For a fiscally conservative program, it’s mind boggling that we’ve paid close to $8 mil. to the man to get us even backwards from a spot I think we wouldn’t have guessed possible to move backwards from. Entitlement of the highest order.
Maybe Knowlton actually hates Fox and wants him to look as bad as possible before he cuts loose. Would have been better for both sides to have parted ways early in the Pac-12 season.
Okay, and hear me out...Maybe the Chancellor's problem is not figuring out "the brand." Maybe it's not about how do we merge "Cal" and "UC Berkeley." Maybe, it's that she hired a bad A.D. Maybe, she should be focusing on getting people hired into the Athletic Department that have some minimal knowledge of how to manage NCAA Division I athletics at Cal, because maybe Jim Knowlton was very competent and good at the job at another university.
Maybe the Chancellor's AD is too slow out of the blocks in hiring and firing coaches who cannot be successful at Cal.
IMHO, being Athletic Director at Cal has never been an easy job. I think everyone knows this. Everyone knows the budgetary issues, also. But if Cal wants to play men's football, basketball and women's basketball at the Division I level, I think the problem here has nothing to do with whether a task force figures out how to marry "Cal" and "UC Berkeley."
There is only way out of this mess and that's by Cal athletics winning. Of course, Cal is not going to be Auburn. No one expects that. Of course, winning isn't everything-again, people who support Cal Athletics already believe this.
Maybe you don't need a task force to tell you the obvious-merging names does not help you to win. Winning, not every game but some, because performing well is how you win. You can even end up losing by a basket or two in overtme-no one is going to walk away from a team that loses in that manner.
But you cannot lose as much as Cal revenue sports + women's basketball do and not have a problem that a task force is not the vehicle for solving.
On the contrary, merging the names has everything to do with winning in the future. Cal's recent seasons spent in the doldrums is largely due to the level of athlete we are permitted to recruit. Simplifying the brand, making sure 17 year olds know that the #1 university in the world (U.S. News & World report Nov '22) is the University of California also known as Cal. Our recruiting margins are so thin, every head turned our way is a potential difference maker.
IMHO, you're overestimating the role of branding and underestimating the role of finances in this. I think a task force exploring, consulting other universities, etc. on finding new donors, raising money, etc. at this particular moment (NILS) would do more good than a task force deciding to call Cal "Cal Berkeley," which I think will be the outcome. But I would be glad to be proven wrong.
My mother worked for years in the Athletic Dept at Cal. I spent every Saturday mornings up at the office with her when football played at home. When my mother gave birth to my brother, and I and my dad were headed off to then, "Harmon Gym" to watch Cal play, it was announced in the Daily Cal. We lived at Oxford and Vine, and because my parents were young, players would come over to our apartment for dinner. My parents partied with Joe Kapp and told a funny story about how he was drunk one time and tore a door of a room off its hinges, so my mom could use the phone and call the sitter.
I saw more college basketball and football games than any of the boys in my class. At Memorial Stadium, as a child, I cried in the stands when Cal would lose to USC. With all of my heart, I'd like to be proven wrong, because I just want to see the student athletes succeed. I just want to watch reasonably entertaining games.
Or, maybe the Chancellor doesn't care that much on winning. ('There is more to athletics than winning'.). Moreover, don't let the Chancellor off the hook and put all the blame in our incompetent AD as it was the Chancellor who signed him to an 8-year extension.
btw: check out Knowlton's resume: he was at a small private D3 which also had a D1 hockey team, but his main and only D1 experience was at Air Force and Army, i.e, both government-run programs. (By that I mean, nothing gets done on campus without the General's approval.)
By any stretch of the imagination, Jim was not a good hire. His resume should have been an auto-reject.
Actually, I don't let her off the hook. Hiring and firing starts and stops with her. I think her judgement is off, and I don't think whatever her task force comes up with re: Cal and UC Berkeley, that it will make a difference in terms of getting Cal athletics "right."
The 4th and 5th graders who played at half time were far more cohesive and skilled as a team. If the hoop/game was scaled to their size they would’ve handed both stanfurd and us an L.
Guy inherited a bad situation, but was not able to rise to the task. That first recruiting class was just so underwhelming and you are seeing the consequences now. There are lots of examples of coaches that had early success but slowly declined, partly because they failed to adapt their style and approach.
For a fiscally conservative program, it’s mind boggling that we’ve paid close to $8 mil. to the man to get us even backwards from a spot I think we wouldn’t have guessed possible to move backwards from. Entitlement of the highest order.
Maybe if Cal was a charter school we would be better at sports.
*sigh
Just when one thought Fox was safe.
El Zorro must go.
I know these reports are a labor of love for the kind, Cal-loving writers, but can’t we catch the easy ones like “fifth straight in a row”?
Maybe Knowlton actually hates Fox and wants him to look as bad as possible before he cuts loose. Would have been better for both sides to have parted ways early in the Pac-12 season.
Okay, and hear me out...Maybe the Chancellor's problem is not figuring out "the brand." Maybe it's not about how do we merge "Cal" and "UC Berkeley." Maybe, it's that she hired a bad A.D. Maybe, she should be focusing on getting people hired into the Athletic Department that have some minimal knowledge of how to manage NCAA Division I athletics at Cal, because maybe Jim Knowlton was very competent and good at the job at another university.
Maybe the Chancellor's AD is too slow out of the blocks in hiring and firing coaches who cannot be successful at Cal.
IMHO, being Athletic Director at Cal has never been an easy job. I think everyone knows this. Everyone knows the budgetary issues, also. But if Cal wants to play men's football, basketball and women's basketball at the Division I level, I think the problem here has nothing to do with whether a task force figures out how to marry "Cal" and "UC Berkeley."
There is only way out of this mess and that's by Cal athletics winning. Of course, Cal is not going to be Auburn. No one expects that. Of course, winning isn't everything-again, people who support Cal Athletics already believe this.
Maybe you don't need a task force to tell you the obvious-merging names does not help you to win. Winning, not every game but some, because performing well is how you win. You can even end up losing by a basket or two in overtme-no one is going to walk away from a team that loses in that manner.
But you cannot lose as much as Cal revenue sports + women's basketball do and not have a problem that a task force is not the vehicle for solving.
On the contrary, merging the names has everything to do with winning in the future. Cal's recent seasons spent in the doldrums is largely due to the level of athlete we are permitted to recruit. Simplifying the brand, making sure 17 year olds know that the #1 university in the world (U.S. News & World report Nov '22) is the University of California also known as Cal. Our recruiting margins are so thin, every head turned our way is a potential difference maker.
IMHO, you're overestimating the role of branding and underestimating the role of finances in this. I think a task force exploring, consulting other universities, etc. on finding new donors, raising money, etc. at this particular moment (NILS) would do more good than a task force deciding to call Cal "Cal Berkeley," which I think will be the outcome. But I would be glad to be proven wrong.
My mother worked for years in the Athletic Dept at Cal. I spent every Saturday mornings up at the office with her when football played at home. When my mother gave birth to my brother, and I and my dad were headed off to then, "Harmon Gym" to watch Cal play, it was announced in the Daily Cal. We lived at Oxford and Vine, and because my parents were young, players would come over to our apartment for dinner. My parents partied with Joe Kapp and told a funny story about how he was drunk one time and tore a door of a room off its hinges, so my mom could use the phone and call the sitter.
I saw more college basketball and football games than any of the boys in my class. At Memorial Stadium, as a child, I cried in the stands when Cal would lose to USC. With all of my heart, I'd like to be proven wrong, because I just want to see the student athletes succeed. I just want to watch reasonably entertaining games.
Or, maybe the Chancellor doesn't care that much on winning. ('There is more to athletics than winning'.). Moreover, don't let the Chancellor off the hook and put all the blame in our incompetent AD as it was the Chancellor who signed him to an 8-year extension.
btw: check out Knowlton's resume: he was at a small private D3 which also had a D1 hockey team, but his main and only D1 experience was at Air Force and Army, i.e, both government-run programs. (By that I mean, nothing gets done on campus without the General's approval.)
By any stretch of the imagination, Jim was not a good hire. His resume should have been an auto-reject.
Actually, I don't let her off the hook. Hiring and firing starts and stops with her. I think her judgement is off, and I don't think whatever her task force comes up with re: Cal and UC Berkeley, that it will make a difference in terms of getting Cal athletics "right."
We may never be an Auburn, but we should be a Michigan.
I still cannot believe I unironically went to this game. Silly me.
Respect for suffering thru it
I’m going to make a gofundme for emotional damages to get my money back
The 4th and 5th graders who played at half time were far more cohesive and skilled as a team. If the hoop/game was scaled to their size they would’ve handed both stanfurd and us an L.
Does this mean that Fox isn't getting an extension?
This headline does not adequately capture what happened. We should just forfeit and save gas money.
:lolsob:
Hey, it's not like Cal lost by 30.
Can we start talking about who replaces Fox?
I’d like to see Shantay Legans get a look. He's been solid and I was impressed with Portland early in the year.
This has gone on too long. Get fox out of here NOW!
Mozilla.
That is all.
agreed
No, Fox can coach. But he can't recruit to Cal. Wyking had none of the former but a little of the latter. End result in both cases, bad hoops.
He can’t recruit and he is a mediocre coach.
Guy inherited a bad situation, but was not able to rise to the task. That first recruiting class was just so underwhelming and you are seeing the consequences now. There are lots of examples of coaches that had early success but slowly declined, partly because they failed to adapt their style and approach.