Photo by Twitter / Jermaine Terry
Cal Football

Bears Add a Future Hometown Hero in 4 Star Richmond TE Jermaine Terry

February 24, 2020
12,984

Cal's strong 2021 recruiting start got another big boost with today's commitment from 6-4/235 Kennedy-Richmond TE Jermaine Terry‍ today.

Earlier Terry indicated that the Bears were high on his radar and have been for quite a while.

“I want to get a great education and go somewhere that uses and produces NFL-caliber tight ends, and it has to feel like home,” said Terry.

“Cal is great place to play football and get an education. Coach Wilcox is bringing that program back up and I would love to be a part of that one day.”

Terry announced his decision today on Twitter, saying:

“First I want to start out by thanking God for how much he has blessed me and always set me on the right path. I want to thank my mom for all that she does. I can never repay her. I want to thank my family for always supporting my decisions and pushing me to be the best I can be every day. I want to thank my friends for always keeping me grounded and level headed.

“The recruitment process has been great for me but they say, “Home is where the heart is” and Cal is that.

“With that being said, I would like to say that I am now committed to THE UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA BERKELEY. 

With offers from top programs throughout the country, including Alabama, Auburn, Ohio State, Penn State and more, keeping the talented tight end home was a strong move for a Cal program seen as being on the rise after finishing their 2019 season strong with a Red Box Bowl win and 8-5 record for the season.

Other stories:

Cal Hoops: A 2020 Recruiting Update

5 Star 2021 WR Troy Franklin Talks Cal Offer and Recruiting

Discussion from...

Bears Add a Future Hometown Hero in 4 Star Richmond TE Jermaine Terry

9,667 Views | 64 Replies | Last: 1 mo ago by Hail2Calif
oskirules
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Big target, big get. Go Bears!
irvinebear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yes! Congrats on making one of the best decisions of your life!

Go Bears!
Fyght4Cal
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yes! Welcome Jermaine!
🎵There‚Äôs the Highland Dutch and the Lowland Dutch
The Rotterdam Dutch and Tim DeRuyter 🎶
Rushinbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Obvious joy for the game. It's all there - size, strength, wheelhouse, athletic, runs. This guy is gonna be Good.

Welcome to Cal, Jermaine.
burritos
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Wait, so in 2 years, can both he and DJ Rogers line up at the same time?
burritos
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Who was his recruiter? Is this early dividends from Musgrave/Mcclure addition?
MoragaBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
burritos said:

Who was his recruiter? Is this early dividends from Musgrave/Mcclure addition?
Tui and Burl's recruiting, Musgrave's offense.
burritos
How long do you want to ignore this user?
MoragaBear said:

burritos said:

Who was his recruiter? Is this early dividends from Musgrave/Mcclure addition?
Tui and Burl's recruiting, Musgrave's offense.
Interesting, would Baldwin's offense have been regarded differently?
Oskigo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Are they still pursuing Bowers? If so, does this help or hurt that pursuit? Thanks
MoragaBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
Musgrave's pro style offense should utilize the TE more aggressively. He's had a lot of communication with Musgrave.

And yes, Cal is still recruiting Bowers. He's seemed to have his sights set nationally rather than locally right now but we'll see when everything shakes out.
heartofthebear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Welcome Jermaine:
You summed it up perfectly,
"Cal is great place to play football and get a great education"
Memorial stadium is considered one of the great venues for college football in the country.
You will love it!
CalFan777
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I love how he was influenced by Makai Polk, who really blossomed late in the year. He put on a route running clinic in the RedBox Bowl, and he is doing well academically. A Bay Area role model! Polk was an underrated recruit. It will be interesting to see Polk and Crawford compete for the WR#1 title this year.

Having local ballers is great on many levels, both for Cal and the Bay Area community.
upsetof86
How long do you want to ignore this user?
CalFan777 said:

I love how he was influenced by Makai Polk, who really blossomed late in the year. He put on a route running clinic in the RedBox Bowl, and he is doing well academically. A Bay Area role model! Polk was an underrated recruit. It will be interesting to see Polk and Crawford compete for the WR#1 title this year.

Having local ballers is great on many levels, both for Cal and the Bay Area community.


Welcome Jermaine! Tui is killing it. DJ and Jermaine, yes. And totally agree re Polk. His body looked stronger at the end of the year and he plays with confidence.
upsetof86
How long do you want to ignore this user?
burritos said:

Wait, so in 2 years, can both he and DJ Rogers line up at the same time?


Could be sick.
kc1121
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Agree on Polk and Terry - go ECHS and Kennedy!
NVBear78
How long do you want to ignore this user?
CalFan777 said:

I love how he was influenced by Makai Polk, who really blossomed late in the year. He put on a route running clinic in the RedBox Bowl, and he is doing well academically. A Bay Area role model! Polk was an underrated recruit. It will be interesting to see Polk and Crawford compete for the WR#1 title this year.

Having local ballers is great on many levels, both for Cal and the Bay Area community.


Thanks 777, where did you see that Polk was a big influence, I missed that.

P.S totally agree about Polk putting on a route running clinic in the Bowl game. Was impressive "live" and looked good on the replays. Is that coaching from Toler and/or hard work from Polk or both.
burritos
How long do you want to ignore this user?
upsetof86 said:

burritos said:

Wait, so in 2 years, can both he and DJ Rogers line up at the same time?


Could be sick.
Right? Those two are some big arse targets. One goes 10 yard, the other 20 yard with Polk streaking down the side line? Or am I just fooling myself?
Bear19
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Hmmmm. Recruiting improves with each year of the Wilcox reign. Who would have ever thought that would happen?
philbert
How long do you want to ignore this user?
NVBear78 said:

CalFan777 said:

I love how he was influenced by Makai Polk, who really blossomed late in the year. He put on a route running clinic in the RedBox Bowl, and he is doing well academically. A Bay Area role model! Polk was an underrated recruit. It will be interesting to see Polk and Crawford compete for the WR#1 title this year.

Having local ballers is great on many levels, both for Cal and the Bay Area community.


Thanks 777, where did you see that Polk was a big influence, I missed that.

P.S totally agree about Polk putting on a route running clinic in the Bowl game. Was impressive "live" and looked good on the replays. Is that coaching from Toler and/or hard work from Polk or both.


Polk is mentioned by Terry in a story on another cal site.
Big C
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Bear19 said:

Hmmmm. Recruiting improves with each year of the Wilcox reign. Who would have ever thought that would happen?
Okay, I acknowledge you might be being ironic, but let''s pretend you're not...

2017: 5-7

2018: 7-5, lose bowl game

2019: 7-5, win bowl game

Local players are starting to recognize that this is turning into a winning program!
golden sloth
How long do you want to ignore this user?
On top of that, unless you have some insanely charismatic coach or a coach with bonafided credentials of success (like Urban Meyer), recruiting is a delayed indicator of team success. Trying to recruit HS seniors is hard as you have a lot of ground to make up, but HS sophomores put you on more equal footing.
XXXBEAR
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Bear19 said:

Hmmmm. Recruiting improves with each year of the Wilcox reign. Who would have ever thought that would happen?
(Sarc)

Something about wins, defense, and a whole new offense maybe?

Couldn't be happier. I'm a big fan of the local kids.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
golden sloth said:

On top of that, unless you have some insanely charismatic coach or a coach with bonafided credentials of success (like Urban Meyer), recruiting is a delayed indicator of team success. Trying to recruit HS seniors is hard as you have a lot of ground to make up, but HS sophomores put you on more equal footing.


Which is why the "we need to recruit better" first argument generally fails. You need to get the most production you can from the players you have before the top players sign on. Though in this case the combination of Wilcox and the promise of Musgrave is enough, the big change will come when we combine a good offense with a good defense.
Radical Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
We got some firepower with Anderson and now Terry. Way to go guys.
71Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

golden sloth said:

On top of that, unless you have some insanely charismatic coach or a coach with bonafided credentials of success (like Urban Meyer), recruiting is a delayed indicator of team success. Trying to recruit HS seniors is hard as you have a lot of ground to make up, but HS sophomores put you on more equal footing.


Which is why the "we need to recruit better" first argument generally fails. You need to get the most production you can from the players you have before the top players sign on. Though in this case the combination of Wilcox and the promise of Musgrave is enough, the big change will come when we combine a good offense with a good defense.
I disagree. Tedford proved you can recruit effectively from a Day One even if you are starting from a deep hole.
OneTopOneChickenApple
How long do you want to ignore this user?
71Bear said:

calumnus said:

golden sloth said:

On top of that, unless you have some insanely charismatic coach or a coach with bonafided credentials of success (like Urban Meyer), recruiting is a delayed indicator of team success. Trying to recruit HS seniors is hard as you have a lot of ground to make up, but HS sophomores put you on more equal footing.


Which is why the "we need to recruit better" first argument generally fails. You need to get the most production you can from the players you have before the top players sign on. Though in this case the combination of Wilcox and the promise of Musgrave is enough, the big change will come when we combine a good offense with a good defense.
I disagree. Tedford proved you can recruit effectively from a Day One even if you are starting from a deep hole.
I may be wrong but didn't Tedford start by getting strong JC transfers first before getting highly rated recruits?
Big Dog
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sonny: 'Wait, what is a tight end?'

burritos
How long do you want to ignore this user?
71Bear said:

calumnus said:

golden sloth said:

On top of that, unless you have some insanely charismatic coach or a coach with bonafided credentials of success (like Urban Meyer), recruiting is a delayed indicator of team success. Trying to recruit HS seniors is hard as you have a lot of ground to make up, but HS sophomores put you on more equal footing.


Which is why the "we need to recruit better" first argument generally fails. You need to get the most production you can from the players you have before the top players sign on. Though in this case the combination of Wilcox and the promise of Musgrave is enough, the big change will come when we combine a good offense with a good defense.
I disagree. Tedford proved you can recruit effectively from a Day One even if you are starting from a deep hole.
Tedford's first year roster already had talent 2002. NFL future Boller, Lorenzo Alexander, Tully Banta-Cain,Jamaal Cherry, Nmandi Asomugha, Other notable players included Donnie McCleskey, Jemeel Powell,Joe Igber, Marcus O'Keith, Makonnen, Lasaun Ward, Strang, Burl Toler, Matt Nixon, Paul Ugenti, Bethea and Fredrickson.

These were Tom Holmoe's recruits. He was unable to coach them up. Tedford could and did, but his cupboard talent-wise was not bare when he stepped in. From that success yes, he could then recruit. Could people say that our recent new coaches had this kind of talent on day one?
socalBear23
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Love this. With this defense and the offense being transformed into a smash mouth Read option type of O, we could be really good. Win the Pac good.

Go Bears
MoragaBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
71Bear said:

calumnus said:

golden sloth said:

On top of that, unless you have some insanely charismatic coach or a coach with bonafided credentials of success (like Urban Meyer), recruiting is a delayed indicator of team success. Trying to recruit HS seniors is hard as you have a lot of ground to make up, but HS sophomores put you on more equal footing.


Which is why the "we need to recruit better" first argument generally fails. You need to get the most production you can from the players you have before the top players sign on. Though in this case the combination of Wilcox and the promise of Musgrave is enough, the big change will come when we combine a good offense with a good defense.
I disagree. Tedford proved you can recruit effectively from a Day One even if you are starting from a deep hole.
Not really. Looking at it from both recruiting rankings and how they ended up working out by recruiting players who outplayed their rankings, the 2002 class was not good. O'Keith, Gray and Parson were 4 star players (good rankings, underachievers). McCleskey, Makonnen and Bundy were 3 stars (McCleskey outplayed his ranking, Makkonen lived up to it and Bundy didn't play). The other 12 were 2 stars and most played like it except Erik Robertson and Tim Mixon. This was by far Cal's worst class in the internet ratings era (post SuperPrep, etc).

In the next year, they had one 4 star (Matt Malele) and three 2 stars (DeCoud, Van Hoesen and Myles). The rest were 3 stars. Ultimately he made good calls on a lot of the 3 star JC guys like Rodgers, Arrington, Cross, Riddle and Giordano plus preps like Mebane and Hughes but the strong recruiting really didn't kick in till 2004 after they'd had two 7-win seasons.
Beardog26
How long do you want to ignore this user?
This
boredom
How long do you want to ignore this user?
burritos said:

71Bear said:

calumnus said:

golden sloth said:

On top of that, unless you have some insanely charismatic coach or a coach with bonafided credentials of success (like Urban Meyer), recruiting is a delayed indicator of team success. Trying to recruit HS seniors is hard as you have a lot of ground to make up, but HS sophomores put you on more equal footing.


Which is why the "we need to recruit better" first argument generally fails. You need to get the most production you can from the players you have before the top players sign on. Though in this case the combination of Wilcox and the promise of Musgrave is enough, the big change will come when we combine a good offense with a good defense.
I disagree. Tedford proved you can recruit effectively from a Day One even if you are starting from a deep hole.
Tedford's first year roster already had talent 2002. NFL future Boller, Lorenzo Alexander, Tully Banta-Cain,Jamaal Cherry, Nmandi Asomugha, Other notable players included Donnie McCleskey, Jemeel Powell,Joe Igber, Marcus O'Keith, Makonnen, Lasaun Ward, Strang, Burl Toler, Matt Nixon, Paul Ugenti, Bethea and Fredrickson.

These were Tom Holmoe's recruits. He was unable to coach them up. Tedford could and did, but his cupboard talent-wise was not bare when he stepped in. From that success yes, he could then recruit. Could people say that our recent new coaches had this kind of talent on day one?
There's a chicken and egg problem there. Tedford came in and got the team to buy into what he was doing and coached guys up. Those guys became NFL players under Tedford. Take the two 1st rounders on the list - Boller was thinking of quitting football and Nnamdi was playing the wrong position.

After Tedford's last season there was a very vocal contingent here saying that we had a ton of talent that was being wasted. Dykes comes in and affirms that there's a lot of talent here. Then he alienates, runs off, or otherwise fails to develop most of that talent and we stop producing NFL players (though he did inherit a qb who he helped get to the #1 overall pick).
burritos
How long do you want to ignore this user?
boredom said:

burritos said:

71Bear said:

calumnus said:

golden sloth said:

On top of that, unless you have some insanely charismatic coach or a coach with bonafided credentials of success (like Urban Meyer), recruiting is a delayed indicator of team success. Trying to recruit HS seniors is hard as you have a lot of ground to make up, but HS sophomores put you on more equal footing.


Which is why the "we need to recruit better" first argument generally fails. You need to get the most production you can from the players you have before the top players sign on. Though in this case the combination of Wilcox and the promise of Musgrave is enough, the big change will come when we combine a good offense with a good defense.
I disagree. Tedford proved you can recruit effectively from a Day One even if you are starting from a deep hole.
Tedford's first year roster already had talent 2002. NFL future Boller, Lorenzo Alexander, Tully Banta-Cain,Jamaal Cherry, Nmandi Asomugha, Other notable players included Donnie McCleskey, Jemeel Powell,Joe Igber, Marcus O'Keith, Makonnen, Lasaun Ward, Strang, Burl Toler, Matt Nixon, Paul Ugenti, Bethea and Fredrickson.

These were Tom Holmoe's recruits. He was unable to coach them up. Tedford could and did, but his cupboard talent-wise was not bare when he stepped in. From that success yes, he could then recruit. Could people say that our recent new coaches had this kind of talent on day one?
There's a chicken and egg problem there. Tedford came in and got the team to buy into what he was doing and coached guys up. Those guys became NFL players under Tedford. Take the two 1st rounders on the list - Boller was thinking of quitting football and Nnamdi was playing the wrong position.

After Tedford's last season there was a very vocal contingent here saying that we had a ton of talent that was being wasted. Dykes comes in and affirms that there's a lot of talent here. Then he alienates, runs off, or otherwise fails to develop most of that talent and we stop producing NFL players (though he did inherit a qb who he helped get to the #1 overall pick).
If Tom Holmoe quits his AD position at BYU, we should hire him as a recruiter.
71Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
MoragaBear said:

71Bear said:

calumnus said:

golden sloth said:

On top of that, unless you have some insanely charismatic coach or a coach with bonafided credentials of success (like Urban Meyer), recruiting is a delayed indicator of team success. Trying to recruit HS seniors is hard as you have a lot of ground to make up, but HS sophomores put you on more equal footing.


Which is why the "we need to recruit better" first argument generally fails. You need to get the most production you can from the players you have before the top players sign on. Though in this case the combination of Wilcox and the promise of Musgrave is enough, the big change will come when we combine a good offense with a good defense.
I disagree. Tedford proved you can recruit effectively from a Day One even if you are starting from a deep hole.
Not really. Looking at it from both recruiting rankings and how they ended up working out by recruiting players who outplayed their rankings, the 2002 class was not good. O'Keith, Gray and Parson were 4 star players (good rankings, underachievers). McCleskey, Makonnen and Bundy were 3 stars (McCleskey outplayed his ranking, Makkonen lived up to it and Bundy didn't play). The other 12 were 2 stars and most played like it except Erik Robertson and Tim Mixon. This was by far Cal's worst class in the internet ratings era (post SuperPrep, etc).

In the next year, they had one 4 star (Matt Malele) and three 2 stars (DeCoud, Van Hoesen and Myles). The rest were 3 stars. Ultimately he made good calls on a lot of the 3 star JC guys like Rodgers, Arrington, Cross, Riddle and Giordano plus preps like Mebane and Hughes but the strong recruiting really didn't kick in till 2004 after they'd had two 7-win seasons.
Tedford 2002 (late start)

Makkonen
McCleskey
Robertson
Mixon

I'll that foursome over any "new coach late start foursome" this century.

Tedford 2003 (first full year)

Arrington
Maningo
Giordano
Hughes
Rodgers
Stevens
Riddle
Mebane
Malele
DeCoud

I'll that top ten over any "new coach first full year top ten" this century.

In fact, I'll take those ten guys in the same class over any ten guys in the same class signed by any coach in any year since Tedford became coach.

To suggest Tedford started slow is ridiculous. 2003 was an amazing group of talent.



MoragaBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
71Bear said:

MoragaBear said:

71Bear said:

calumnus said:

golden sloth said:

On top of that, unless you have some insanely charismatic coach or a coach with bonafided credentials of success (like Urban Meyer), recruiting is a delayed indicator of team success. Trying to recruit HS seniors is hard as you have a lot of ground to make up, but HS sophomores put you on more equal footing.


Which is why the "we need to recruit better" first argument generally fails. You need to get the most production you can from the players you have before the top players sign on. Though in this case the combination of Wilcox and the promise of Musgrave is enough, the big change will come when we combine a good offense with a good defense.
I disagree. Tedford proved you can recruit effectively from a Day One even if you are starting from a deep hole.
Not really. Looking at it from both recruiting rankings and how they ended up working out by recruiting players who outplayed their rankings, the 2002 class was not good. O'Keith, Gray and Parson were 4 star players (good rankings, underachievers). McCleskey, Makonnen and Bundy were 3 stars (McCleskey outplayed his ranking, Makkonen lived up to it and Bundy didn't play). The other 12 were 2 stars and most played like it except Erik Robertson and Tim Mixon. This was by far Cal's worst class in the internet ratings era (post SuperPrep, etc).

In the next year, they had one 4 star (Matt Malele) and three 2 stars (DeCoud, Van Hoesen and Myles). The rest were 3 stars. Ultimately he made good calls on a lot of the 3 star JC guys like Rodgers, Arrington, Cross, Riddle and Giordano plus preps like Mebane and Hughes but the strong recruiting really didn't kick in till 2004 after they'd had two 7-win seasons.
Tedford 2002 (late start)

Makkonen
McCleskey
Robertson
Mixon

I'll that foursome over any "new coach late start foursome" this century.

Tedford 2003 (first full year)

Arrington
Maningo
Giordano
Hughes
Rodgers
Stevens
Riddle
Mebane
Malele
DeCoud

I'll that top ten over any "new coach first full year top ten" this century.

In fact, I'll take those ten guys in the same class over any ten guys in the same class signed by any coach in any year since Tedford became coach.

To suggest Tedford started slow is ridiculous. 2003 was an amazing group of talent.
Well, you're moving the goalposts here. You said:
Quote:

I disagree. Tedford proved you can recruit effectively from a Day One even if you are starting from a deep hole.
No "late start" mulligans involved in a Day One statement.

Secondly, How many of those four you mentioned were Tedford recruits? I think only Makonnen was. You still have to hold on to them so points for that. But beyond that, I'd venture that there were hundreds of top fours from a coach's first recruiting class that were better to far better than that group. And to cherry pick the best four from a class of 18 that averaged a miserable 2.44 stars per player -you can't put lipstick on that pig. No big knock on Tedford. It's just another example of how it's tough to recruit strong classes from Day One.

As for the 2003 class, if you want to define recruiting effectively by looking at what kind of college players they were, fine. Then you have to reserve judgment on the last 2-3 of Wilcox's classes, too, because we're not there yet. But if you want to go by ratings, the 2003 class had a 2.92 to 3.0 star average. That's okay. Not sure it would normally be considered effective.
Page 1 of 2
 
×
Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.