself.

I'll give you this, I don't see a huge difference between Wilcox (Defensive guy) and Dykes (offensive guy). I do think Wilcox has more upside and Justin did not lay a big stinking egg his first season like Dykes did but there are some stunning mirror images:

• Dykes elevated a bad offense to tops in the nation almost immediately. Wilcox did the same on defense.
• Each coach accomplished the above at the expense of the other side of the ball.
• Each coach was able to secure above average coordinates on the side of the ball they resurrected.
• Each coach was unable to secure quality coordinators on the other side of the ball, regardless of name recognition or prior resume.
• Each coach recruits mostly 3 star talent, with the exception of the position they know the most (Wilcox = LB, Dykes = WR). Those exceptions include 4 star talent.
• Each coach showed that the are capable of getting to a bowl game in one of the first 3 years.
• Each coach made headways in surprising out of conference teams (Dykes vs. Texas, Wilcox vs. North Carolina)
• Neither coach has had much success against the big 5 conference schools (Furd, Washington, USC, UCLA and Oregon) although Cal broke through against USC under Wilcox.
• Each coach has shown they are capable of playing and losing close conference games.
• Each coach has kept the academics at Cal a focus.
• Each coach has made good use of walk ons.
• Each coach has made recruiting inroads (Dykes in Texas and Wilcox with local high schools)
• Each coach has had huge attrition at positions that had been deep at Cal (Dykes at LB, Wilcox at WR)

I do have more hope with Wilcox in place because I think he has more overall coaching connections nationwide and is better respected by those coaches. I also think he is more competent overall. Plus Wilcox is coaching under a better administration at Cal. But, like I said, I'm kind of burned out on hope.

---

Oh come on now
Wilcox went to a bowl game in his 2nd season Sonny in his 3rd. Saying that both went to a bowl within 3 years is correct but misleading
Wilcox beat both USC and UW in his 2nd season.
Sonny dominated poor teams and was clobbered by the good teams. Yes Wilcox lost to some good teams but he also beat some good teams and was rarely clobbered.
Sonny also had the advantage of the best QB in college football at the time (according to the NFL draft) to make his offense a success.
Wilcox is winning by building a strong TEAM and not relying on superstars.
No I would not say that Wilcox is the same as Sonny
Yes I see a reason to hope

---

Thanks, I realized after posting that I had forgotten that Wilcox has only been here 2 years.
But give Dykes/Franklin some credit. Would Goff had become one of the best all time under Baldwin?
Would Goff had developed in a system that did not have a high octane passing scheme?
And Dykes had his share of upsets.
He also beat Washington under Petersen.

---

The biggest gripes I have heard about Baldwin are that 1. he cannot "coach up" 3* talent. 2. His play calling became conservative and predictable (IMO this was ordered by Wilcox when the available QBs became turnover-machines)

IMO if Goff had played for Wilcox he would have been the star QB of a top 20 (top 10?) team.
Admittedly his OL would have underperformed but this was also true for Sonny Dykes. (Have we already forgotten how harassed Goff was as the Cal QB all of his time at Cal). Yet Goff was able to put up a ton of points.

With a few more TDs per game Wilcox's Bears would have been amazing.

Admittedly Goff's passing yards and TD's would not have been as high under Wilcox as they were under Sonny. But his winning percentage would have been much higher

His draft status would not have suffered.

---

Goff probably would have transferred out under Wilcox. I say that because the evidence supports that.

your name is a misnomer then Heartofthebear

heartofthebear said:

---

GivemTheAxe said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

GivemTheAxe said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Blueblood said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

I was just having fun.
BTW
Congrats Mr. Johnson and good luck at Cal.

---

Keep your head turned away as I realize that this post exposes me further!

Well I'll be! So was I or is it so was me? (I get nervous as AunBear89 is dogging my grammar!)

---

At least you're not in denial.
I wonder if some of those that are offended by your posts are just irritated that you have burst their euphoric bubble of preseason sunshine. I burned out on hope a long time ago. I find your posts refreshingly honest, even if they don't always prove to be accurate. Being honest about how we feel about recruits is a dangerous business here and I choose to keep my thoughts to myself.

I'll give you this, I don't see a huge difference between Wilcox (Defensive guy) and Dykes (offensive guy). I do think Wilcox has more upside and Justin did not lay a big stinking egg his first season like Dykes did but there are some stunning mirror images:

• Dykes elevated a bad offense to tops in the nation almost immediately. Wilcox did the same on defense.
• Each coach accomplished the above at the expense of the other side of the ball.
• Each coach was able to secure above average coordinates on the side of the ball they resurrected.
• Each coach was unable to secure quality coordinators on the other side of the ball, regardless of name recognition or prior resume.
• Each coach recruits mostly 3 star talent, with the exception of the position they know the most (Wilcox = LB, Dykes = WR). Those exceptions include 4 star talent.
• Each coach showed that the are capable of getting to a bowl game in one of the first 3 years.
• Each coach made headways in surprising out of conference teams (Dykes vs. Texas, Wilcox vs. North Carolina)
• Neither coach has had much success against the big 5 conference schools (Furd, Washington, USC, UCLA and Oregon) although Cal broke through against USC under Wilcox.
• Each coach has shown they are capable of playing and losing close conference games.
• Each coach has kept the academics at Cal a focus.
• Each coach has made good use of walk ons.
• Each coach has made recruiting inroads (Dykes in Texas and Wilcox with local high schools)
• Each coach has had huge attrition at positions that had been deep at Cal (Dykes at LB, Wilcox at WR)

I do have more hope with Wilcox in place because I think he has more overall coaching connections nationwide and is better respected by those coaches. I also think he is more competent overall. Plus Wilcox is coaching under a better administration at Cal. But, like I said, I'm kind of burned out on hope.

---

Oh come on now
Wilcox went to a bowl game in his 2nd season Sonny in his 3rd. Saying that both went to a bowl within 3 years is correct but misleading
Wilcox beat both USC and UW in his 2nd season.
Sonny dominated poor teams and was clobbered by the good teams. Yes Wilcox lost to some good teams but he also beat some good teams and was rarely clobbered.
Sonny also had the advantage of the best QB in college football at the time (according to the NFL draft) to make his offense a success.
Wilcox is winning by building a strong TEAM and not relying on superstars.
No I would not say that Wilcox is the same as Sonny
Yes I see a reason to hope

---

Thanks, I realized after posting that I had forgotten that Wilcox has only been here 2 years.
But give Dykes/Franklin some credit. Would Goff had become one of the best all time under Baldwin?
Would Goff had developed in a system that did not have a high octane passing scheme?
And Dykes had his share of upsets.
He also beat Washington under Petersen.

---

The biggest gripes I have heard about Baldwin are that 1. he cannot "coach up" 3* talent. 2. His play calling became conservative and predictable (IMO this was ordered by Wilcox when the available QBs became turnover-machines)

IMO if Goff had played for Wilcox he would have been the star QB of a top 20 (top 10?) team.
Admittedly his OL would have underperformed but this was also true for Sonny Dykes. (Have we already forgotten how harassed Goff was as the Cal QB all of his time at Cal). Yet Goff was able to put up a ton of points.

With a few more TDs per game Wilcox's Bears would have been amazing.

Admittedly Goff's passing yards and TD's would not have been as high under Wilcox as they were under Sonny. But his winning percentage would have been much higher

His draft status would not have suffered.

---

Goff probably would have transferred out under Wilcox. I say that because the evidence supports that.

---

No he would not have. I can tell you that much. Also would have probably gotten more WR with him being there vis a vis Bowers....

heartofthebear said:

---

GivemTheAxe said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

GivemTheAxe said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Blueblood said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

I was just having fun.
BTW
Congrats Mr. Johnson and good luck at Cal.

---

Keep your head turned away as I realize that this post exposes me further!

Well I'll be! So was I or is it so was me? (I get nervous as AunBear89 is dogging my grammar!)

---

At least you're not in denial.
I wonder if some of those that are offended by your posts are just irritated that you have burst their euphoric bubble of preseason sunshine. I burned out on hope a long time ago. I find your posts refreshingly honest, even if they don't always prove to be accurate. Being honest about how we feel about recruits is a dangerous business here and I choose to keep my thoughts to myself.

I'll give you this, I don't see a huge difference between Wilcox (Defensive guy) and Dykes (offensive guy). I do think Wilcox has more upside and Justin did not lay a big stinking egg his first season like Dykes did but there are some stunning mirror images:

• Dykes elevated a bad offense to tops in the nation almost immediately. Wilcox did the same on defense.
• Each coach accomplished the above at the expense of the other side of the ball.
• Each coach was able to secure above average coordinates on the side of the ball they resurrected.
• Each coach was unable to secure quality coordinators on the other side of the ball, regardless of name recognition or prior resume.
• Each coach recruits mostly 3 star talent, with the exception of the position they know the most (Wilcox = LB, Dykes = WR). Those exceptions include 4 star talent.
• Each coach showed that the are capable of getting to a bowl game in one of the first 3 years.
• Each coach made headways in surprising out of conference teams (Dykes vs. Texas, Wilcox vs. North Carolina)
• Neither coach has had much success against the big 5 conference schools (Furd, Washington, USC, UCLA and Oregon) although Cal broke through against USC under Wilcox.
• Each coach has shown they are capable of playing and losing close conference games.
• Each coach has kept the academics at Cal a focus.
• Each coach has made good use of walk ons.
• Each coach has made recruiting inroads (Dykes in Texas and Wilcox with local high schools)
• Each coach has had huge attrition at positions that had been deep at Cal (Dykes at LB, Wilcox at WR)

I do have more hope with Wilcox in place because I think he has more overall coaching connections nationwide and is better respected by those coaches. I also think he is more competent overall. Plus Wilcox is coaching under a better administration at Cal. But, like I said, I'm kind of burned out on hope.

---

Oh come on now
Wilcox went to a bowl game in his 2nd season Sonny in his 3rd. Saying that both went to a bowl within 3 years is correct but misleading
Wilcox beat both USC and UW in his 2nd season.
Sonny dominated poor teams and was clobbered by the good teams. Yes Wilcox lost to some good teams but he also beat some good teams and was rarely clobbered.
Sonny also had the advantage of the best QB in college football at the time (according to the NFL draft) to make his offense a success.
Wilcox is winning by building a strong TEAM and not relying on superstars.
No I would not say that Wilcox is the same as Sonny
Yes I see a reason to hope

---

Thanks, I realized after posting that I had forgotten that Wilcox has only been here 2 years.
But give Dykes/Franklin some credit. Would Goff had become one of the best all time under Baldwin?
Would Goff had developed in a system that did not have a high octane passing scheme?
And Dykes had his share of upsets.
He also beat Washington under Petersen.

---

The biggest gripes I have heard about Baldwin are that 1. he cannot "coach up" 3* talent. 2. His play calling became conservative and predictable (IMO this was ordered by Wilcox when the available QBs became turnover-machines)

IMO if Goff had played for Wilcox he would have been the star QB of a top 20 (top 10?) team.
Admittedly his OL would have underperformed but this was also true for Sonny Dykes. (Have we already forgotten how harassed Goff was as the Cal QB all of his time at Cal). Yet Goff was able to put up a ton of points.

With a few more TDs per game Wilcox's Bears would have been amazing.

Admittedly Goff's passing yards and TD's would not have been as high under Wilcox as they were under Sonny. But his winning percentage would have been much higher

His draft status would not have suffered.

---

Goff probably would have transferred out under Wilcox. I say that because the evidence supports that.

---

What is this evidence you speak of? I cannot find anything that supports your claim.

evanstobrown said:

---

your name is a misnomer then Heartofthebear

---

It's just a name on a board. Get over it.

71Bear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

GivemTheAxe said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

GivemTheAxe said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Blueblood said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

I was just having fun.
BTW
Congrats Mr. Johnson and good luck at Cal.

---

Keep your head turned away as I realize that this post exposes me further!

Well I'll be! So was I or is it so was me? (I get nervous as AunBear89 is dogging my grammar!)

---

At least you're not in denial.
I wonder if some of those that are offended by your posts are just irritated that you have burst their euphoric bubble of preseason sunshine. I burned out on hope a long time ago. I find your posts refreshingly honest, even if they don't always prove to be accurate. Being honest about how we feel about recruits is a dangerous business here and I choose to keep my thoughts to myself.

I'll give you this, I don't see a huge difference between Wilcox (Defensive guy) and Dykes (offensive guy). I do think Wilcox has more upside and Justin did not lay a big stinking egg his first season like Dykes did but there are some stunning mirror images:

• Dykes elevated a bad offense to tops in the nation almost immediately. Wilcox did the same on defense.
• Each coach accomplished the above at the expense of the other side of the ball.
• Each coach was able to secure above average coordinates on the side of the ball they resurrected.
• Each coach was unable to secure quality coordinators on the other side of the ball, regardless of name recognition or prior resume.
• Each coach recruits mostly 3 star talent, with the exception of the position they know the most (Wilcox = LB, Dykes = WR). Those exceptions include 4 star talent.
• Each coach showed that the are capable of getting to a bowl game in one of the first 3 years.
• Each coach made headways in surprising out of conference teams (Dykes vs. Texas, Wilcox vs. North Carolina)
• Neither coach has had much success against the big 5 conference schools (Furd, Washington, USC, UCLA and Oregon) although Cal broke through against USC under Wilcox.
• Each coach has shown they are capable of playing and losing close conference games.
• Each coach has kept the academics at Cal a focus.
• Each coach has made good use of walk ons.
• Each coach has made recruiting inroads (Dykes in Texas and Wilcox with local high schools)
• Each coach has had huge attrition at positions that had been deep at Cal (Dykes at LB, Wilcox at WR)

I do have more hope with Wilcox in place because I think he has more overall coaching connections nationwide and is better respected by those coaches. I also think he is more competent overall. Plus Wilcox is coaching under a better administration at Cal. But, like I said, I'm kind of burned out on hope.

---

Oh come on now
Wilcox went to a bowl game in his 2nd season Sonny in his 3rd. Saying that both went to a bowl within 3 years is correct but misleading
Wilcox beat both USC and UW in his 2nd season.
Sonny dominated poor teams and was clobbered by the good teams. Yes Wilcox lost to some good teams but he also beat some good teams and was rarely clobbered.
Sonny also had the advantage of the best QB in college football at the time (according to the NFL draft) to make his offense a success.
Wilcox is winning by building a strong TEAM and not relying on superstars.
No I would not say that Wilcox is the same as Sonny
Yes I see a reason to hope

---

Thanks, I realized after posting that I had forgotten that Wilcox has only been here 2 years.
But give Dykes/Franklin some credit. Would Goff had become one of the best all time under Baldwin?
Would Goff had developed in a system that did not have a high octane passing scheme?
And Dykes had his share of upsets.
He also beat Washington under Petersen.

---

The biggest gripes I have heard about Baldwin are that 1. he cannot "coach up" 3* talent. 2. His play calling became conservative and predictable (IMO this was ordered by Wilcox when the available QBs became turnover-machines)

IMO if Goff had played for Wilcox he would have been the star QB of a top 20 (top 10?) team.
Admittedly his OL would have underperformed but this was also true for Sonny Dykes. (Have we already forgotten how harassed Goff was as the Cal QB all of his time at Cal). Yet Goff was able to put up a ton of points.

With a few more TDs per game Wilcox's Bears would have been amazing.

Admittedly Goff's passing yards and TD's would not have been as high under Wilcox as they were under Sonny. But his winning percentage would have been much higher

His draft status would not have suffered.

---

Goff probably would have transferred out under Wilcox. I say that because the evidence supports that.

---

What is this evidence you speak of? I cannot find anything that supports your claim.

---

De-commitments and transfers out by QBs since Baldwin came on board are the evidence I refer to. I think there were at least 3.

heartofthebear said:

---

71Bear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

GivemTheAxe said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

GivemTheAxe said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Blueblood said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

I was just having fun.
BTW
Congrats Mr. Johnson and good luck at Cal.

---

Keep your head turned away as I realize that this post exposes me further!

Well I'll be! So was I or is it so was me? (I get nervous as AunBear89 is dogging my grammar!)

---

At least you're not in denial.
I wonder if some of those that are offended by your posts are just irritated that you have burst their euphoric bubble of preseason sunshine. I burned out on hope a long time ago. I find your posts refreshingly honest, even if they don't always prove to be accurate. Being honest about how we feel about recruits is a dangerous business here and I choose to keep my thoughts to myself.

I'll give you this, I don't see a huge difference between Wilcox (Defensive guy) and Dykes (offensive guy). I do think Wilcox has more upside and Justin did not lay a big stinking egg his first season like Dykes did but there are some stunning mirror images:

• Dykes elevated a bad offense to tops in the nation almost immediately. Wilcox did the same on defense.
• Each coach accomplished the above at the expense of the other side of the ball.
• Each coach was able to secure above average coordinates on the side of the ball they resurrected.
• Each coach was unable to secure quality coordinators on the other side of the ball, regardless of name recognition or prior resume.
• Each coach recruits mostly 3 star talent, with the exception of the position they know the most (Wilcox = LB, Dykes = WR). Those exceptions include 4 star talent.
• Each coach showed that the are capable of getting to a bowl game in one of the first 3 years.
• Each coach made headways in surprising out of conference teams (Dykes vs. Texas, Wilcox vs. North Carolina)
• Neither coach has had much success against the big 5 conference schools (Furd, Washington, USC, UCLA and Oregon) although Cal broke through against USC under Wilcox.
• Each coach has shown they are capable of playing and losing close conference games.
• Each coach has kept the academics at Cal a focus.
• Each coach has made good use of walk ons.
• Each coach has made recruiting inroads (Dykes in Texas and Wilcox with local high schools)
• Each coach has had huge attrition at positions that had been deep at Cal (Dykes at LB, Wilcox at WR)

I do have more hope with Wilcox in place because I think he has more overall coaching connections nationwide and is better respected by those coaches. I also think he is more competent overall. Plus Wilcox is coaching under a better administration at Cal. But, like I said, I'm kind of burned out on hope.

---

Oh come on now
Wilcox went to a bowl game in his 2nd season Sonny in his 3rd. Saying that both went to a bowl within 3 years is correct but misleading
Wilcox beat both USC and UW in his 2nd season.
Sonny dominated poor teams and was clobbered by the good teams. Yes Wilcox lost to some good teams but he also beat some good teams and was rarely clobbered.
Sonny also had the advantage of the best QB in college football at the time (according to the NFL draft) to make his offense a success.
Wilcox is winning by building a strong TEAM and not relying on superstars.
No I would not say that Wilcox is the same as Sonny
Yes I see a reason to hope

---

Thanks, I realized after posting that I had forgotten that Wilcox has only been here 2 years.
But give Dykes/Franklin some credit. Would Goff had become one of the best all time under Baldwin?
Would Goff had developed in a system that did not have a high octane passing scheme?
And Dykes had his share of upsets.
He also beat Washington under Petersen.

---

The biggest gripes I have heard about Baldwin are that 1. he cannot "coach up" 3* talent. 2. His play calling became conservative and predictable (IMO this was ordered by Wilcox when the available QBs became turnover-machines)

IMO if Goff had played for Wilcox he would have been the star QB of a top 20 (top 10?) team.
Admittedly his OL would have underperformed but this was also true for Sonny Dykes. (Have we already forgotten how harassed Goff was as the Cal QB all of his time at Cal). Yet Goff was able to put up a ton of points.

With a few more TDs per game Wilcox's Bears would have been amazing.

Admittedly Goff's passing yards and TD's would not have been as high under Wilcox as they were under Sonny. But his winning percentage would have been much higher

His draft status would not have suffered.

---

Goff probably would have transferred out under Wilcox. I say that because the evidence supports that.

---

What is this evidence you speak of? I cannot find anything that supports your claim.

---

De-commitments and transfers out by QBs since Baldwin came on board are the evidence I refer to. I think there were at least 3.

---

Disagree. QBs who transferred out could not perform.
Baldwin and Wilcox showed an unwillingness to stick with a QB who could not perform and to give let the next guy in line a chance. Unfortunately none of the next guys in line were able to perform.
If Goff had been available I am certain he would have won (and kept) the starting job.

heartofthebear said:

---

71Bear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

GivemTheAxe said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

GivemTheAxe said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Blueblood said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

OJI was just having fun.
BTW
Congrats Mr. Johnson and good luck at Cal.

---

Keep your head turned away as I realize that this post exposes me further!

Well I'll be! So was I or is it so was me? (I get nervous as AunBear89 is dogging my grammar!)

---

At least you're not in denial.
I wonder if some of those that are offended by your posts are just irritated that you have burst their euphoric bubble of preseason sunshine. I burned out on hope a long time ago. I find your posts refreshingly honest, even if they don't always prove to be accurate. Being honest about how we feel about recruits is a dangerous business here and I choose to keep my thoughts to myself.

I'll give you this, I don't see a huge difference between Wilcox (Defensive guy) and Dykes (offensive guy). I do think Wilcox has more upside and Justin did not lay a big stinking egg his first season like Dykes did but there are some stunning mirror images:

• Dykes elevated a bad offense to tops in the nation almost immediately. Wilcox did the same on defense.
• Each coach accomplished the above at the expense of the other side of the ball.
• Each coach was able to secure above average coordinates on the side of the ball they resurrected.
• Each coach was unable to secure quality coordinators on the other side of the ball, regardless of name recognition or prior resume.
• Each coach recruits mostly 3 star talent, with the exception of the position they know the most (Wilcox = LB, Dykes = WR). Those exceptions include 4 star talent.
• Each coach showed that the are capable of getting to a bowl game in one of the first 3 years.
• Each coach made headways in surprising out of conference teams (Dykes vs. Texas, Wilcox vs. North Carolina)
• Neither coach has had much success against the big 5 conference schools (Furd, Washington, USC, UCLA and Oregon) although Cal broke through against USC under Wilcox.
• Each coach has shown they are capable of playing and losing close conference games.
• Each coach has kept the academics at Cal a focus.
• Each coach has made good use of walk ons.
• Each coach has made recruiting inroads (Dykes in Texas and Wilcox with local high schools)
• Each coach has had huge attrition at positions that had been deep at Cal (Dykes at LB, Wilcox at WR)

I do have more hope with Wilcox in place because I think he has more overall coaching connections nationwide and is better respected by those coaches. I also think he is more competent overall. Plus Wilcox is coaching under a better administration at Cal. But, like I said, I'm kind of burned out on hope.

---

Oh come on now
Wilcox went to a bowl game in his 2nd season Sonny in his 3rd. Saying that both went to a bowl within 3 years is correct but misleading
Wilcox beat both USC and UW in his 2nd season.
Sonny dominated poor teams and was clobbered by the good teams. Yes Wilcox lost to some good teams but he also beat some good teams and was rarely clobbered.
Sonny also had the advantage of the best QB in college football at the time (according to the NFL draft) to make his offense a success.
Wilcox is winning by building a strong TEAM and not relying on superstars.
No I would not say that Wilcox is the same as Sonny
Yes I see a reason to hope

---

Thanks, I realized after posting that I had forgotten that Wilcox has only been here 2 years.
But give Dykes/Franklin some credit. Would Goff had become one of the best all time under Baldwin?
Would Goff had developed in a system that did not have a high octane passing scheme?
And Dykes had his share of upsets.
He also beat Washington under Petersen.

---

The biggest gripes I have heard about Baldwin are that 1. he cannot "coach up" 3* talent. 2. His play calling became conservative and predictable (IMO this was ordered by Wilcox when the available QBs became turnover-machines)

IMO if Goff had played for Wilcox he would have been the star QB of a top 20 (top 10?) team.
Admittedly his OL would have underperformed but this was also true for Sonny Dykes. (Have we already forgotten how harassed Goff was as the Cal QB all of his time at Cal). Yet Goff was able to put up a ton of points.

With a few more TDs per game Wilcox's Bears would have been amazing.

Admittedly Goff's passing yards and TD's would not have been as high under Wilcox as they were under Sonny. But his winning percentage would have been much higher

His draft status would not have suffered.

---

Goff probably would have transferred out under Wilcox. I say that because the evidence supports that.

---

What is this evidence you speak of? I cannot find anything that supports your claim.

---

De-commitments and transfers out by QBs since Baldwin came on board are the evidence I refer to. I think there were at least 3.

---

Hmmm... First you cite "evidence", then you suggest that you "think" there were transfers and/or decommits for which Baldwin was responsible. I think you need to specifically name names. Anything short of that indicates that you do not have "evidence". Instead you are merely speculating. There is nothing wrong with speculation. However, it is important to identify your comments accordingly. Otherwise, you lose credibility.

By the way, I do not believe that Goff would have left (see Moraga's post for details).

heartofthebear said:

---

71Bear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

GivemTheAxe said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

GivemTheAxe said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Blueblood said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

I was just having fun.
BTW
Congrats Mr. Johnson and good luck at Cal.

---

Keep your head turned away as I realize that this post exposes me further!

Well I'll be! So was I or is it so was me? (I get nervous as AunBear89 is dogging my grammar!)

---

At least you're not in denial.
I wonder if some of those that are offended by your posts are just irritated that you have burst their euphoric bubble of preseason sunshine. I burned out on hope a long time ago. I find your posts refreshingly honest, even if they don't always prove to be accurate. Being honest about how we feel about recruits is a dangerous business here and I choose to keep my thoughts to myself.

I'll give you this, I don't see a huge difference between Wilcox (Defensive guy) and Dykes (offensive guy). I do think Wilcox has more upside and Justin did not lay a big stinking egg his first season like Dykes did but there are some stunning mirror images:

• Dykes elevated a bad offense to tops in the nation almost immediately. Wilcox did the same on defense.
• Each coach accomplished the above at the expense of the other side of the ball.
• Each coach was able to secure above average coordinates on the side of the ball they resurrected.
• Each coach was unable to secure quality coordinators on the other side of the ball, regardless of name recognition or prior resume.
• Each coach recruits mostly 3 star talent, with the exception of the position they know the most (Wilcox = LB, Dykes = WR). Those exceptions include 4 star talent.
• Each coach showed that the are capable of getting to a bowl game in one of the first 3 years.
• Each coach made headways in surprising out of conference teams (Dykes vs. Texas, Wilcox vs. North Carolina)
• Neither coach has had much success against the big 5 conference schools (Furd, Washington, USC, UCLA and Oregon) although Cal broke through against USC under Wilcox.
• Each coach has shown they are capable of playing and losing close conference games.
• Each coach has kept the academics at Cal a focus.
• Each coach has made good use of walk ons.
• Each coach has made recruiting inroads (Dykes in Texas and Wilcox with local high schools)
• Each coach has had huge attrition at positions that had been deep at Cal (Dykes at LB, Wilcox at WR)

I do have more hope with Wilcox in place because I think he has more overall coaching connections nationwide and is better respected by those coaches. I also think he is more competent overall. Plus Wilcox is coaching under a better administration at Cal. But, like I said, I'm kind of burned out on hope.

---

Oh come on now
Wilcox went to a bowl game in his 2nd season Sonny in his 3rd. Saying that both went to a bowl within 3 years is correct but misleading
Wilcox beat both USC and UW in his 2nd season.
Sonny dominated poor teams and was clobbered by the good teams. Yes Wilcox lost to some good teams but he also beat some good teams and was rarely clobbered.
Sonny also had the advantage of the best QB in college football at the time (according to the NFL draft) to make his offense a success.
Wilcox is winning by building a strong TEAM and not relying on superstars.
No I would not say that Wilcox is the same as Sonny
Yes I see a reason to hope

---

Thanks, I realized after posting that I had forgotten that Wilcox has only been here 2 years.
But give Dykes/Franklin some credit. Would Goff had become one of the best all time under Baldwin?
Would Goff had developed in a system that did not have a high octane passing scheme?
And Dykes had his share of upsets.
He also beat Washington under Petersen.

---

The biggest gripes I have heard about Baldwin are that 1. he cannot "coach up" 3* talent. 2. His play calling became conservative and predictable (IMO this was ordered by Wilcox when the available QBs became turnover-machines)

IMO if Goff had played for Wilcox he would have been the star QB of a top 20 (top 10?) team.
Admittedly his OL would have underperformed but this was also true for Sonny Dykes. (Have we already forgotten how harassed Goff was as the Cal QB all of his time at Cal). Yet Goff was able to put up a ton of points.

With a few more TDs per game Wilcox's Bears would have been amazing.

Admittedly Goff's passing yards and TD's would not have been as high under Wilcox as they were under Sonny. But his winning percentage would have been much higher

His draft status would not have suffered.

---

Goff probably would have transferred out under Wilcox. I say that because the evidence supports that.

---

What is this evidence you speak of? I cannot find anything that supports your claim.

---

De-commitments and transfers out by QBs since Baldwin came on board are the evidence I refer to. I think there were at least 3.

---

Well I happen to know Jared and his family.....not sure if you do...

GivemTheAxe said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

GivemTheAxe said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Blueblood said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

I was just having fun.
BTW
Congrats Mr. Johnson and good luck at Cal.

---

Keep your head turned away as I realize that this post exposes me further!

Well I'll be! So was I or is it so was me? (I get nervous as AunBear89 is dogging my grammar!)

---

At least you're not in denial.
I wonder if some of those that are offended by your posts are just irritated that you have burst their euphoric bubble of preseason sunshine. I burned out on hope a long time ago. I find your posts refreshingly honest, even if they don't always prove to be accurate. Being honest about how we feel about recruits is a dangerous business here and I choose to keep my thoughts to myself.

I'll give you this, I don't see a huge difference between Wilcox (Defensive guy) and Dykes (offensive guy). I do think Wilcox has more upside and Justin did not lay a big stinking egg his first season like Dykes did but there are some stunning mirror images:

• Dykes elevated a bad offense to tops in the nation almost immediately. Wilcox did the same on defense.
• Each coach accomplished the above at the expense of the other side of the ball.
• Each coach was able to secure above average coordinates on the side of the ball they resurrected.
• Each coach was unable to secure quality coordinators on the other side of the ball, regardless of name recognition or prior resume.
• Each coach recruits mostly 3 star talent, with the exception of the position they know the most (Wilcox = LB, Dykes = WR). Those exceptions include 4 star talent.
• Each coach showed that the are capable of getting to a bowl game in one of the first 3 years.
• Each coach made headways in surprising out of conference teams (Dykes vs. Texas, Wilcox vs. North Carolina)
• Neither coach has had much success against the big 5 conference schools (Furd, Washington, USC, UCLA and Oregon) although Cal broke through against USC under Wilcox.
• Each coach has shown they are capable of playing and losing close conference games.
• Each coach has kept the academics at Cal a focus.
• Each coach has made good use of walk ons.
• Each coach has made recruiting inroads (Dykes in Texas and Wilcox with local high schools)
• Each coach has had huge attrition at positions that had been deep at Cal (Dykes at LB, Wilcox at WR)

I do have more hope with Wilcox in place because I think he has more overall coaching connections nationwide and is better respected by those coaches. I also think he is more competent overall. Plus Wilcox is coaching under a better administration at Cal. But, like I said, I'm kind of burned out on hope.

---

Oh come on now
Wilcox went to a bowl game in his 2nd season Sonny in his 3rd. Saying that both went to a bowl within 3 years is correct but misleading
Wilcox beat both USC and UW in his 2nd season.
Sonny dominated poor teams and was clobbered by the good teams. Yes Wilcox lost to some good teams but he also beat some good teams and was rarely clobbered.
Sonny also had the advantage of the best QB in college football at the time (according to the NFL draft) to make his offense a success.
Wilcox is winning by building a strong TEAM and not relying on superstars.
No I would not say that Wilcox is the same as Sonny
Yes I see a reason to hope

---

Thanks, I realized after posting that I had forgotten that Wilcox has only been here 2 years.
But give Dykes/Franklin some credit. Would Goff had become one of the best all time under Baldwin?
Would Goff had developed in a system that did not have a high octane passing scheme?
And Dykes had his share of upsets.
He also beat Washington under Petersen.

---

The biggest gripes I have heard about Baldwin are that 1. he cannot "coach up" 3* talent. 2. His play calling became conservative and predictable (IMO this was ordered by Wilcox when the available QBs became turnover-machines)

IMO if Goff had played for Wilcox he would have been the star QB of a top 20 (top 10?) team.
Admittedly his OL would have underperformed but this was also true for Sonny Dykes. (Have we already forgotten how harassed Goff was as the Cal QB all of his time at Cal). Yet Goff was able to put up a ton of points.

With a few more TDs per game Wilcox's Bears would have been amazing.

Admittedly Goff's passing yards and TD's would not have been as high under Wilcox as they were under Sonny. But his winning percentage would have been much higher

His draft status would not have suffered.

---

Baldwin's playcalling was utterly predictable and unimaginative and his personnel decisions questionable the year before too when we managed to nudge out OSU for 11th best offense in the PAC-12. The year before that we had the number 1 offense in the PAC-12. Spring of 2017 we were told we were 5 deep at WR....

GivemTheAxe said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

71Bear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

GivemTheAxe said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

GivemTheAxe said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Blueblood said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

I was just having fun.
BTW
Congrats Mr. Johnson and good luck at Cal.

---

Keep your head turned away as I realize that this post exposes me further!

Well I'll be! So was I or is it so was me? (I get nervous as AunBear89 is dogging my grammar!)

---

At least you're not in denial.
I wonder if some of those that are offended by your posts are just irritated that you have burst their euphoric bubble of preseason sunshine. I burned out on hope a long time ago. I find your posts refreshingly honest, even if they don't always prove to be accurate. Being honest about how we feel about recruits is a dangerous business here and I choose to keep my thoughts to myself.

I'll give you this, I don't see a huge difference between Wilcox (Defensive guy) and Dykes (offensive guy). I do think Wilcox has more upside and Justin did not lay a big stinking egg his first season like Dykes did but there are some stunning mirror images:

• Dykes elevated a bad offense to tops in the nation almost immediately. Wilcox did the same on defense.
• Each coach accomplished the above at the expense of the other side of the ball.
• Each coach was able to secure above average coordinates on the side of the ball they resurrected.
• Each coach was unable to secure quality coordinators on the other side of the ball, regardless of name recognition or prior resume.
• Each coach recruits mostly 3 star talent, with the exception of the position they know the most (Wilcox = LB, Dykes = WR). Those exceptions include 4 star talent.
• Each coach showed that the are capable of getting to a bowl game in one of the first 3 years.
• Each coach made headways in surprising out of conference teams (Dykes vs. Texas, Wilcox vs. North Carolina)
• Neither coach has had much success against the big 5 conference schools (Furd, Washington, USC, UCLA and Oregon) although Cal broke through against USC under Wilcox.
• Each coach has shown they are capable of playing and losing close conference games.
• Each coach has kept the academics at Cal a focus.
• Each coach has made good use of walk ons.
• Each coach has made recruiting inroads (Dykes in Texas and Wilcox with local high schools)
• Each coach has had huge attrition at positions that had been deep at Cal (Dykes at LB, Wilcox at WR)

I do have more hope with Wilcox in place because I think he has more overall coaching connections nationwide and is better respected by those coaches. I also think he is more competent overall. Plus Wilcox is coaching under a better administration at Cal. But, like I said, I'm kind of burned out on hope.

---

Oh come on now
Wilcox went to a bowl game in his 2nd season Sonny in his 3rd. Saying that both went to a bowl within 3 years is correct but misleading
Wilcox beat both USC and UW in his 2nd season.
Sonny dominated poor teams and was clobbered by the good teams. Yes Wilcox lost to some good teams but he also beat some good teams and was rarely clobbered.
Sonny also had the advantage of the best QB in college football at the time (according to the NFL draft) to make his offense a success.
Wilcox is winning by building a strong TEAM and not relying on superstars.
No I would not say that Wilcox is the same as Sonny
Yes I see a reason to hope

---

Thanks, I realized after posting that I had forgotten that Wilcox has only been here 2 years.
But give Dykes/Franklin some credit. Would Goff had become one of the best all time under Baldwin?
Would Goff had developed in a system that did not have a high octane passing scheme?
And Dykes had his share of upsets.
He also beat Washington under Petersen.

---

The biggest gripes I have heard about Baldwin are that 1. he cannot "coach up" 3* talent. 2. His play calling became conservative and predictable (IMO this was ordered by Wilcox when the available QBs became turnover-machines)

IMO if Goff had played for Wilcox he would have been the star QB of a top 20 (top 10?) team.
Admittedly his OL would have underperformed but this was also true for Sonny Dykes. (Have we already forgotten how harassed Goff was as the Cal QB all of his time at Cal). Yet Goff was able to put up a ton of points.

With a few more TDs per game Wilcox's Bears would have been amazing.

Admittedly Goff's passing yards and TD's would not have been as high under Wilcox as they were under Sonny. But his winning percentage would have been much higher

His draft status would not have suffered.

---

Goff probably would have transferred out under Wilcox. I say that because the evidence supports that.

---

What is this evidence you speak of? I cannot find anything that supports your claim.

---

De-commitments and transfers out by QBs since Baldwin came on board are the evidence I refer to. I think there were at least 3.

---

Disagree. QBs who transferred out could not perform.
Baldwin and Wilcox showed an unwillingness to stick with a QB who could not perform and to give let the next guy in line a chance. Unfortunately none of the next guys in line were able to perform.
If Goff had been available I am certain he would have won (and kept) the starting job.

---

Goff struggled at times as a freshman. Remember that game up in Oregon? Most on this board were pining for Kline or even Hinder. He clearly developed year over year under that staff. They got Davis Webb drafted.

Baldwin was handed 4 and 5 star QBs. Are they really all terrible?

Chase Forrest had a 138 passing rating as a freshman in 2015 as the #2 behind Goff (better than Goff's 123 as a freshman). He looked good. He (and every other quarterback) has looked bad under Baldwin. In the Cheezit Bowl Forrest had a 49 passing rating.

calumnus said:

---

GivemTheAxe said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

GivemTheAxe said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Blueblood said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

I was just having fun.
BTW
Congrats Mr. Johnson and good luck at Cal.

---

Keep your head turned away as I realize that this post exposes me further!

Well I'll be! So was I or is it so was me? (I get nervous as AunBear89 is dogging my grammar!)

---

At least you're not in denial.
I wonder if some of those that are offended by your posts are just irritated that you have burst their euphoric bubble of preseason sunshine. I burned out on hope a long time ago. I find your posts refreshingly honest, even if they don't always prove to be accurate. Being honest about how we feel about recruits is a dangerous business here and I choose to keep my thoughts to myself.

I'll give you this, I don't see a huge difference between Wilcox (Defensive guy) and Dykes (offensive guy). I do think Wilcox has more upside and Justin did not lay a big stinking egg his first season like Dykes did but there are some stunning mirror images:

• Dykes elevated a bad offense to tops in the nation almost immediately. Wilcox did the same on defense.
• Each coach accomplished the above at the expense of the other side of the ball.
• Each coach was able to secure above average coordinates on the side of the ball they resurrected.
• Each coach was unable to secure quality coordinators on the other side of the ball, regardless of name recognition or prior resume.
• Each coach recruits mostly 3 star talent, with the exception of the position they know the most (Wilcox = LB, Dykes = WR). Those exceptions include 4 star talent.
• Each coach showed that the are capable of getting to a bowl game in one of the first 3 years.
• Each coach made headways in surprising out of conference teams (Dykes vs. Texas, Wilcox vs. North Carolina)
• Neither coach has had much success against the big 5 conference schools (Furd, Washington, USC, UCLA and Oregon) although Cal broke through against USC under Wilcox.
• Each coach has shown they are capable of playing and losing close conference games.
• Each coach has kept the academics at Cal a focus.
• Each coach has made good use of walk ons.
• Each coach has made recruiting inroads (Dykes in Texas and Wilcox with local high schools)
• Each coach has had huge attrition at positions that had been deep at Cal (Dykes at LB, Wilcox at WR)

I do have more hope with Wilcox in place because I think he has more overall coaching connections nationwide and is better respected by those coaches. I also think he is more competent overall. Plus Wilcox is coaching under a better administration at Cal. But, like I said, I'm kind of burned out on hope.

---

Oh come on now
Wilcox went to a bowl game in his 2nd season Sonny in his 3rd. Saying that both went to a bowl within 3 years is correct but misleading
Wilcox beat both USC and UW in his 2nd season.
Sonny dominated poor teams and was clobbered by the good teams. Yes Wilcox lost to some good teams but he also beat some good teams and was rarely clobbered.
Sonny also had the advantage of the best QB in college football at the time (according to the NFL draft) to make his offense a success.
Wilcox is winning by building a strong TEAM and not relying on superstars.
No I would not say that Wilcox is the same as Sonny
Yes I see a reason to hope

---

Thanks, I realized after posting that I had forgotten that Wilcox has only been here 2 years.
But give Dykes/Franklin some credit. Would Goff had become one of the best all time under Baldwin?
Would Goff had developed in a system that did not have a high octane passing scheme?
And Dykes had his share of upsets.
He also beat Washington under Petersen.

---

The biggest gripes I have heard about Baldwin are that 1. he cannot "coach up" 3* talent. 2. His play calling became conservative and predictable (IMO this was ordered by Wilcox when the available QBs became turnover-machines)

IMO if Goff had played for Wilcox he would have been the star QB of a top 20 (top 10?) team.
Admittedly his OL would have underperformed but this was also true for Sonny Dykes. (Have we already forgotten how harassed Goff was as the Cal QB all of his time at Cal). Yet Goff was able to put up a ton of points.

With a few more TDs per game Wilcox's Bears would have been amazing.

Admittedly Goff's passing yards and TD's would not have been as high under Wilcox as they were under Sonny. But his winning percentage would have been much higher

His draft status would not have suffered.

---

Baldwin's playcalling was utterly predictable and unimaginative and his personnel decisions questionable the year before too when we managed to nudge out OSU for 11th best offense in the PAC-12. The year before that we had the number 1 offense in the PAC-12. Spring of 2017 we were told we were 5 deep at WR....

---

Quite a difference between having a QB who was drafted in the 3rd Round (2016) and a QB who subsequently left the program and found a home at the FCS level (2017), eh?

Here is your five deep:

Wharton, Noa, Veasy, Singleton, Duncan (all caught 10+ passes in 2017). Add in Robertson who was injured early in the season and you actually have six guys. What strikes me about the aforementioned fivesome is that none of them were star receivers. All of them were ok to good but none were sterling.

71Bear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

GivemTheAxe said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

GivemTheAxe said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Blueblood said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

I was just having fun.
BTW
Congrats Mr. Johnson and good luck at Cal.

---

Keep your head turned away as I realize that this post exposes me further!

Well I'll be! So was I or is it so was me? (I get nervous as AunBear89 is dogging my grammar!)

---

At least you're not in denial.
I wonder if some of those that are offended by your posts are just irritated that you have burst their euphoric bubble of preseason sunshine. I burned out on hope a long time ago. I find your posts refreshingly honest, even if they don't always prove to be accurate. Being honest about how we feel about recruits is a dangerous business here and I choose to keep my thoughts to myself.

I'll give you this, I don't see a huge difference between Wilcox (Defensive guy) and Dykes (offensive guy). I do think Wilcox has more upside and Justin did not lay a big stinking egg his first season like Dykes did but there are some stunning mirror images:

• Dykes elevated a bad offense to tops in the nation almost immediately. Wilcox did the same on defense.
• Each coach accomplished the above at the expense of the other side of the ball.
• Each coach was able to secure above average coordinates on the side of the ball they resurrected.
• Each coach was unable to secure quality coordinators on the other side of the ball, regardless of name recognition or prior resume.
• Each coach recruits mostly 3 star talent, with the exception of the position they know the most (Wilcox = LB, Dykes = WR). Those exceptions include 4 star talent.
• Each coach showed that the are capable of getting to a bowl game in one of the first 3 years.
• Each coach made headways in surprising out of conference teams (Dykes vs. Texas, Wilcox vs. North Carolina)
• Neither coach has had much success against the big 5 conference schools (Furd, Washington, USC, UCLA and Oregon) although Cal broke through against USC under Wilcox.
• Each coach has shown they are capable of playing and losing close conference games.
• Each coach has kept the academics at Cal a focus.
• Each coach has made good use of walk ons.
• Each coach has made recruiting inroads (Dykes in Texas and Wilcox with local high schools)
• Each coach has had huge attrition at positions that had been deep at Cal (Dykes at LB, Wilcox at WR)

I do have more hope with Wilcox in place because I think he has more overall coaching connections nationwide and is better respected by those coaches. I also think he is more competent overall. Plus Wilcox is coaching under a better administration at Cal. But, like I said, I'm kind of burned out on hope.

---

Oh come on now
Wilcox went to a bowl game in his 2nd season Sonny in his 3rd. Saying that both went to a bowl within 3 years is correct but misleading
Wilcox beat both USC and UW in his 2nd season.
Sonny dominated poor teams and was clobbered by the good teams. Yes Wilcox lost to some good teams but he also beat some good teams and was rarely clobbered.
Sonny also had the advantage of the best QB in college football at the time (according to the NFL draft) to make his offense a success.
Wilcox is winning by building a strong TEAM and not relying on superstars.
No I would not say that Wilcox is the same as Sonny
Yes I see a reason to hope

---

Thanks, I realized after posting that I had forgotten that Wilcox has only been here 2 years.
But give Dykes/Franklin some credit. Would Goff had become one of the best all time under Baldwin?
Would Goff had developed in a system that did not have a high octane passing scheme?
And Dykes had his share of upsets.
He also beat Washington under Petersen.

---

The biggest gripes I have heard about Baldwin are that 1. he cannot "coach up" 3* talent. 2. His play calling became conservative and predictable (IMO this was ordered by Wilcox when the available QBs became turnover-machines)

IMO if Goff had played for Wilcox he would have been the star QB of a top 20 (top 10?) team.
Admittedly his OL would have underperformed but this was also true for Sonny Dykes. (Have we already forgotten how harassed Goff was as the Cal QB all of his time at Cal). Yet Goff was able to put up a ton of points.

With a few more TDs per game Wilcox's Bears would have been amazing.

Admittedly Goff's passing yards and TD's would not have been as high under Wilcox as they were under Sonny. But his winning percentage would have been much higher

His draft status would not have suffered.

---

Baldwin's playcalling was utterly predictable and unimaginative and his personnel decisions questionable the year before too when we managed to nudge out OSU for 11th best offense in the PAC-12. The year before that we had the number 1 offense in the PAC-12. Spring of 2017 we were told we were 5 deep at WR....

---

Quite a difference between having a QB who was drafted in the 3rd Round (2016) and a QB who subsequently left the program and found a home at the FCS level (2017), eh?

Here is your five deep:

Wharton, Noa, Veasy, Singleton, Duncan (all caught 10+ passes in 2017). Add in Robertson who was injured early in the season and you actually have six guys. What strikes me about the aforementioned fivesome is that none of them were star receivers. All of them were ok to good but none were sterling.

---

Here are the guys we listed as WR returners from 2016 and newcomers for 2017: Robertson, Stovall, Duncan, Echols, Noa, Hudson, Bankhead, Wharton, Veasy, Singleton, Rockett, Austin, Kobayashi, Peterson, Ashton, Gamble, Dunn, Locklin, Worstell, Laris, Hawkins, Taariq Johnson, Netherda, Phillip, Caldwell, King. Other than Hansen it was the core WR corps that was part of the #4 passing offense in the country in 2016 plus some very highly rated newcomers.

We dropped from the #10 offense in 2016 to the #90 offense in 2017 and #115 in 2018.

By contrast, in 2012 Tedford's last year, we had the #95 defense. Dykes's defenses were terrible, but it is not like we were good before he showed up. He took a bad defense and made it terrible. Baldwin inherited a good offense and made it terrible. Sure, injuries played a role in both, but at least on offense you can adjust your strategy accordingly and play to your strengths (as opposed to having your weaknesses exposed).

I just haven't seen anything that looks coherent from Baldwin. People here point to bad QBs and WRsthen why run a passing spread with 4 and 5 WR spreads? He does claim to be "multiple." Hope to be proven wrong about him this year.