Not a fan of calling for people’s job but if you aren’t putting the student-athletes in the best position to succeed..
We have good talent and frankly, it’s going to waste. JW won’t get fired anytime soon but he really really needs to show leadership and change the course this team is taking..
Sort of surprised that nobody is calling out Starling for a soft catch in the end zone. Musgrave called the play and Jack delivered a strike. That catch was utter sh*t. You run into the ball and secure it. He gets some slack for being a back up but this is on the players too (not just the coaches).
My hot take was going to be the offense, Plummer, Starling, and Mavin Anderson all looked quite good on that final drive and it was encouraging how they moved down field -- with the receivers filling in late behind Hunter/Sturdivant as dare I say a bright spot to take away from the game.
I think that catch then un-catch will prove to be a learning experience for everyone, obviously Starling the most. Barring that play, Starling looked like a pretty talented big bodied receiver on that final drive. Hopefully it doesnt mess with his confidence.
I’m tired of JW after each and every loss he simply says it’s on him and takes responsibility over it. Taking responsibility means taking action and making changes; learning from past mistakes. He had 2 weeks to take responsibility and take action for the atrocious offensive showing at WSU. Apparently that wasn’t enough.
Again, in post game interview he says it’s on him and takes responsibility. Well let’s see it…? Will McClure and Musgrave be fired? Or will the staffing be changed/rotated some how?
As an example, he never fired Beau Baldwin, who left for the Cal Poly head coach job. Fun Fact:
"In Baldwin's second season at Cal, the Bears’ offensive efficiency ranked as the second worst among all Power Five teams.[3] Under Baldwin, the Cal offense led by their third-string quarterback was shutout for the first time in 20 years in its Pac-12 conference game against Utah on October 26, 2019.[4] As the offensive coordinator for California, the Bears finished the 2017, 2018, and 2019 football seasons with the 11th, 12th, and 12th ranked offenses respectively out of 12 teams in the Pac-12 Conference in Yards Per Game.[5] During those same seasons, the Bears finished with the 10th, 12th, and 12th ranked offenses respectively out of 12 teams in the Pac-12 Conference in Total Points Per Game under Baldwin's offensive leadership.[6]"
"'Boy, looking at ourselves, you just don’t win football games playing like we did today,” explained Coach Wilcox. “There’s no way.'"
Uh, yeah.
It's crystal clear that Coach Wilcox has delegated all offense to the O.C. and assistant coaches. Moreover, that the question arises as to his readiness to be more than a DC, for now. What I saw from our coaching staff, at least in the two previous games, but really for the past six years, when it came to offense, was a clear lack of adjustment and passion.
It is clear Musgraves is tired and disconnected from the players and seems unwilling or unable to adjust to their skills or to muster up those skills to match his playbook. It was very sad to watch Utah execute successfully some of the same plays, e.g. QB eligible reverse, that have failed under Musgraves guidance. If we think of coaches as teachers, then, as a teacher, I learned, early on, to not blame one's students for failing to learn. As one of my teaching mentors would quote an old saying, "If the student hasn't learned, the teacher hasn't taught." I learned real examples after rattling through my "well-planned" lessons only to see too much of my classes fail a quiz or test. I had not adjusted for their understanding of the content. Likewise, in sports, just because the team has the plays memorized does not mean they can or will execute as designed. The great sports teams are about heart and inspiration with a will and deep, deep desire to win. The coaches insure success by their leadership. Our offense has the ability, but lacks the coaching leadership.
After our disappointment, I watched two great, top twenty teams' games, yesterday. First, Alabama and Tennessee, then USC and Utah. Honestly, there were points, late in both games where the underdog team could have easily given up. But, instead, both struggled back. The coaches cared and the players knew that. The fans cared because, not just out of love of their schools, but, also, because the coach and players cared. All teams involved played with desire. During a time out, an injured SC player hobbled out to the field to inspire his teammates. We like to think of SC players as semi-professional cold killers, but their passion was every bit as intense as the Utes. I am not sure how to feel about the grown, adult "towel guys" on the SC sidelines (I mean what is that? Terrible Towels 2.0? The Steelers called and want their rally thing back). When the intense game ended, Utah players were shedding tears of joy, while SC players were shedding the same for sadness. Caleb Williams covered his eyes from the TV cameras, but, in a brief, unguarded moment, it was obvious he found the loss devastating. Intensity of the whole team and staff was not lacking.
Colorado's coaches were passionate and inspiring. Our's were not so much so, at least for the offense. In one moment, Jack Plummer seemed to trying to engage Musgraves in conversation, but the coach seemed to be more patronizing than appreciative of Plummer. I know it was only a moment, but results and a general offensive malaise bear out the conclusion that, well, the players are not inspired. I'll make it short, by both results and examples, it is clear our offense is not inspired and well-coached. Players are young people who need guidance and inspiration, not calloused pros punching a clock. Like with teachers, if the players are not succeeding, then coach has not coached.
Fun fact: the best pro teams, too, play with purpose and inspiration. I guess that is the fifth element to sports success and we are missing it on our offense.
Parting Shot: I do not think we have a complete, inspiring coaching package. For defense, we could not ask for better, but offense is almost like a second thought and over-delegated by the HC. As others have said, it is possible that this disconnect on offense underscores that JW is not ready to be a P5 head coach. I have to wonder, if we did a shake up, if JW would be willing to be D.C, under a new head coach like Troy Taylor. Just a thought to borrow from GoBears 49.
JW can be critical of execution, but much (most?) of that is on play calling. The Buffs were consistently stacking the box with 6/7 defenders to stop the run. Just daring Musgrave to call a pass play (or Plummer to audible) on 1st down and for Plummer to beat them over the top. Instead, let's just run Ott between the tackles into a 7 man-D. (Sequon Barkley wouldn't get much yards against a 7-man front.)
Not putting the players in teh best position to execute well is on the coaches.
I understand that Wilcox refuses to fire assistants and will not make changes during the season. Fine. By 1 Jan 23 everyone leading the offense better quit or fire Wilcox and bring in someone who can effect a change. Stop repeating failures. If Wilcox is as mad as he says, then someone mentor needs to him into looking in the mirror and removing the problem, even if he only sees himself.
Really fear Wilcox is just totally overmatched. That looks more and more likely after each week.
I’m sure they called the timeout as the clock expired prior to kicking the game tying FG, but honestly, it would not have surprised me in the slightest to see them fall asleep and fail to call it. I didn’t hear a whistle….
It's clear that something has to change. Wilcox says the loss is on him. But he also is critical of the players not playing well. Doing the same thing over and over again will not lead to success. The offense needs a shake-up what that means at this point I don't know. I do know our rushing total was abysmal meanwhile Air Force torched Colorado for 440 yards on the ground. We were getting whipped at the line of scrimmage so that Ott had no chance.
After 34 seasons, I am now on the fence about renewing for next year. There has to be some changes. This is no different than when Dykes could not field a decent defense, now it is the opposite with Wilcox and the offense.
I'm with you. I renewed for this year with hope. Ain't gonna happen for next year without major changes. Hell, I'm a die hard sunshine pumper but I'm not going to even attend another Cal game in Berkeley or up here in the PNW this year without some dramatic changes. Dark days indeed.
Where do we go from here? Fire Musgrave? Or entire Offensive staff? Replace Wilcox and start over? Can Knowlton be trusted to hire a new coach? So many questions and no feasible answers at this point. Emotions are in full effect. I've never been so depressed about Cal football as I am now especially when you look around the conference and see how other teams are succeeding to some extent (Beavers, Cougars).
I anticipate Mugrave and McClure will be goners, but only after the season. Wilcox will stay cause Knowlton is both conflict averse and because he cares so little about winning.
Knowlton is a lazy and narcissistic AD. He puts coaches in place (namely Fox) and then walks away thinking his job is done. He'd rather have people kiss his ring saying what a great job he's doing. I hope Chancellor Christ sees through this charade and does something memorable before she retires.
It's pretty clear we're in for at least another 4-5 years in the wilderness. Wilcox won't be able to turn it around, and the current AD can't be trusted to recognize the problem or hire a decent replacement (witness his handling of Mark Fox and the basketball program).
Another example of an overmatched, defense-first revenue sports head coach at Cal that struggles immensely to field a competent offense and relies on razor thin margins for error to win.
Noticing a trend here from Knowlton, who loves nothing more than to blame COVID for all the ills that befall the Department…
The only hope is that change comes from one level above: perhaps the Chancellor realizes that you can't keep going on like this if you ever want to hope to pay off the stadium debt. There's an additional motivator that wasn't there in previous periods of Cal sports apathy.
I actually get the Chancellor's ear from time to time as my best friend was her babysitter many years ago, and she always likes to chat with us during games. I had a long chat with her at the ND game and she is a bit distanced from making day to day decisions with the athletic department. After we lost to ND, she said, at least it was close. Don't expect much from the higher ups to make those necessary changes.
On a side note, she was really pissed about UCLA leaving the Pac-12 without any notice. She only found out through the media like the rest of us. That move may be a bigger issue with the debt
Oct 17, 2022·edited Oct 17, 2022Liked by Rick Chen
Totally understand why she would not be hands-on with the Athletic Department, nor should she be. But she needs to finally acknowledge that Knowlton was a bad hire. Her bad hire. And only she can rectify it.
Moreover, she has to know that Football pays the bills, including those bills for all non-rev sports, which includes women's sports. A struggling football team's revenue sinks all boats.
I certainly wouldn't expect the Chancellor to be in on day-to-day athletics operations. She has larger responsibilities. But I also hope that if attendance craters (and it will), the financial realities should become apparent.
That's not a guarantee, though, because there has always been a strong default pull at Berkeley away from spending money on football. The Tedford years were an unusual exception. But again, the stadium debt is kind of an unavoidable problem.
Totally hear you…and after this game, much of the fan base is in agreement. Frustration with the entire program and AD is as high as it’s been since the Holmoe years.
Everyone can agree, it all comes down to offense…the D has played well enough to get a win in all 3 road losses. However, the P10/12 has always been a league that pushed for offense….you have to be able to score points and have a functional O. While Cal’s struggles are a combination of personnel, play calling and player execution, something needs to change. It’s simply not working, and if yesterdays embarrassing loss doesn’t light a fire and lead to tangible change, it may never…but now is the time.
Wilcox’s road record is a problem, though. Not having the kids ready to play in a winnable game off a Bye is one as well. This is a program on the decline, while similar programs (Or St, Wazzu, U of A) are ascending. Wilcox needs to change SOMETHING…here’s hoping he does.
The Bear will not quit…the Bear will not die…but the Bear will hibernate.
If I'm reading the SI article correctly, the buyout is essentially one year of comp (see last par of article). If correct, eminently doable.
"If Cal terminates Wilcox without cause at the conclusion of the first year it must pay him $3.6 million. That buyout increases to $3.75 million in 2023, $3.9 million in 2024, $4.05 million in 2025 and $4.2 million in 2026."
While competitive in nature, I think success is secondary to him…otherwise he would’ve taken the Oregon job, like 99% of the other coaches would. His decision to remain in Berkeley as opposed to Eugene remains baffling.
Depends on how he defines personal success -- if it's just about Ws, then he should obviously have gone to Oregon. But if he defines success as building a program up from the bottom, then it makes sense for him to stay at Cal. (Just to be clear, I'm not saying that he's actually succeeding here.)
It's always going to be a judgment call by the refs, but what they look for according to the NCAA rule book is that the player BOTH 1. "secures control" of the football AND 2. "continues to maintain control". And this applies to not only the field of play (where making another "football move" is possible), but to the endzone, and similarly to when the player gets a toe in but continues out of bounds.
Clearly Starling had #1 (secure), but #2 (maintain) is the issue and more subjective by nature.
In any event, it's not an instantaneous TD (or completion in any context) by securing it alone.
Nobody is saying you have to go down for it to be ruled a touchdown. And the fact that the article references going to the ground doesn't mean that the general rule doesn't apply.
The general rule for a completed pass is the player meets three conditions:
1. Secures firm control with the hand(s) or arm(s) of a live ball in flight
before the ball touches the ground, and
2. Touches the ground in bounds with any part of his body, and then
3. Maintains control of the ball long enough to enable him to perform an act common to the game, i.e., long enough to pitch or hand the ball, advance it, avoid or ward off an opponent, etc.
This rule applies to anywhere on the field, including the endzone.
In Starling's case, he clearly had #1 and #2 above, but the refs decided he didnt have #3.
If you're hung up on #3 and "perform an act", go back and focus instead on the words "long enough to enable him to" (gendered pronoun aside). Then repeat to yourself "long enough". "Long enough".
You then realize the "act" is hypothetical. You don't literally have to perform an act, you just need to control the ball long enough that you hypothetically could perform an act.
Obviously, there are no acts left to be performed after you complete the catch in the endzone for a TD (or similarly if you go out of bounds in the process of completing the catch).
The requirement is simply that you maintained control of the ball for a minimum duration of time.
The minimum duration of time is defined as the time it would take to be in a position to hypothetically perform another act.
Cal finishes 4-8 at best, and Wilcox probably gets fired at most any other school. Only the baffling extension handed out by an incompetent AD saves him.
What’s the excuse for poor recruiting at OL for the last 5 years? The OL and offense has been average to bad every year under Wilcox, well before uncertainty with conference alignment became an issue.
We have dozens of LB's bcos he recruits AND signs them. (Kinda like SonnyD overloading on WR's.) We have a weak OL because he is not successful recruiting them. (btw: recruiting big uglies was a Wisconsin speciality when JW was in Madison, so he should know their value.)
We have an erratic Grad QB bcos JW can't recruit any 4* high schoolers.
Not a fan of calling for people’s job but if you aren’t putting the student-athletes in the best position to succeed..
We have good talent and frankly, it’s going to waste. JW won’t get fired anytime soon but he really really needs to show leadership and change the course this team is taking..
Sort of surprised that nobody is calling out Starling for a soft catch in the end zone. Musgrave called the play and Jack delivered a strike. That catch was utter sh*t. You run into the ball and secure it. He gets some slack for being a back up but this is on the players too (not just the coaches).
My hot take was going to be the offense, Plummer, Starling, and Mavin Anderson all looked quite good on that final drive and it was encouraging how they moved down field -- with the receivers filling in late behind Hunter/Sturdivant as dare I say a bright spot to take away from the game.
I think that catch then un-catch will prove to be a learning experience for everyone, obviously Starling the most. Barring that play, Starling looked like a pretty talented big bodied receiver on that final drive. Hopefully it doesnt mess with his confidence.
Yeah and I feel bad for calling any one player out. Guy was kicking butt off the bench til that happened.
I’m tired of JW after each and every loss he simply says it’s on him and takes responsibility over it. Taking responsibility means taking action and making changes; learning from past mistakes. He had 2 weeks to take responsibility and take action for the atrocious offensive showing at WSU. Apparently that wasn’t enough.
Again, in post game interview he says it’s on him and takes responsibility. Well let’s see it…? Will McClure and Musgrave be fired? Or will the staffing be changed/rotated some how?
Maybe he took responsibility after WSU loss and started coaching OL and took over offensive playcalling. And it got worse.
Stanford beat notre dame too. This is the darkest timeline
As an example, he never fired Beau Baldwin, who left for the Cal Poly head coach job. Fun Fact:
"In Baldwin's second season at Cal, the Bears’ offensive efficiency ranked as the second worst among all Power Five teams.[3] Under Baldwin, the Cal offense led by their third-string quarterback was shutout for the first time in 20 years in its Pac-12 conference game against Utah on October 26, 2019.[4] As the offensive coordinator for California, the Bears finished the 2017, 2018, and 2019 football seasons with the 11th, 12th, and 12th ranked offenses respectively out of 12 teams in the Pac-12 Conference in Yards Per Game.[5] During those same seasons, the Bears finished with the 10th, 12th, and 12th ranked offenses respectively out of 12 teams in the Pac-12 Conference in Total Points Per Game under Baldwin's offensive leadership.[6]"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Beau_Baldwin
At Cal Poly is 3-17 over the past three years.
Fun Facts, right? His loyalty is commendable, but it can also be construed as conysim,
"'Boy, looking at ourselves, you just don’t win football games playing like we did today,” explained Coach Wilcox. “There’s no way.'"
Uh, yeah.
It's crystal clear that Coach Wilcox has delegated all offense to the O.C. and assistant coaches. Moreover, that the question arises as to his readiness to be more than a DC, for now. What I saw from our coaching staff, at least in the two previous games, but really for the past six years, when it came to offense, was a clear lack of adjustment and passion.
It is clear Musgraves is tired and disconnected from the players and seems unwilling or unable to adjust to their skills or to muster up those skills to match his playbook. It was very sad to watch Utah execute successfully some of the same plays, e.g. QB eligible reverse, that have failed under Musgraves guidance. If we think of coaches as teachers, then, as a teacher, I learned, early on, to not blame one's students for failing to learn. As one of my teaching mentors would quote an old saying, "If the student hasn't learned, the teacher hasn't taught." I learned real examples after rattling through my "well-planned" lessons only to see too much of my classes fail a quiz or test. I had not adjusted for their understanding of the content. Likewise, in sports, just because the team has the plays memorized does not mean they can or will execute as designed. The great sports teams are about heart and inspiration with a will and deep, deep desire to win. The coaches insure success by their leadership. Our offense has the ability, but lacks the coaching leadership.
After our disappointment, I watched two great, top twenty teams' games, yesterday. First, Alabama and Tennessee, then USC and Utah. Honestly, there were points, late in both games where the underdog team could have easily given up. But, instead, both struggled back. The coaches cared and the players knew that. The fans cared because, not just out of love of their schools, but, also, because the coach and players cared. All teams involved played with desire. During a time out, an injured SC player hobbled out to the field to inspire his teammates. We like to think of SC players as semi-professional cold killers, but their passion was every bit as intense as the Utes. I am not sure how to feel about the grown, adult "towel guys" on the SC sidelines (I mean what is that? Terrible Towels 2.0? The Steelers called and want their rally thing back). When the intense game ended, Utah players were shedding tears of joy, while SC players were shedding the same for sadness. Caleb Williams covered his eyes from the TV cameras, but, in a brief, unguarded moment, it was obvious he found the loss devastating. Intensity of the whole team and staff was not lacking.
Colorado's coaches were passionate and inspiring. Our's were not so much so, at least for the offense. In one moment, Jack Plummer seemed to trying to engage Musgraves in conversation, but the coach seemed to be more patronizing than appreciative of Plummer. I know it was only a moment, but results and a general offensive malaise bear out the conclusion that, well, the players are not inspired. I'll make it short, by both results and examples, it is clear our offense is not inspired and well-coached. Players are young people who need guidance and inspiration, not calloused pros punching a clock. Like with teachers, if the players are not succeeding, then coach has not coached.
Fun fact: the best pro teams, too, play with purpose and inspiration. I guess that is the fifth element to sports success and we are missing it on our offense.
Parting Shot: I do not think we have a complete, inspiring coaching package. For defense, we could not ask for better, but offense is almost like a second thought and over-delegated by the HC. As others have said, it is possible that this disconnect on offense underscores that JW is not ready to be a P5 head coach. I have to wonder, if we did a shake up, if JW would be willing to be D.C, under a new head coach like Troy Taylor. Just a thought to borrow from GoBears 49.
Meanwhile, we die, again...
https://media.giphy.com/media/7sN1E4GmLMqebhc8wL/giphy.gif
Troy Taylor...hopefully we can retain most of our starters.
Ott will be in the portal the day after our last game.
Wilcox had six years and paid millions of dollars to show improvement and win. Face it, its not going to happen.
Yeah, the consensus is that he's a good defense coach, but just out to lunch on offense.
JW can be critical of execution, but much (most?) of that is on play calling. The Buffs were consistently stacking the box with 6/7 defenders to stop the run. Just daring Musgrave to call a pass play (or Plummer to audible) on 1st down and for Plummer to beat them over the top. Instead, let's just run Ott between the tackles into a 7 man-D. (Sequon Barkley wouldn't get much yards against a 7-man front.)
Not putting the players in teh best position to execute well is on the coaches.
Has Musgrave been fired yet?
This was the Cheez It Bowl 2.0 with the offensive ineptness by each team.
I understand that Wilcox refuses to fire assistants and will not make changes during the season. Fine. By 1 Jan 23 everyone leading the offense better quit or fire Wilcox and bring in someone who can effect a change. Stop repeating failures. If Wilcox is as mad as he says, then someone mentor needs to him into looking in the mirror and removing the problem, even if he only sees himself.
I don't imagine there will be any changes to clarify I mean personnel changes...
That was a rhetorical question, Wilcox isn’t firing anyone.
Really fear Wilcox is just totally overmatched. That looks more and more likely after each week.
I’m sure they called the timeout as the clock expired prior to kicking the game tying FG, but honestly, it would not have surprised me in the slightest to see them fall asleep and fail to call it. I didn’t hear a whistle….
It's clear that something has to change. Wilcox says the loss is on him. But he also is critical of the players not playing well. Doing the same thing over and over again will not lead to success. The offense needs a shake-up what that means at this point I don't know. I do know our rushing total was abysmal meanwhile Air Force torched Colorado for 440 yards on the ground. We were getting whipped at the line of scrimmage so that Ott had no chance.
After 34 seasons, I am now on the fence about renewing for next year. There has to be some changes. This is no different than when Dykes could not field a decent defense, now it is the opposite with Wilcox and the offense.
I'm with you. I renewed for this year with hope. Ain't gonna happen for next year without major changes. Hell, I'm a die hard sunshine pumper but I'm not going to even attend another Cal game in Berkeley or up here in the PNW this year without some dramatic changes. Dark days indeed.
CalBears91 calling DDDOOOOOOOOOOOMMMMM!
Welcome, my friend.
Where do we go from here? Fire Musgrave? Or entire Offensive staff? Replace Wilcox and start over? Can Knowlton be trusted to hire a new coach? So many questions and no feasible answers at this point. Emotions are in full effect. I've never been so depressed about Cal football as I am now especially when you look around the conference and see how other teams are succeeding to some extent (Beavers, Cougars).
Troy Taylor
He has Sac State cooking.
I anticipate Mugrave and McClure will be goners, but only after the season. Wilcox will stay cause Knowlton is both conflict averse and because he cares so little about winning.
Knowlton is a lazy and narcissistic AD. He puts coaches in place (namely Fox) and then walks away thinking his job is done. He'd rather have people kiss his ring saying what a great job he's doing. I hope Chancellor Christ sees through this charade and does something memorable before she retires.
The fact that winning is clearly lower on the list of priorities is a huge part of the problem…
It's pretty clear we're in for at least another 4-5 years in the wilderness. Wilcox won't be able to turn it around, and the current AD can't be trusted to recognize the problem or hire a decent replacement (witness his handling of Mark Fox and the basketball program).
Dark days ahead.
Another example of an overmatched, defense-first revenue sports head coach at Cal that struggles immensely to field a competent offense and relies on razor thin margins for error to win.
Noticing a trend here from Knowlton, who loves nothing more than to blame COVID for all the ills that befall the Department…
The only hope is that change comes from one level above: perhaps the Chancellor realizes that you can't keep going on like this if you ever want to hope to pay off the stadium debt. There's an additional motivator that wasn't there in previous periods of Cal sports apathy.
I actually get the Chancellor's ear from time to time as my best friend was her babysitter many years ago, and she always likes to chat with us during games. I had a long chat with her at the ND game and she is a bit distanced from making day to day decisions with the athletic department. After we lost to ND, she said, at least it was close. Don't expect much from the higher ups to make those necessary changes.
On a side note, she was really pissed about UCLA leaving the Pac-12 without any notice. She only found out through the media like the rest of us. That move may be a bigger issue with the debt
Totally understand why she would not be hands-on with the Athletic Department, nor should she be. But she needs to finally acknowledge that Knowlton was a bad hire. Her bad hire. And only she can rectify it.
Moreover, she has to know that Football pays the bills, including those bills for all non-rev sports, which includes women's sports. A struggling football team's revenue sinks all boats.
I certainly wouldn't expect the Chancellor to be in on day-to-day athletics operations. She has larger responsibilities. But I also hope that if attendance craters (and it will), the financial realities should become apparent.
That's not a guarantee, though, because there has always been a strong default pull at Berkeley away from spending money on football. The Tedford years were an unusual exception. But again, the stadium debt is kind of an unavoidable problem.
Totally hear you…and after this game, much of the fan base is in agreement. Frustration with the entire program and AD is as high as it’s been since the Holmoe years.
Everyone can agree, it all comes down to offense…the D has played well enough to get a win in all 3 road losses. However, the P10/12 has always been a league that pushed for offense….you have to be able to score points and have a functional O. While Cal’s struggles are a combination of personnel, play calling and player execution, something needs to change. It’s simply not working, and if yesterdays embarrassing loss doesn’t light a fire and lead to tangible change, it may never…but now is the time.
Wilcox’s road record is a problem, though. Not having the kids ready to play in a winnable game off a Bye is one as well. This is a program on the decline, while similar programs (Or St, Wazzu, U of A) are ascending. Wilcox needs to change SOMETHING…here’s hoping he does.
The Bear will not quit…the Bear will not die…but the Bear will hibernate.
Go Bears
Thanks for the article, Rick…no doubt another tough one to write.
With appreciation - here’s hoping brighter days are ahead!!!
If I'm reading the SI article correctly, the buyout is essentially one year of comp (see last par of article). If correct, eminently doable.
"If Cal terminates Wilcox without cause at the conclusion of the first year it must pay him $3.6 million. That buyout increases to $3.75 million in 2023, $3.9 million in 2024, $4.05 million in 2025 and $4.2 million in 2026."
https://www.si.com/college/cal/news/wilcox-contract-details
I agree. The article is likely incorrect.
He's gonna try. He is competitive in nature and definitely wants to have success. Whether he's capable at it is a difference issue.
While competitive in nature, I think success is secondary to him…otherwise he would’ve taken the Oregon job, like 99% of the other coaches would. His decision to remain in Berkeley as opposed to Eugene remains baffling.
Depends on how he defines personal success -- if it's just about Ws, then he should obviously have gone to Oregon. But if he defines success as building a program up from the bottom, then it makes sense for him to stay at Cal. (Just to be clear, I'm not saying that he's actually succeeding here.)
Argument that it wasn’t:
The refs ruled it wasn’t a catch and we lost.
Why are you citing NFL rules for a CFB game?
It's always going to be a judgment call by the refs, but what they look for according to the NCAA rule book is that the player BOTH 1. "secures control" of the football AND 2. "continues to maintain control". And this applies to not only the field of play (where making another "football move" is possible), but to the endzone, and similarly to when the player gets a toe in but continues out of bounds.
Clearly Starling had #1 (secure), but #2 (maintain) is the issue and more subjective by nature.
In any event, it's not an instantaneous TD (or completion in any context) by securing it alone.
You can download the rule book for free here https://www.ncaapublications.com/p-4648-2022-ncaa-football-rules-book.aspx
but this usa today article has some quotes and links..
https://ftw.usatoday.com/2021/01/what-is-a-catch-ncaa-college-football-rules
Nobody is saying you have to go down for it to be ruled a touchdown. And the fact that the article references going to the ground doesn't mean that the general rule doesn't apply.
The general rule for a completed pass is the player meets three conditions:
1. Secures firm control with the hand(s) or arm(s) of a live ball in flight
before the ball touches the ground, and
2. Touches the ground in bounds with any part of his body, and then
3. Maintains control of the ball long enough to enable him to perform an act common to the game, i.e., long enough to pitch or hand the ball, advance it, avoid or ward off an opponent, etc.
This rule applies to anywhere on the field, including the endzone.
In Starling's case, he clearly had #1 and #2 above, but the refs decided he didnt have #3.
If you're hung up on #3 and "perform an act", go back and focus instead on the words "long enough to enable him to" (gendered pronoun aside). Then repeat to yourself "long enough". "Long enough".
You then realize the "act" is hypothetical. You don't literally have to perform an act, you just need to control the ball long enough that you hypothetically could perform an act.
Obviously, there are no acts left to be performed after you complete the catch in the endzone for a TD (or similarly if you go out of bounds in the process of completing the catch).
The requirement is simply that you maintained control of the ball for a minimum duration of time.
The minimum duration of time is defined as the time it would take to be in a position to hypothetically perform another act.
Cal finishes 4-8 at best, and Wilcox probably gets fired at most any other school. Only the baffling extension handed out by an incompetent AD saves him.
What’s the excuse for poor recruiting at OL for the last 5 years? The OL and offense has been average to bad every year under Wilcox, well before uncertainty with conference alignment became an issue.
What specifically, is out of his control?
We have dozens of LB's bcos he recruits AND signs them. (Kinda like SonnyD overloading on WR's.) We have a weak OL because he is not successful recruiting them. (btw: recruiting big uglies was a Wisconsin speciality when JW was in Madison, so he should know their value.)
We have an erratic Grad QB bcos JW can't recruit any 4* high schoolers.