Story Poster
Photo by Al Sermeno / KLC Fotos
Cal Football

Wilcox Signs Contract Extension

January 20, 2022
20,570

Head Football Coach Justin Wilcox has signed a contract extension that will keep him with the Cal program through the 2027 season and increases the salary pool for assistant coaches, the school announced Thursday .

"Justin Wilcox is a football coach who shares our values and vision, and we want to ensure that he is the leader of our program for the long term," Cal Director of Athletics Jim Knowlton said. "He is a great fit for Cal Athletics and our university, with a philosophy that places an emphasis on developing young men on the field, in the classroom and as people. I am confident our fans and alumni share my enthusiasm for the direction of our program, and the level of success we have seen to date has set a foundation for sustained excellence in the future."

Wilcox has compiled a long list of accomplishments and recorded several signature wins in his first five campaigns at Cal, including leading the program to back-to-back winning seasons and bowl games in 2018 and 2019 for the first time in a decade. Cal finished the 2019 campaign with an 8-5 record that included a victory in the Big Game at Stanford and a Redbox Bowl win over Illinois to close the year. The Bears captured the Axe again in 2021 with a 41-11 victory at Stanford in November and completed the season with a 24-14 win over USC as part of a 4-2 record in the second half of the campaign.

"I appreciate the opportunity to be the head football coach at Cal and am excited about the future of our program," Wilcox said. "I have thoroughly enjoyed every minute I have spent with the extraordinary young men who have been in our program. We are in a great position and strongly aligned with our university thanks to the leadership of Chancellor Carol Christ and Jim Knowlton. I thank both of them for their continued trust and confidence in me to lead a football program that will make the entire Cal community proud. We have very high expectations. I think we've earned the right to expect more, and that's exactly what we're going to do."

Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic limiting the 2020 campaign to four games, the Bears increased their numbers of wins over each of Wilcox's first three seasons, including a perfect 9-0 record in regular-season non-conference games, with four of the victories against Power 5 schools. During those three years, Cal defeated a Top-15 team each season and won games at USC, Washington, UCLA and Stanford.

The Bears earned a spot in the Cheez-It Bowl in 2018 and followed that with a 35-20 victory over Illinois in the 2019 Redbox Bowl.

"Since the beginning of his tenure, I have been impressed by Justin Wilcox's leadership, and his commitment to enabling our student-athletes to take full advantage of the academic and athletic opportunities we offer," Christ said. "He is, in my opinion, the quintessential Berkeley coach who understands the university's values, as well as the value his program brings to the campus as a rallying point for Cal's global community. College football is a highly competitive environment, and the investment represented in Justin's new contract is commensurate with all that I know he will contribute to our university in the years ahead."

Under Wilcox's leadership, the Cal football program has achieved notable levels of success not only on the field, but also in the classroom and the community.

In the classroom, the program announced its highest Graduation Success Rate ever at 84 percent, according to data released by the NCAA in December. During Wilcox's tenure, Cal has also recorded its top score in the NCAA's Academic Progress Rate and highest team grade-point average. In addition, 29 Golden Bears were named to the 2020 Pac-12 Academic Honor Roll last fall, the highest number for a season in program history.

Fan support for the Bears has also increased since Wilcox took over his leading role. Student attendance nearly doubled from 2017 to 2018, and student ticket purchases were higher in 2021 than they had been in the past 10 years. In addition, Cal fans had a 95% season-ticket renewal rate for 2020 as compared to the 2019 campaign.

Other stories:

'23 OLB Target Carson Mott Talks about Cal Visit

Brandt Impressed With Visit to Cal

Discussion from...

Wilcox Signs Contract Extension

19,796 Views | 181 Replies | Last: 1 mo ago by calumnus
SurvivorOf1and10fkaLEA
How long do you want to ignore this user?
This might blow your mind: Cal being 9-3 versus 7-5 is NOT that important in the grand scheme of things. It's not going to markedly improve the quality of your life, it's not going to help the environment or solve societal ills.

Whereas, IMHO, the rapid commercialization of amateur athletics (whether AAU or college football) is bad for society. I'd rather my alma mater be a part of the solution rather than the problem.

I want Cal to be successful and win the Pac12, but not if it means having to get into bidding wars for high school kids and tolerate a carousel of soulless mercenaries like Chip Kelly or Ed Orgeron.
71Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
SurvivorOf1and10fkaLEA said:

This might blow your mind: Cal being 9-3 versus 7-5 is NOT that important in the grand scheme of things. It's not going to markedly improve the quality of your life, it's not going to help the environment or solve societal ills.

Whereas, IMHO, the rapid commercialization of amateur athletics (whether AAU or college football) is bad for society. I'd rather my alma mater be a part of the solution rather than the problem.

I want Cal to be successful and win the Pac12, but not if it means having to get into bidding wars for high school kids and tolerate a carousel of soulless mercenaries like Chip Kelly or Ed Orgeron.

???

May I suggest that next time you actually read the remarks to which you are responding prior to posting. In the context of what I wrote, your comment made no sense at all.

Mattlowe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I would be interested in what type of team we should realistically aspire to in todays environment? Who is doing it well the right way and has some of our challenges?

UCLA?
Notre Dame?
Stanford in the good years?
Wisconsin?
dimitrig
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mattlowe said:

I would be interested in what type of team we should realistically aspire to in todays environment? Who is doing it well the right way and has some of our challenges?

UCLA?
Notre Dame?
Stanford in the good years?
Wisconsin?

Utah?

Utah just joined the Pac-12 and already has a Rose Bowl appearance.

I would say Colorado as well, but they haven't been too successful.

59bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mattlowe said:

I would be interested in what type of team we should realistically aspire to in todays environment? Who is doing it well the right way and has some of our challenges?

UCLA?
Notre Dame?
Stanford in the good years?
Wisconsin?
I think "today's environment" has yet to be defined so there is no way to know what the "right way" is. What seems obvious to me is that the gusher of NIL money, while good for some athletes, presents an opportunity for corruption of unprecedented scope. I think we're in for a wild, possibly very unenjoyable ride as this gets sorted out.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
59bear said:

Mattlowe said:

I would be interested in what type of team we should realistically aspire to in todays environment? Who is doing it well the right way and has some of our challenges?

UCLA?
Notre Dame?
Stanford in the good years?
Wisconsin?
I think "today's environment" has yet to be defined so there is no way to know what the "right way" is. What seems obvious to me is that the gusher of NIL money, while good for some athletes, presents an opportunity for corruption of unprecedented scope. I think we're in for a wild, possibly very unenjoyable ride as this gets sorted out.


I also think that for Cal to be successful Cal needs to develop its own comparative advantages. There may be elements similar to other schools, but there will be some that are unique to Cal and would be difficult for others to emulate, just as other schools have some that are difficult for us to emulate.

Unfortunately Knowlton is the last guy to develop a uniquely Cal vision for excellence in our major sports programs.
71Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Mattlowe said:

I would be interested in what type of team we should realistically aspire to in todays environment? Who is doing it well the right way and has some of our challenges?

UCLA?
Notre Dame?
Stanford in the good years?
Wisconsin?
Michigan is the best example of a premier academic school with an excellent athletic program.

They are the model Cal should try to emulate.
burritos
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Any chance he can get Tosh back. The coffee mug with coin will now be legal.
Bobodeluxe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
burritos said:

Any chance he can get Tosh back. The coffee mug with coin will now be legal.
It was always legal, until one was caught. Then, nothing.
Big C
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

59bear said:

Mattlowe said:

I would be interested in what type of team we should realistically aspire to in todays environment? Who is doing it well the right way and has some of our challenges?

UCLA?
Notre Dame?
Stanford in the good years?
Wisconsin?
I think "today's environment" has yet to be defined so there is no way to know what the "right way" is. What seems obvious to me is that the gusher of NIL money, while good for some athletes, presents an opportunity for corruption of unprecedented scope. I think we're in for a wild, possibly very unenjoyable ride as this gets sorted out.


I also think that for Cal to be successful Cal needs to develop its own comparative advantages. There may be elements similar to other schools, but there will be some that are unique to Cal and would be difficult for others to emulate, just as other schools have some that are difficult for us to emulate.

Unfortunately Knowlton is the last guy to develop a uniquely Cal vision for excellence in our major sports programs.

Maybe he could employ just the right consulting firm to help him with that!
82gradDLSdad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Big C said:

calumnus said:

59bear said:

Mattlowe said:

I would be interested in what type of team we should realistically aspire to in todays environment? Who is doing it well the right way and has some of our challenges?

UCLA?
Notre Dame?
Stanford in the good years?
Wisconsin?
I think "today's environment" has yet to be defined so there is no way to know what the "right way" is. What seems obvious to me is that the gusher of NIL money, while good for some athletes, presents an opportunity for corruption of unprecedented scope. I think we're in for a wild, possibly very unenjoyable ride as this gets sorted out.


I also think that for Cal to be successful Cal needs to develop its own comparative advantages. There may be elements similar to other schools, but there will be some that are unique to Cal and would be difficult for others to emulate, just as other schools have some that are difficult for us to emulate.

Unfortunately Knowlton is the last guy to develop a uniquely Cal vision for excellence in our major sports programs.

Maybe he could employ just the right consulting firm to help him with that!


Given what BearGreg wrote about our athletic department I really don't want anyone who would take a job in it being our AD. If you had reasonable ambition and you interviewed for our AD job in the last 25 years, and then did a little digging and question asking, wouldn't you turn the job down and go somewhere else? Like Troy St.? Or anywhere else? Now if you were a yes man, and a paper pusher, and a lifelong administrator, who has no ambition to make anything better you jump at the job and settle in.
drizzlybears brother
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cal Strong! said:

Strykur said:

Cal Strong! said:

This extension likely means more losses to teams like TCU, WSU, and Nevada. More empty stadiums. More getting out-recruited by stanfurd. More below-mediocrity. More weakness.
If Wilcox starts losing Big Game repeatedly and piles up blowout losses, then yeah he will be shown the door, but he could win some stuff if he can get the offense to just average.
Cal Strong never understood why repeated close losses are a good thing. Doesn't that just mean that the teams are fairly matched, but that the other coach did a better job of convincing his guys to finish strong?

It could just mean the coin flipped the other way. We had close wins in prior seasons that we may have overvalued, and in 2021 had close losses that I think we're also over weighing.
DiabloWags
How long do you want to ignore this user?

I dont see how we're able to recruit against the rest of the Conference when Wilcox is required to have 80% of his recruiting class sport a 3.0 GPA.
drizzlybears brother
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cal Strong! said:

GivemTheAxe said:


I was shocked when I heard the JW turned down a "shot at the Big Time" (PAC-12 wise).
When was the last time something like that happened?

Tedford was said to have turned down the Chicago Bears early in his tenure at Cal.

Wilcox is said to have turned down Oregon.

I don't really believe either of these claims.

But just as Sonny got an extension after flirting with a half dozen other programs, there is no better way to get an extension than to convince people that another school wants you -- even if it isn't true.
You just make up what you want to believe? Discard the inconvenient? Do you have better information that we should know about?
drizzlybears brother
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calBlitz said:

I like Wilcox, but given the results so far, can any insider (or anyone) explain the logic behind this.
This mischaracterization gets repeated here regularly, the coach wasn't extended because he went 5-7, but because the market believes he merits it.
Cal Strong!
How long do you want to ignore this user?
drizzlybears brother said:


You just make up what you want to believe? Discard the inconvenient? Do you have better information that we should know about?
The information I have is that this was just a report by an Oregon reporter who is wrong more often than he is right, which was based on anonymous sources, that was never confirmed by any of the parties involved.

According to this report, Wilcox twice turned down his alma mater and one would assume far more money in his home state in order to keep a job in which he has a losing record at a program that (according to many people on this board) does not offer him sufficient support.

If this doesn't raise your suspicions, I don't know what would.
drizzlybears brother
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cal Strong! said:

drizzlybears brother said:


You just make up what you want to believe? Discard the inconvenient? Do you have better information that we should know about?
The information I have is that this was just a report by an Oregon reporter who is wrong more often than he is right, which was based on anonymous sources, that was never confirmed by any of the parties involved.

According to this report, Wilcox twice turned down his alma mater and one would assume far more money in his home state in order to keep a job in which he has a losing record at a program that (according to many people on this board) does not offer him sufficient support.

If this doesn't raise your suspicions, I don't know what would.
So no evidence. That's what I thought. Weak.
Cal Strong!
How long do you want to ignore this user?
drizzlybears brother said:

Cal Strong! said:

drizzlybears brother said:


You just make up what you want to believe? Discard the inconvenient? Do you have better information that we should know about?
The information I have is that this was just a report by an Oregon reporter who is wrong more often than he is right, which was based on anonymous sources, that was never confirmed by any of the parties involved.

According to this report, Wilcox twice turned down his alma mater and one would assume far more money in his home state in order to keep a job in which he has a losing record at a program that (according to many people on this board) does not offer him sufficient support.

If this doesn't raise your suspicions, I don't know what would.
So no evidence. That's what I thought. Weak.
You seem to misunderstand the way this works. If you are saying something happened that not a single source has confirmed on the record, then it is up to you to provide the evidence.

Willful misunderstanding WEAK like stanfurd. Inadvertent misunderstanding a STRONG learning opportunity, like Cal.

Tedford supposedly turned down the Chicago Bears and got a big extension, and Wilcox did the same with Oregon. Seems pretty crazy. Tedford had an amazing turnaround story to pitch to the Bears. Wilcox had nothing to pitch to Oregon, but it was his alma mater. Seems like Cal must be an elite dream job if these coaches turn down programs like Oregon and the Chicago Bears in favor of staying in Berkeley.
82gradDLSdad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cal Strong! said:

drizzlybears brother said:

Cal Strong! said:

drizzlybears brother said:


You just make up what you want to believe? Discard the inconvenient? Do you have better information that we should know about?
The information I have is that this was just a report by an Oregon reporter who is wrong more often than he is right, which was based on anonymous sources, that was never confirmed by any of the parties involved.

According to this report, Wilcox twice turned down his alma mater and one would assume far more money in his home state in order to keep a job in which he has a losing record at a program that (according to many people on this board) does not offer him sufficient support.

If this doesn't raise your suspicions, I don't know what would.
So no evidence. That's what I thought. Weak.
You seem to misunderstand the way this works. If you are saying something happened that not a single source has confirmed on the record, then it is up to you to provide the evidence.

Willful misunderstanding WEAK like stanfurd. Inadvertent misunderstanding a STRONG learning opportunity, like Cal.

Tedford supposedly turned down the Chicago Bears and got a big extension, and Wilcox did the same with Oregon. Seems pretty crazy. Tedford had an amazing turnaround story to pitch to the Bears. Wilcox had nothing to pitch to Oregon, but it was his alma mater. Seems like Cal must be an elite dream job if these coaches turn down programs like Oregon and the Chicago Bears in favor of staying in Berkeley.


You may be right but here is a different take. I already make enough money to live comfortably the rest of my life. The Cal position is one in a great location and at a pressure level I can live with. Both Oregon and the NFL Bears are jobs with high pressure, get fired if you fail conditions. I'll stay at Cal. If you don't think there are people who would stay at Cal then you need to get out more. Not everyone, even a professional coach, is a keep on moving up kind of guy. BTW, you think Bob Ladouceur turned down more lucrative jobs while just a high school coach at DLS? I know he did.
Strykur
How long do you want to ignore this user?
59bear said:

Mattlowe said:

I would be interested in what type of team we should realistically aspire to in todays environment? Who is doing it well the right way and has some of our challenges?

UCLA?
Notre Dame?
Stanford in the good years?
Wisconsin?
I think "today's environment" has yet to be defined so there is no way to know what the "right way" is. What seems obvious to me is that the gusher of NIL money, while good for some athletes, presents an opportunity for corruption of unprecedented scope. I think we're in for a wild, possibly very unenjoyable ride as this gets sorted out.
NIL plus the transfer portal gives blue-chip prospects the opportunity to hit up 2-3 schools during a career and still get a good amount of cash to carry over into NFL free agency. Meaning, trying to sell a guy on a long-term vision right out of high school may not jive in today's ballgame.
4thGenCal
How long do you want to ignore this user?
82gradDLSdad said:

Cal Strong! said:

drizzlybears brother said:

Cal Strong! said:

drizzlybears brother said:


You just make up what you want to believe? Discard the inconvenient? Do you have better information that we should know about?
The information I have is that this was just a report by an Oregon reporter who is wrong more often than he is right, which was based on anonymous sources, that was never confirmed by any of the parties involved.

According to this report, Wilcox twice turned down his alma mater and one would assume far more money in his home state in order to keep a job in which he has a losing record at a program that (according to many people on this board) does not offer him sufficient support.

If this doesn't raise your suspicions, I don't know what would.
So no evidence. That's what I thought. Weak.
You seem to misunderstand the way this works. If you are saying something happened that not a single source has confirmed on the record, then it is up to you to provide the evidence.

Willful misunderstanding WEAK like stanfurd. Inadvertent misunderstanding a STRONG learning opportunity, like Cal.

Tedford supposedly turned down the Chicago Bears and got a big extension, and Wilcox did the same with Oregon. Seems pretty crazy. Tedford had an amazing turnaround story to pitch to the Bears. Wilcox had nothing to pitch to Oregon, but it was his alma mater. Seems like Cal must be an elite dream job if these coaches turn down programs like Oregon and the Chicago Bears in favor of staying in Berkeley.


You may be right but here is a different take. I already make enough money to live comfortably the rest of my life. The Cal position is one in a great location and at a pressure level I can live with. Both Oregon and the NFL Bears are jobs with high pressure, get fired if you fail conditions. I'll stay at Cal. If you don't think there are people who would stay at Cal then you need to get out more. Not everyone, even a professional coach, is a keep on moving up kind of guy. BTW, you think Bob Ladouceur turned down more lucrative jobs while just a high school coach at DLS? I know he did.
Justin is a Very High Character person. He stayed and did turn down Oregon twice simply because he 1) likes the lower key/less overall pressure that Cal HC position offers relative to Oregon 2) He genuinely loves his players and felt he would be walking out on them 3) He believes he can win at Cal and wants to prove that. 4) He enjoys his life style and not being in the center of attention when he is on his own locally. These are not opinions but JW reasons.
dimitrig
How long do you want to ignore this user?
4thGenCal said:

82gradDLSdad said:

Cal Strong! said:

drizzlybears brother said:

Cal Strong! said:

drizzlybears brother said:


You just make up what you want to believe? Discard the inconvenient? Do you have better information that we should know about?
The information I have is that this was just a report by an Oregon reporter who is wrong more often than he is right, which was based on anonymous sources, that was never confirmed by any of the parties involved.

According to this report, Wilcox twice turned down his alma mater and one would assume far more money in his home state in order to keep a job in which he has a losing record at a program that (according to many people on this board) does not offer him sufficient support.

If this doesn't raise your suspicions, I don't know what would.
So no evidence. That's what I thought. Weak.
You seem to misunderstand the way this works. If you are saying something happened that not a single source has confirmed on the record, then it is up to you to provide the evidence.

Willful misunderstanding WEAK like stanfurd. Inadvertent misunderstanding a STRONG learning opportunity, like Cal.

Tedford supposedly turned down the Chicago Bears and got a big extension, and Wilcox did the same with Oregon. Seems pretty crazy. Tedford had an amazing turnaround story to pitch to the Bears. Wilcox had nothing to pitch to Oregon, but it was his alma mater. Seems like Cal must be an elite dream job if these coaches turn down programs like Oregon and the Chicago Bears in favor of staying in Berkeley.


You may be right but here is a different take. I already make enough money to live comfortably the rest of my life. The Cal position is one in a great location and at a pressure level I can live with. Both Oregon and the NFL Bears are jobs with high pressure, get fired if you fail conditions. I'll stay at Cal. If you don't think there are people who would stay at Cal then you need to get out more. Not everyone, even a professional coach, is a keep on moving up kind of guy. BTW, you think Bob Ladouceur turned down more lucrative jobs while just a high school coach at DLS? I know he did.
Justin is a Very High Character person. He stayed and did turn down Oregon twice simply because he 1) likes the lower key/less overall pressure that Cal HC position offers relative to Oregon 2) He genuinely loves his players and felt he would be walking out on them 3) He believes he can win at Cal and wants to prove that. 4) He enjoys his life style and not being in the center of attention when he is on his own locally. These are not opinions but JW reasons.


Sounds like it is good to be Wilcox.

Why is this good for Cal?

Big C
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cal Strong! said:

drizzlybears brother said:


You just make up what you want to believe? Discard the inconvenient? Do you have better information that we should know about?
The information I have is that this was just a report by an Oregon reporter who is wrong more often than he is right, which was based on anonymous sources, that was never confirmed by any of the parties involved.

According to this report, Wilcox twice turned down his alma mater and one would assume far more money in his home state in order to keep a job in which he has a losing record at a program that (according to many people on this board) does not offer him sufficient support.

If this doesn't raise your suspicions, I don't know what would.

Cal Strong no drink Kool Aid today!
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
drizzlybears brother said:

calBlitz said:

I like Wilcox, but given the results so far, can any insider (or anyone) explain the logic behind this.
This mischaracterization gets repeated here regularly, the coach wasn't extended because he went 5-7, but because the market believes he merits it.


The only reason Wilcox was considered at Oregon is because of pressure from some Oregon alums to hire an alum. It did not establish he is in high demand in the market at large. The only reason Cal would need to extend is if that was his condition for turning Oregon down, ie he was leveraging the interview with his alma mater to get more from Cal. However, we are told Wilcox is above doing that. Thus, the only reason to extend is if you are happy with 26-28, 15-25 in conference or there is good reason to believe he can do significantly better in the future. In fact, that is the only reason you should extend regardless of whether he had an offer from someone else. If you were not happy with 5-7 you should want someone to buy out his contract.
drizzlybears brother
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

drizzlybears brother said:

calBlitz said:

I like Wilcox, but given the results so far, can any insider (or anyone) explain the logic behind this.
This mischaracterization gets repeated here regularly, the coach wasn't extended because he went 5-7, but because the market believes he merits it.


The only reason Wilcox was considered at Oregon is because of pressure from some Oregon alums to hire an alum. It did not establish he is in high demand in the market at large. The only reason Cal would need to extend is if that was his condition for turning Oregon down, ie he was leveraging the interview with his alma mater to get more from Cal. However, we are told Wilcox is above doing that. Thus, the only reason to extend is if you are happy with 26-28, 15-25 in conference or there is good reason to believe he can do significantly better in the future. In fact, that is the only reason you should extend regardless of whether he had an offer from someone else. If you were not happy with 5-7 you should want someone to buy out his contract.
BS. We know that at least 2 PAC 12 schools were interested in Wilcox, and the one with maybe the deepest pockets made two offers to him. The rest is you spinning what you need. Save it.
drizzlybears brother
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cal Strong! said:

drizzlybears brother said:

Cal Strong! said:

drizzlybears brother said:


You just make up what you want to believe? Discard the inconvenient? Do you have better information that we should know about?
The information I have is that this was just a report by an Oregon reporter who is wrong more often than he is right, which was based on anonymous sources, that was never confirmed by any of the parties involved.

According to this report, Wilcox twice turned down his alma mater and one would assume far more money in his home state in order to keep a job in which he has a losing record at a program that (according to many people on this board) does not offer him sufficient support.

If this doesn't raise your suspicions, I don't know what would.
So no evidence. That's what I thought. Weak.
You seem to misunderstand the way this works. If you are saying something happened that not a single source has confirmed on the record, then it is up to you to provide the evidence.

Willful misunderstanding WEAK like stanfurd. Inadvertent misunderstanding a STRONG learning opportunity, like Cal.

Tedford supposedly turned down the Chicago Bears and got a big extension, and Wilcox did the same with Oregon. Seems pretty crazy. Tedford had an amazing turnaround story to pitch to the Bears. Wilcox had nothing to pitch to Oregon, but it was his alma mater. Seems like Cal must be an elite dream job if these coaches turn down programs like Oregon and the Chicago Bears in favor of staying in Berkeley.
Why do you use syntax that makes you sound like a moron, because your arguments aren't doing you any favors.

It's you with your willful head in the sand. People don't typically confirm offers that were declined, at least not publicly. The lack of denial is the stronger evidence because there's more to be gained by doing so. They have a mutual respect so they're not going to embarrass each other by acknowledging the declined offers.

There were published reports describing two offers and none refuting it. Yet your genius chooses the opposite story, again with no evidence but your own will and ask us to believe your take over the one with actual sources. You star in your own fantasy. Provide contrasting sources or give it up.
GivemTheAxe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Big C said:

Cal Strong! said:

drizzlybears brother said:


You just make up what you want to believe? Discard the inconvenient? Do you have better information that we should know about?
The information I have is that this was just a report by an Oregon reporter who is wrong more often than he is right, which was based on anonymous sources, that was never confirmed by any of the parties involved.

According to this report, Wilcox twice turned down his alma mater and one would assume far more money in his home state in order to keep a job in which he has a losing record at a program that (according to many people on this board) does not offer him sufficient support.

If this doesn't raise your suspicions, I don't know what would.

Cal Strong no drinking Kool Aid today!

I have two good friends who are in the big donor category and are clued in to the behind the scenes activities
Both have confirmed that the TWO offers from UO were real. Maybe some will say that they were fooled along with everyone else but the greater the number of confirmations makes the naysayers look foolish.
dimitrig
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GivemTheAxe said:

Big C said:

Cal Strong! said:

drizzlybears brother said:


You just make up what you want to believe? Discard the inconvenient? Do you have better information that we should know about?
The information I have is that this was just a report by an Oregon reporter who is wrong more often than he is right, which was based on anonymous sources, that was never confirmed by any of the parties involved.

According to this report, Wilcox twice turned down his alma mater and one would assume far more money in his home state in order to keep a job in which he has a losing record at a program that (according to many people on this board) does not offer him sufficient support.

If this doesn't raise your suspicions, I don't know what would.

Cal Strong no drinking Kool Aid today!

I have two good friends who are in the big donor category and are clued in to the behind the scenes activities
Both have confirmed that the TWO offers from UO were real. Maybe some will say that they were fooled along with everyone else but the greater the number of confirmations makes the naysayers look foolish.

I think Cal missed a great opportunity to foist Wilcox on Oregon then.


calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
drizzlybears brother said:

calumnus said:

drizzlybears brother said:

calBlitz said:

I like Wilcox, but given the results so far, can any insider (or anyone) explain the logic behind this.
This mischaracterization gets repeated here regularly, the coach wasn't extended because he went 5-7, but because the market believes he merits it.


The only reason Wilcox was considered at Oregon is because of pressure from some Oregon alums to hire an alum. It did not establish he is in high demand in the market at large. The only reason Cal would need to extend is if that was his condition for turning Oregon down, ie he was leveraging the interview with his alma mater to get more from Cal. However, we are told Wilcox is above doing that. Thus, the only reason to extend is if you are happy with 26-28, 15-25 in conference or there is good reason to believe he can do significantly better in the future. In fact, that is the only reason you should extend regardless of whether he had an offer from someone else. If you were not happy with 5-7 you should want someone to buy out his contract.
BS. We know that at least 2 PAC 12 schools were interested in Wilcox, and the one with maybe the deepest pockets made two offers to him. The rest is you spinning what you need. Save it.


BS? That is your refutation? What two schools then?

Besides, did you even read the rest of what I wrote? The only reason to extend Is if 26-28, 15-25 in conference is good enough, or you have reason to expect significant improvement. If not, you should not extend and be happy someone else takes him off your hands. If you are just hoping things get better, you continue to let him play out his contract until he actually delivers improvement or you need to extend for recruiting purposes.

So the question to you is: 1) is a losing record in conference every year good enough for you? And/or 2) what specific reasons do you have to think future results will be significantly better?
Cal Strong!
How long do you want to ignore this user?
82gradDLSdad said:


You may be right but here is a different take. I already make enough money to live comfortably the rest of my life. The Cal position is one in a great location and at a pressure level I can live with. Both Oregon and the NFL Bears are jobs with high pressure, get fired if you fail conditions. I'll stay at Cal. If you don't think there are people who would stay at Cal then you need to get out more. Not everyone, even a professional coach, is a keep on moving up kind of guy. BTW, you think Bob Ladouceur turned down more lucrative jobs while just a high school coach at DLS? I know he did.
Cal Strong respect this take. But there a big problem with this reasoning: until Wilcox, coaches who failed on the field always got fired. Holmoe got fired. Dykes got fired. Even Tedford got fired. So coaches (until Wilcox) should have no reason to trust in job security if they routinely lose more games than they win.
Cal Strong!
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GivemTheAxe said:

Big C said:

Cal Strong! said:

drizzlybears brother said:


You just make up what you want to believe? Discard the inconvenient? Do you have better information that we should know about?
The information I have is that this was just a report by an Oregon reporter who is wrong more often than he is right, which was based on anonymous sources, that was never confirmed by any of the parties involved.

According to this report, Wilcox twice turned down his alma mater and one would assume far more money in his home state in order to keep a job in which he has a losing record at a program that (according to many people on this board) does not offer him sufficient support.

If this doesn't raise your suspicions, I don't know what would.

Cal Strong no drinking Kool Aid today!

I have two good friends who are in the big donor category and are clued in to the behind the scenes activities
Both have confirmed that the TWO offers from UO were real. Maybe some will say that they were fooled along with everyone else but the greater the number of confirmations makes the naysayers look foolish.
There not a single on the record confirmation. Not one.

Even GivemTheAxe refuse to name his sources. He just said they are rich donors. But how would a donor know what was going on in an offer / contract negotiation between Wilcox and the Oregon AD? If Wilcox's agent started the rumor, they would be just as ignorant about the truth of it as anyone else.

It is clear that neither Wilcox nor Oregon wants to go public with this. They have both refused to speak about it. So whoever is leaking has a vested interest in people believing (whether it is true or not) that Oregon wanted Wilcox.

Once there are two confirmed sources (the basic standard in journalism), then Cal Strong will believe it.
82gradDLSdad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dimitrig said:

4thGenCal said:

82gradDLSdad said:

Cal Strong! said:

drizzlybears brother said:

Cal Strong! said:

drizzlybears brother said:


You just make up what you want to believe? Discard the inconvenient? Do you have better information that we should know about?
The information I have is that this was just a report by an Oregon reporter who is wrong more often than he is right, which was based on anonymous sources, that was never confirmed by any of the parties involved.

According to this report, Wilcox twice turned down his alma mater and one would assume far more money in his home state in order to keep a job in which he has a losing record at a program that (according to many people on this board) does not offer him sufficient support.

If this doesn't raise your suspicions, I don't know what would.
So no evidence. That's what I thought. Weak.
You seem to misunderstand the way this works. If you are saying something happened that not a single source has confirmed on the record, then it is up to you to provide the evidence.

Willful misunderstanding WEAK like stanfurd. Inadvertent misunderstanding a STRONG learning opportunity, like Cal.

Tedford supposedly turned down the Chicago Bears and got a big extension, and Wilcox did the same with Oregon. Seems pretty crazy. Tedford had an amazing turnaround story to pitch to the Bears. Wilcox had nothing to pitch to Oregon, but it was his alma mater. Seems like Cal must be an elite dream job if these coaches turn down programs like Oregon and the Chicago Bears in favor of staying in Berkeley.


You may be right but here is a different take. I already make enough money to live comfortably the rest of my life. The Cal position is one in a great location and at a pressure level I can live with. Both Oregon and the NFL Bears are jobs with high pressure, get fired if you fail conditions. I'll stay at Cal. If you don't think there are people who would stay at Cal then you need to get out more. Not everyone, even a professional coach, is a keep on moving up kind of guy. BTW, you think Bob Ladouceur turned down more lucrative jobs while just a high school coach at DLS? I know he did.
Justin is a Very High Character person. He stayed and did turn down Oregon twice simply because he 1) likes the lower key/less overall pressure that Cal HC position offers relative to Oregon 2) He genuinely loves his players and felt he would be walking out on them 3) He believes he can win at Cal and wants to prove that. 4) He enjoys his life style and not being in the center of attention when he is on his own locally. These are not opinions but JW reasons.


Sounds like it is good to be Wilcox.

Why is this good for Cal?




Reasonable question. I no longer have a problem with Wilcox. But I also no longer live and die with any sports. So I like having a reasonable head coach of my alma mater who may or may not figure out how to recruit and coach offense better. I guess I will want him fired if he completely falls apart and can't win any games.
drizzlybears brother
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

drizzlybears brother said:

calumnus said:

drizzlybears brother said:

calBlitz said:

I like Wilcox, but given the results so far, can any insider (or anyone) explain the logic behind this.
This mischaracterization gets repeated here regularly, the coach wasn't extended because he went 5-7, but because the market believes he merits it.


The only reason Wilcox was considered at Oregon is because of pressure from some Oregon alums to hire an alum. It did not establish he is in high demand in the market at large. The only reason Cal would need to extend is if that was his condition for turning Oregon down, ie he was leveraging the interview with his alma mater to get more from Cal. However, we are told Wilcox is above doing that. Thus, the only reason to extend is if you are happy with 26-28, 15-25 in conference or there is good reason to believe he can do significantly better in the future. In fact, that is the only reason you should extend regardless of whether he had an offer from someone else. If you were not happy with 5-7 you should want someone to buy out his contract.
BS. We know that at least 2 PAC 12 schools were interested in Wilcox, and the one with maybe the deepest pockets made two offers to him. The rest is you spinning what you need. Save it.


BS? That is your refutation? What two schools then?

Besides, did you even read the rest of what I wrote? The only reason to extend Is if 26-28, 15-25 in conference is good enough, or you have reason to expect significant improvement. If not, you should not extend and be happy someone else takes him off your hands. If you are just hoping things get better, you continue to let him play out his contract until he actually delivers improvement or you need to extend for recruiting purposes.

So the question to you is: 1) is a losing record in conference every year good enough for you? And/or 2) what specific reasons do you have to think future results will be significantly better?

The two schools we know reached out were UW and UO. The record is your red herring. No one is offering because of the record, it's because of what and how he builds, and because they believe he will achieve better records. It's not me you're arguing with, it's the market. When you're ready to make a multimillion dollar bet I'll pay more attention to you too.
GivemTheAxe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
drizzlybears brother said:

calumnus said:

drizzlybears brother said:

calumnus said:

drizzlybears brother said:

calBlitz said:

I like Wilcox, but given the results so far, can any insider (or anyone) explain the logic behind this.
This mischaracterization gets repeated here regularly, the coach wasn't extended because he went 5-7, but because the market believes he merits it.


The only reason Wilcox was considered at Oregon is because of pressure from some Oregon alums to hire an alum. It did not establish he is in high demand in the market at large. The only reason Cal would need to extend is if that was his condition for turning Oregon down, ie he was leveraging the interview with his alma mater to get more from Cal. However, we are told Wilcox is above doing that. Thus, the only reason to extend is if you are happy with 26-28, 15-25 in conference or there is good reason to believe he can do significantly better in the future. In fact, that is the only reason you should extend regardless of whether he had an offer from someone else. If you were not happy with 5-7 you should want someone to buy out his contract.
BS. We know that at least 2 PAC 12 schools were interested in Wilcox, and the one with maybe the deepest pockets made two offers to him. The rest is you spinning what you need. Save it.


BS? That is your refutation? What two schools then?

Besides, did you even read the rest of what I wrote? The only reason to extend Is if 26-28, 15-25 in conference is good enough, or you have reason to expect significant improvement. If not, you should not extend and be happy someone else takes him off your hands. If you are just hoping things get better, you continue to let him play out his contract until he actually delivers improvement or you need to extend for recruiting purposes.

So the question to you is: 1) is a losing record in conference every year good enough for you? And/or 2) what specific reasons do you have to think future results will be significantly better?

The two schools we know reached out were UW and UO. The record is your red herring. No one is offering because of the record, it's because of what and how he builds, and because they believe he will achieve better records. It's not me you're arguing with, it's the market. When you're ready to make a multimillion dollar bet I'll pay more attention to you too.
Thanks Drizzybears brother. You have made the point that i was trying to make but you have done it much more concisely than I.
UO and UW have big $$$ on the line on their HC selection unlike any of the posters on this board.

Historically UO has had very great success with its HC selections in both FB and BB.
UW not so much. But UW's selections for HC have been better than Cal's HC selections in both FB and BB.
Those results tell me that either UO and UW have better HC selection smarts than Cal or Cal has certain impediments that make success more difficult at Cal or maybe both are true.

Based upon the foregoing (not on JW's W-L record) I would conclude that JW should be a fairly good bet as Cal's HC in football.
But many posters disagree based upon JW's W-L record are saying get rid of JW (or at least Cal should not have given him the contract extension until his record improves),
The latter alternative would be the equivalent of telling him to go to another school where he has better options.

Those posters would like to trust the AD or the Administrators or some Search Committee to find a better HC candidate than JW. Yeah as if that has been working out so well for Cal BB.

Personally I trust the HC selection smarts of UO and UW much more than i trust the Cal's HC selection smarts or those of any other person on this board who have no financial incentive or resources to come up with the right choice.
59bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
DiabloWags said:

SurvivorOf1and10fkaLEA said:


I hate what has happened to college /amateur athletics in recent decades. I find know need for a great bastion of enlightenment like the University of California to try to keep up with clown colleges like LSU, Alabama, or Oregon that have little to offer the world beyond athletic entertainment. I have professional sports teams I can root for to provide that form of entertainment.

I suggest some of you find your sense of self-worth in something less futile than how an academic institution competes in the sinister world of for-profit sports.

We have Championship intercollegiate teams in Rugby, Swimming, and Water Polo.
They consistently compete for titles.
Why?

Because they have coaches that know how to recruit and compete.
Sadly, I think that you're selling CAL short as just an academic institution and am accepting of the "bar" being low.
Competing on the playing field and in the classroom are not mutually exclusive.


They (rugby and water polo anyway) are sports which are not widely contested at the college level. It's easier to excel if there isn't a lot of competition.
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.