I rode my motorcycle 1500 miles to see this joke of a game. Total incompetence. We made them look like Alabama. Horrible play calls. Horrible execution. Horrendous Oline play. Dumpster fire ala Holmoe. I will not attend another Cal game this year. And I'm die hard. That was beyond a joke. I hope they win a few for the seniors, but that level of total ineptitude does not happen accidentally. And have I read today that Wilcox has fired Ragle? No? No big changes? No? I've been all in on Wilcox, and certainly take nothing away from him as a man and saying the right things and the guys graduating and all that, but football is game played to win. And losing like that after losing like those others, too much. Next?
It comes down to recruiting - the GPA requirement has killed it. We have no outstanding athletes on the team - no speed and football is a speed game now. And you can't coach speed either.
The current roster is full of....ok players. With top notch coaching and development, what would be the ceiling? I'm not sure it would be much higher than where they're at. Maybe .500
So, maybe a little better, and perhaps a smidge of support for coaching not doing the job. But still, Cal projects to be a middling Pac12 team, and here we are.
Losing to the Cougs, means this argument doesn't matter. When we lose to $C we can say because of talent. But losing that way to the Cougs? That's coaching.
Losing to the Cougs minus Mike Leach. I’m not even convinced their current coach is any good or half the coach Leach is. This would be like Tedford losing to Walt Harris.
Harder, yes. But we have traditionally had speed, particularly on the offensive side of the ball. The utter lack of it has mostly corresponded with Wilcox's tenure. That's more a symptom of not being an offensive coach and not having an offensive system (if we have one at all) that shows much potential for upside to those types of prospects.
I don't agree with you on many fronts but let's start with the simplest only because it's the most obvious:
"In either of those above cases, do you see them getting better than they were in 2019? With this staff at the helm?
I can’t answer that question for you."
which you opine and answer yourself, just above this text with:
"(We don’t need to devote any mental energy to discussing the 1-3 win scenarios, which, I hope the athletic department recognizes would have to result in his ouster.)" I would have added emphasis if this site allowed me, but it doesn't.
If you want Wilcox out, just have the courage to say so. Wilcox is building a program but along the way he has made significant and common mistakes of a business manager / coach. One of his top 3 was hiring Greatwood. While GW had a great record/reputation he was clearly on the tail end of his career and wasn't a particularly great recruiter (Craig being his only blue chip). Nepotism is a manager/coach's worst act. Wilcox has repeated that with Sirmon. For Cal to be successful OL is one of the 2 foundations (DL is the other) that must exist. So, starting out with GW put the program back 2 - 3 years. A better solution would have been to hire an OL coach equivalent of Browning (current DL coach). Angus wasn't much of a step up from GW and recruiting is still iffy on OL. It doesn't look like Angus will bring in any blue chippers with this cycle ~ he's on the hot seat, starting with these next 2 weeks of "development".
The second major mistake is sticking with CG for so long. Albeit there are several reasonable reasons for this: Cal doesn't have anyone better or they had but they all transferred. Losing 2 QBs last spring falls on the staff. The other obvious reason is Cal's inability a recruit a top QB. I would describe a "top" QB not necessarily as a 4* or 5* but one that can throw the ball with velocity (accuracy can be taught, velocity can't). Should Wilcox go down he will have to reflect on sticking with CG. Many managers stick to their A player for too long only to find out later, much too late, that the underling was much better.
I am still a Wilcox supporter while recognizing that his mistakes are common and therefore stupid. Were I his advisor I would recommend several things by EOY:
Angus: improve this OL and get me 8 OL that I can depend on or your ass is gone in December.
Musgrave: play Millner a minimum of 3 series per game from now until the last game, starting after the Oregun game (it would be cruel to put a freshmen into an away game at Oregun as his first experience).
Sirmon/Browning/Watson: keep doing what you are doing
1) I don't have any problems with people not agreeing with me. That's totally fine, and as I've been dealing with on Twitter this morning, there still are some loyalists to the project, and even some people who write about the team are on that side of things. More power to you if you feel that way.
2) I am not comfortable using my position to advocate for peoples' firing, because at the end of the day, we are dealing with real people. This is consistent with how I have operated this space -- you will never see me say the words that someone should be fired because I am under no delusion that me saying it matters to anyone important -- and it is admittedly a tricky thing to hold because I am a fan of the program on game days, and an analyst on all the others. I am unabashedly rooting for the positive outcome, in all circumstances.
3) There have certainly been hiring mistakes, because there've been so many opportunities to do so -- which is why I don't agree understand the impulse to let him try again at this point with a new assistant cycle. If you acknowledge this is the case, why should he get the chance to continue so? Shouldn't he be held accountable for those hires?
4) The program feels good about Kai, but putting him in this kind of situation is...tough? The bye is a good point to re-evaluate so, maybe?
5) The OL hasn't always been the issue each week. The point about recruiting, I agree.
6) Chase has already been limited, but I don't think anyone better has been in the wings waiting in any of those years. Why we didn't always play in a way to help him out, knowing those limits, is frustrating, to say the least.
Again, I *want* Wilcox to succeed. I don't think it's unreasonable to start to lose hope in that, given the way things are going.
That said, is it a fine line saying "I hope the athletic department recognizes would have to result in his ouster" versus saying, "he should be fired" they are essentially saying the same thing.
Sure he's had a few bad hires and also a few good hires: GA & Browning (with a good OL Musgrave would be a good hire as well). So yeah he should get another cycle if needed. My point incorporated/included that he needs to START firing as well.
Note I'm advocating putting Millner in a very controlled situation: not at Oregun. I'm not advocating throwing him to the lions. So yes, let him see some PT this season.
If we have 4 games remaining and have zero chance for a bowl game I expect to see a lot of Millner. 4 games preserves his redshirt and gets him valuable experience even if we are getting our arse kicked. So if that is indeed the scenario and I hope it's not, we had better see Millner, else I would consider that poor planning on Wilcox's part. 4 games depending on record is an obvious BIG decision point for Wilcox.
Taco, what are you seeing that makes you want Sirmon and Watson to keep doing what they are doing? The defense has regressed massively. In fact, it might be the worst in the conference.
I feel that in previous posts I have explained this succinctly and repeatedly. So, I will paraphrase:
GA had League talent to work with, this staff has some "potential" League talent: Hearns, Scott. The jury on Watson is recruiting, for now he is failing but guess what so did GA, GA left the DB cupboard bare ~ fans conveniently ignore that. GA didn't bring anyone in!! So perhaps it is GA that caused the mess in the defensive backfield? Has anyone mentioned that?
Sirmon had League talent in Weaver and K ~ Cal fans seem to ignore that it is SIRMON who coached them up to League players. Do you think that Sirmon has lost his coaching ability or PERHAPS he is dealing with younger players that haven't fully developed yet?? Oladejo is a freshmen, Paster (1st year at ILB) keep an eye on his development ~ he could be a League player!! Tattersall had his opportunity but I think he is a role player now. Some players practice well but play poorly.
Sirmon as a DC. He is as aggressive and talented as DTR, he is just working with a very young defense. How many true freshmen, RS freshmen, or first year players are playing on D right now??? Hearns, Roberts, Saunders, McKenzie, Gamble, Oledajo, Paster, Correiea. It's a young defense that with the sole exception of Scott is getting little production from super seniors or GA players: Hicks, Anusiem ~ did these two forget what GA taught them or are they just not the same level as Hawkins, Bynum and Davis?? So Sirmon has to play it close to the vest for now.
Cal is and only can be a "developmental" program. It ain't 'bama. Who knows how good bamas coaches are, anyone could coach that talent or have their coaching deficiencies covered up by the talent. Hell bama is so talented they can play base defense and dominate. Most coaches know how to coach base.
So given the developmental nature of Cal, which is subject to greater deviations when it comes to recruiting it is no wonder Cal will have deeper valleys and at times (Weaver era) higher peaks. Doesn't mean that all of a sudden Sirmon can't coach.
My take is this. Next year Cal will have the best front seven on D in the conference. This will be due to the development of the younger players and the addition of BJ. The DBs will still be a weakness given GA (ha) didn't recruit anyone.
I agree that some of the younger players on D have flashed, and I hope they continue to get more minutes. Missing Brett Johnson hurts us too. While there are indeed fluctuations in what level of talent we have on the roster, I still think that you’re letting Sirmon off too easy.
Good article, one minor question or point of clarification.
“ has some parallels to the way Oregon State dominating the Bears was for the 2016 team”
Did mean Washington State instead of Oregon State? We actually showed fight against Oregon State in 16 and came back to take that game to OT, where eventually lost. WSU destroyed us 51-21 in 16 and that looked like a give up game.
Ah -- no, I did mean that we were dominated by the Oregon State team. Yes, it came back and went to OT, but I was in the stands in Corvallis that day and the solution to most of the team's ills -- running the freaking ball -- felt so obvious, yet didn't come through until late. It felt very much that the team wouldn't ever get good enough at all the parts of football at the same time to ensure success. The run defense faltered that day and in the years before that it was the pass defense, and so on, and so forth. I left the stadium that day knowing we'd probably never get it together.
The Fire Wilcox chants were across several alumni sections as well. This was the first game I was able to go to and it was jarring to hear. There is a guy in the section next to us everyone just calls "Angry Guy". He's been coming to games by himself for 20 years and listens to Starkey on a transistor radio. He talks to himself a lot and mutters obscenities. When really ticked he jumps up and down. He was pretty quiet most of the game (for him) and then just got up and left in the middle of the third quarter.
A first. I find myself in the brain fog alluded to by Nam but also wanting the Executive Corrective Action program described by Taco. However, these would be very bold moves for a stoic Wilcox, and in order to keep fans and donors engaged, he'd have to communicate the details of his plan like leaders do with their stakeholders. He certainly *can* talk to reporters and fans, and does share some inside info with donors, but he has never really communicated anything from what I've observed. So no matter what, the fandom appears lost unless there is some epic turnaround and the fans get a glimpse of the post-Garbers era, which means Millner, Hunter, Sturdivant, Anderson, Mangum, Lee, etc. seeing some real time.
I think Wilcox should have to play Squid Game after this season to earn another year as our HC.
Now I'll have to watch this show, I blame you if it isn't worth my time.
If you liked Parasite, or Snowpiercer, it's in that mode.
So.. korean? It me!
In screenwriting, we say that the beginning always hints at the end. That's why that Wazzu game feels familiar.
I rode my motorcycle 1500 miles to see this joke of a game. Total incompetence. We made them look like Alabama. Horrible play calls. Horrible execution. Horrendous Oline play. Dumpster fire ala Holmoe. I will not attend another Cal game this year. And I'm die hard. That was beyond a joke. I hope they win a few for the seniors, but that level of total ineptitude does not happen accidentally. And have I read today that Wilcox has fired Ragle? No? No big changes? No? I've been all in on Wilcox, and certainly take nothing away from him as a man and saying the right things and the guys graduating and all that, but football is game played to win. And losing like that after losing like those others, too much. Next?
Wilcox is not the coach Cal needs but the coach it deserves.
If you don’t know who the bottom dwelling wanker in the conference is, you’re the BDW.
It comes down to recruiting - the GPA requirement has killed it. We have no outstanding athletes on the team - no speed and football is a speed game now. And you can't coach speed either.
Pac 12 recruiting rankings (24/7)
2020: Cal #8
2019: Cal #8
2018: Cal #8
2017: Cal #12
The current roster is full of....ok players. With top notch coaching and development, what would be the ceiling? I'm not sure it would be much higher than where they're at. Maybe .500
It’s a fair point but you also can’t be selective and not include 2021 while including 2017 (being a wipe since he came in January/February of 2017).
247 composite
3rd in conference
28 Nationally.
Just for funzies here's Rivals:
2020: Cal #7
2019: Cal #6
2018: Cal #7
2017: Cal #12
So, maybe a little better, and perhaps a smidge of support for coaching not doing the job. But still, Cal projects to be a middling Pac12 team, and here we are.
Which isn’t even middle of the Pac, we won’t even be middle of the P12 north
Losing to the Cougs, means this argument doesn't matter. When we lose to $C we can say because of talent. But losing that way to the Cougs? That's coaching.
Losing to the Cougs minus Mike Leach. I’m not even convinced their current coach is any good or half the coach Leach is. This would be like Tedford losing to Walt Harris.
I forgot the details on this GPA requirment. Is it actually a thing?
Basically 3.0. Someone else will have the specifics on this, but that being what it is extremely tightens the pool of available recruits.
that is a terribly unfair and short-sighted policy...but then again it's Cal
get it down to 2.5 and imagine the recruits theyll have, Cal is hard enough as it is for regular students.
It's my understanding that it's a UC wide thing, no? As in UCLA is also impacted
Harder, yes. But we have traditionally had speed, particularly on the offensive side of the ball. The utter lack of it has mostly corresponded with Wilcox's tenure. That's more a symptom of not being an offensive coach and not having an offensive system (if we have one at all) that shows much potential for upside to those types of prospects.
we have speed, it's sitting on the bench
That's true. Stredick is the fastest RB. He has yet to see a snap because he's too far down in the pecking order.
I don't agree with you on many fronts but let's start with the simplest only because it's the most obvious:
"In either of those above cases, do you see them getting better than they were in 2019? With this staff at the helm?
I can’t answer that question for you."
which you opine and answer yourself, just above this text with:
"(We don’t need to devote any mental energy to discussing the 1-3 win scenarios, which, I hope the athletic department recognizes would have to result in his ouster.)" I would have added emphasis if this site allowed me, but it doesn't.
If you want Wilcox out, just have the courage to say so. Wilcox is building a program but along the way he has made significant and common mistakes of a business manager / coach. One of his top 3 was hiring Greatwood. While GW had a great record/reputation he was clearly on the tail end of his career and wasn't a particularly great recruiter (Craig being his only blue chip). Nepotism is a manager/coach's worst act. Wilcox has repeated that with Sirmon. For Cal to be successful OL is one of the 2 foundations (DL is the other) that must exist. So, starting out with GW put the program back 2 - 3 years. A better solution would have been to hire an OL coach equivalent of Browning (current DL coach). Angus wasn't much of a step up from GW and recruiting is still iffy on OL. It doesn't look like Angus will bring in any blue chippers with this cycle ~ he's on the hot seat, starting with these next 2 weeks of "development".
The second major mistake is sticking with CG for so long. Albeit there are several reasonable reasons for this: Cal doesn't have anyone better or they had but they all transferred. Losing 2 QBs last spring falls on the staff. The other obvious reason is Cal's inability a recruit a top QB. I would describe a "top" QB not necessarily as a 4* or 5* but one that can throw the ball with velocity (accuracy can be taught, velocity can't). Should Wilcox go down he will have to reflect on sticking with CG. Many managers stick to their A player for too long only to find out later, much too late, that the underling was much better.
I am still a Wilcox supporter while recognizing that his mistakes are common and therefore stupid. Were I his advisor I would recommend several things by EOY:
Angus: improve this OL and get me 8 OL that I can depend on or your ass is gone in December.
Musgrave: play Millner a minimum of 3 series per game from now until the last game, starting after the Oregun game (it would be cruel to put a freshmen into an away game at Oregun as his first experience).
Sirmon/Browning/Watson: keep doing what you are doing
Hi, GEAT --
Addressing a couple of things here:
1) I don't have any problems with people not agreeing with me. That's totally fine, and as I've been dealing with on Twitter this morning, there still are some loyalists to the project, and even some people who write about the team are on that side of things. More power to you if you feel that way.
2) I am not comfortable using my position to advocate for peoples' firing, because at the end of the day, we are dealing with real people. This is consistent with how I have operated this space -- you will never see me say the words that someone should be fired because I am under no delusion that me saying it matters to anyone important -- and it is admittedly a tricky thing to hold because I am a fan of the program on game days, and an analyst on all the others. I am unabashedly rooting for the positive outcome, in all circumstances.
3) There have certainly been hiring mistakes, because there've been so many opportunities to do so -- which is why I don't agree understand the impulse to let him try again at this point with a new assistant cycle. If you acknowledge this is the case, why should he get the chance to continue so? Shouldn't he be held accountable for those hires?
4) The program feels good about Kai, but putting him in this kind of situation is...tough? The bye is a good point to re-evaluate so, maybe?
5) The OL hasn't always been the issue each week. The point about recruiting, I agree.
6) Chase has already been limited, but I don't think anyone better has been in the wings waiting in any of those years. Why we didn't always play in a way to help him out, knowing those limits, is frustrating, to say the least.
Again, I *want* Wilcox to succeed. I don't think it's unreasonable to start to lose hope in that, given the way things are going.
Thanks for reading.
Seems we mostly agree.
That said, is it a fine line saying "I hope the athletic department recognizes would have to result in his ouster" versus saying, "he should be fired" they are essentially saying the same thing.
Sure he's had a few bad hires and also a few good hires: GA & Browning (with a good OL Musgrave would be a good hire as well). So yeah he should get another cycle if needed. My point incorporated/included that he needs to START firing as well.
Note I'm advocating putting Millner in a very controlled situation: not at Oregun. I'm not advocating throwing him to the lions. So yes, let him see some PT this season.
Lol, yeah. That's like, as close as I can come to saying it outright, but it matters to me that I frame it in that way.
If we have 4 games remaining and have zero chance for a bowl game I expect to see a lot of Millner. 4 games preserves his redshirt and gets him valuable experience even if we are getting our arse kicked. So if that is indeed the scenario and I hope it's not, we had better see Millner, else I would consider that poor planning on Wilcox's part. 4 games depending on record is an obvious BIG decision point for Wilcox.
This is a horrible take.
I'm gunna rec this cuz w/o any explanation it is so chicken shit it has to be rec'd.
Taco, what are you seeing that makes you want Sirmon and Watson to keep doing what they are doing? The defense has regressed massively. In fact, it might be the worst in the conference.
I feel that in previous posts I have explained this succinctly and repeatedly. So, I will paraphrase:
GA had League talent to work with, this staff has some "potential" League talent: Hearns, Scott. The jury on Watson is recruiting, for now he is failing but guess what so did GA, GA left the DB cupboard bare ~ fans conveniently ignore that. GA didn't bring anyone in!! So perhaps it is GA that caused the mess in the defensive backfield? Has anyone mentioned that?
Sirmon had League talent in Weaver and K ~ Cal fans seem to ignore that it is SIRMON who coached them up to League players. Do you think that Sirmon has lost his coaching ability or PERHAPS he is dealing with younger players that haven't fully developed yet?? Oladejo is a freshmen, Paster (1st year at ILB) keep an eye on his development ~ he could be a League player!! Tattersall had his opportunity but I think he is a role player now. Some players practice well but play poorly.
Sirmon as a DC. He is as aggressive and talented as DTR, he is just working with a very young defense. How many true freshmen, RS freshmen, or first year players are playing on D right now??? Hearns, Roberts, Saunders, McKenzie, Gamble, Oledajo, Paster, Correiea. It's a young defense that with the sole exception of Scott is getting little production from super seniors or GA players: Hicks, Anusiem ~ did these two forget what GA taught them or are they just not the same level as Hawkins, Bynum and Davis?? So Sirmon has to play it close to the vest for now.
Cal is and only can be a "developmental" program. It ain't 'bama. Who knows how good bamas coaches are, anyone could coach that talent or have their coaching deficiencies covered up by the talent. Hell bama is so talented they can play base defense and dominate. Most coaches know how to coach base.
So given the developmental nature of Cal, which is subject to greater deviations when it comes to recruiting it is no wonder Cal will have deeper valleys and at times (Weaver era) higher peaks. Doesn't mean that all of a sudden Sirmon can't coach.
My take is this. Next year Cal will have the best front seven on D in the conference. This will be due to the development of the younger players and the addition of BJ. The DBs will still be a weakness given GA (ha) didn't recruit anyone.
I agree that some of the younger players on D have flashed, and I hope they continue to get more minutes. Missing Brett Johnson hurts us too. While there are indeed fluctuations in what level of talent we have on the roster, I still think that you’re letting Sirmon off too easy.
Good article, one minor question or point of clarification.
“ has some parallels to the way Oregon State dominating the Bears was for the 2016 team”
Did mean Washington State instead of Oregon State? We actually showed fight against Oregon State in 16 and came back to take that game to OT, where eventually lost. WSU destroyed us 51-21 in 16 and that looked like a give up game.
Ah -- no, I did mean that we were dominated by the Oregon State team. Yes, it came back and went to OT, but I was in the stands in Corvallis that day and the solution to most of the team's ills -- running the freaking ball -- felt so obvious, yet didn't come through until late. It felt very much that the team wouldn't ever get good enough at all the parts of football at the same time to ensure success. The run defense faltered that day and in the years before that it was the pass defense, and so on, and so forth. I left the stadium that day knowing we'd probably never get it together.
The Fire Wilcox chants were across several alumni sections as well. This was the first game I was able to go to and it was jarring to hear. There is a guy in the section next to us everyone just calls "Angry Guy". He's been coming to games by himself for 20 years and listens to Starkey on a transistor radio. He talks to himself a lot and mutters obscenities. When really ticked he jumps up and down. He was pretty quiet most of the game (for him) and then just got up and left in the middle of the third quarter.
A first. I find myself in the brain fog alluded to by Nam but also wanting the Executive Corrective Action program described by Taco. However, these would be very bold moves for a stoic Wilcox, and in order to keep fans and donors engaged, he'd have to communicate the details of his plan like leaders do with their stakeholders. He certainly *can* talk to reporters and fans, and does share some inside info with donors, but he has never really communicated anything from what I've observed. So no matter what, the fandom appears lost unless there is some epic turnaround and the fans get a glimpse of the post-Garbers era, which means Millner, Hunter, Sturdivant, Anderson, Mangum, Lee, etc. seeing some real time.