The conference scenario is similar to the Tedford years. At the beginning, the only team to get past was $C. Cal was contending, but Tedford only beat them once. The conference then strengthened and we ended up in the middle. With Wilcox we started out in the middle of a weaker conference. Now that everyone except ‘furd, ASU, and Colorado are stronger, where are we going to end up?
For me this is kind of a make-or-break season for Wilcox. He gradually improved the team from 2017-2019, so I don't think there was any good reason to make a change yet. Then COVID hit, so it was hard to know what to make of those seasons, given the circumstances.
This year there's no real excuse. He's had a chance to recruit and put his staff together. If we can't, at minimum, hit the 8-win mark we hit in 2019 then I think it's time to look at other options. I thought the Arizona game was evidence that we were seeing a breakout. WSU put those thoughts away, but maybe they can show that it was just a blip.
You just rattled off the highlights of Wilcox’s 6 seasons…6…now do the road games outside the state of California…they’re awful.
Looking closer, tho, the Lightning bowl and @ SC were both complete flukes that were gift wrapped. That win at the Rose Bowl was against a UCLA team that had quit. And last year’s Stanford team was completely awful.
I gotta hand it to the pro-Wilcox crowd, tho - they’re steadfast in their defense of him, despite the mediocrity and failure to pass the eye test.
In conference, yes. If you include out of conference it looks a bit better, since you have wins at UNC, at BYU, and at Ole Miss (plus a respectable loss at Notre Dame).
Absolutely nothing in that press conference we didn't already know he would say. The positive is that he's no Mike Leach. The negative is no expectation of changes or improvements since we've seen the same things for years. We may look OK in beating CO and Furd, and lose horribly to the good teams in the Pac. Rinse and repeat. This offseason will be the real test.
Mike Leach is the most entertaining coach in the country. His players generally love him. But at Cal, Hell No! Not on Monday, Sunday, Saturday or any other day. He may be eccentrically bright, but his character and biases and crap wouldn't fly for five minutes in the Bay. He's better off in the South where they don't mind his antics.
So you’d rather be 29-30 (16-26) with Wilcox, rather than win 8 games a year and go to a bowl bc of politics? I dunno….
Sure, he’s not a fit in Berkeley, but TBH, NO ONE IS. You can’t win here…but Leach’s kids play hard for him (for the most part, ha) and the games are exciting. F the politics…I’ll take the wins & bowl bids.
Why are you talking "politics", because I sure didn't! I said character and biases. This is just a little thought experiment, and is fun in that regard, but to answer your question, I would definitely rather have a worse record with a good human being as coach than have a better record with a guy who calls out his players for their "fat little girlfriends"!
Then Wilcox is your guy…you must be so happy!! ;-) Me, I’d rather have a football team that’s fun to watch, wins, makes bowl games and generates revenue for the department…and please, politics are entirely the reason why Leach would never fit at Cal.
You need someone that understands the culture of Cal. Sonny is the perfect example, a good coach but he didn't understand Cal and that's why he failed here
I agree with him about not needing more consultants. It would be a quite rare situation that could be remedied by hiring a consultant as opposed to just replacing the coach.
I'm tired of being (sometimes) a negabear and harping on this or that, but as fans that's a prerogative we have. The loyalty and commitment Wilcox shows is great. I hope he is nothing but successful and stays at Cal for a long time. But it's hard to make the emotional investment and see underwhelming results. Anyway, as an old blue now time keeps passing and that Rose Bowl (or heck, Sun Bowl) remains elusive...
I wanna see Prune Ball break out with Colorado and who cares if we're revealing these wrinkles to the rest of our games - heck, we need the practice to iron those wrinkles out for WA, SC, etc.
Yeah, last week was really the first glimpse of the kind of excitement we used to have regularly with the special play of Ott, it seems like in many many years. Sure we've had many good wins, but Ott (supported by the entire team) displayed the kind of multi-faceted talent we haven't had in recent years. I was looking up how much success Sonny Dykes has had down at SMU and now at TCU and felt good for him but too bad he couldn't get it done here.
Welp, expecting him to change horses midstream is not realistic. Loyalty and perseverance are JW's great hallmark. I like that he seeks to work through problems and not throw people under the bus, because this can build trust and confidence amongst both players and staff.
Our problem is that it's been about the same middling on this long road since Tedford's apex. With Tedford, we saw that Cal could be a national contender, but that elated expectation has been dying by middling, since. And it's frustrating as we not so patiently await the second coming of the Tedford Era.
If you’re waiting for a return to Tedford levels of success, you’ll be waiting for awhile. The academic landscape is completely different. Wilcox can only take up to 20% non-qualifiers. Tedford had no such restrictions, and frankly, it showed in graduation and academic progress rates in ways that I don’t think the admin wants to repeat.
And this from the school that is eliminating test results from the ACT and SAT as part of its new and woke admissions process. I am hopelessly hooked on the Cal football program, but less so on the people who run the university and its athletic department.
Gosh, it's almost like lower academic standards = better football teams. Who'da thunk?
Yeah, Cal football is a struggle against our academic rep, but, gee, how does Michigan, Wisconsin, Texas do it? Fact is their academic rep is not far behind us.
It’s not really about academic reputation. None of those schools have the same 20% non-qualifier restriction that Cal does. Nor do schools like Duke, Vandy, UVA, Stanford, USC, etc., all of which have great academic reps. I’m pretty sure it’s not even a UC restriction that UCLA has to comply with — it’s a Cal requirement.
Welp. You mean the leadership that secretly hates and resents football? Yes, it's a thing. They want enough success to make the payments on the stadium, while middling the football program. Or so it would seem.
Agreed — well, with everything except for “secretly.” Lol.
All those other schools we just listed are proof that you can have the best of both worlds with high academic standards AND a football program that actually generates revenue for the athletic department. It doesn’t mean we need to be SMU in the 1980’s, but the administration and the athletic department can all do a much better job balancing the two.
I think the second coming of the second half of Tedford's tenure at Cal is already here, and we are staring it in the face. You used the word perseverance when describing Wilcox' MO. He has the luxury of a $4.5 million salary guaranteed through 2027, so let him persevere. As fans, we have other options. I am really looking forward to the UCLA/Utah and USC/WSU games this weekend. The Colorado game...... not so much.
The conference scenario is similar to the Tedford years. At the beginning, the only team to get past was $C. Cal was contending, but Tedford only beat them once. The conference then strengthened and we ended up in the middle. With Wilcox we started out in the middle of a weaker conference. Now that everyone except ‘furd, ASU, and Colorado are stronger, where are we going to end up?
Better than Stanford, CU, ASU, Arizona, and OSU
Win 2 out of 3 non conference
7 wins every season with the occasional 8 or 5 win season
Here’s to a solid BYE week and a focused effort in an absolutely must win at altitude next week….
For me this is kind of a make-or-break season for Wilcox. He gradually improved the team from 2017-2019, so I don't think there was any good reason to make a change yet. Then COVID hit, so it was hard to know what to make of those seasons, given the circumstances.
This year there's no real excuse. He's had a chance to recruit and put his staff together. If we can't, at minimum, hit the 8-win mark we hit in 2019 then I think it's time to look at other options. I thought the Arizona game was evidence that we were seeing a breakout. WSU put those thoughts away, but maybe they can show that it was just a blip.
His team’s road efforts leave a lot to be desired.
What about:
Beating UW in the Lightning Bowl
Beating USC when they had Pittman
Beating UCLA at the Rose Bowl (game before Redbox bowl)
Beating Stanford twice on the road
You just rattled off the highlights of Wilcox’s 6 seasons…6…now do the road games outside the state of California…they’re awful.
Looking closer, tho, the Lightning bowl and @ SC were both complete flukes that were gift wrapped. That win at the Rose Bowl was against a UCLA team that had quit. And last year’s Stanford team was completely awful.
I gotta hand it to the pro-Wilcox crowd, tho - they’re steadfast in their defense of him, despite the mediocrity and failure to pass the eye test.
In conference, yes. If you include out of conference it looks a bit better, since you have wins at UNC, at BYU, and at Ole Miss (plus a respectable loss at Notre Dame).
That Ole Miss game was so much fun! An all around great weekend!
Absolutely nothing in that press conference we didn't already know he would say. The positive is that he's no Mike Leach. The negative is no expectation of changes or improvements since we've seen the same things for years. We may look OK in beating CO and Furd, and lose horribly to the good teams in the Pac. Rinse and repeat. This offseason will be the real test.
Mike Leach is 50 games over .500 as a HC for his career (154-104). I’d take the Pirate over Justin Wilcox any day.
Mike Leach is the most entertaining coach in the country. His players generally love him. But at Cal, Hell No! Not on Monday, Sunday, Saturday or any other day. He may be eccentrically bright, but his character and biases and crap wouldn't fly for five minutes in the Bay. He's better off in the South where they don't mind his antics.
So you’d rather be 29-30 (16-26) with Wilcox, rather than win 8 games a year and go to a bowl bc of politics? I dunno….
Sure, he’s not a fit in Berkeley, but TBH, NO ONE IS. You can’t win here…but Leach’s kids play hard for him (for the most part, ha) and the games are exciting. F the politics…I’ll take the wins & bowl bids.
Why are you talking "politics", because I sure didn't! I said character and biases. This is just a little thought experiment, and is fun in that regard, but to answer your question, I would definitely rather have a worse record with a good human being as coach than have a better record with a guy who calls out his players for their "fat little girlfriends"!
Then Wilcox is your guy…you must be so happy!! ;-) Me, I’d rather have a football team that’s fun to watch, wins, makes bowl games and generates revenue for the department…and please, politics are entirely the reason why Leach would never fit at Cal.
You need someone that understands the culture of Cal. Sonny is the perfect example, a good coach but he didn't understand Cal and that's why he failed here
I agree with him about not needing more consultants. It would be a quite rare situation that could be remedied by hiring a consultant as opposed to just replacing the coach.
Paul Chryst doesn’t help…it’s more of the same.
I'm tired of being (sometimes) a negabear and harping on this or that, but as fans that's a prerogative we have. The loyalty and commitment Wilcox shows is great. I hope he is nothing but successful and stays at Cal for a long time. But it's hard to make the emotional investment and see underwhelming results. Anyway, as an old blue now time keeps passing and that Rose Bowl (or heck, Sun Bowl) remains elusive...
GoldenSD and my Sun Bowl is becoming a pipe dream…just ever, ever elusive.
Damnit.
"We should have wrinkles as well."
I wanna see Prune Ball break out with Colorado and who cares if we're revealing these wrinkles to the rest of our games - heck, we need the practice to iron those wrinkles out for WA, SC, etc.
I like everything about Wilcox except for the annual win totals.
Not needing 8-10 per year, but 6+ consistently would make him the perfect Cal fit.
In the meantime, I’ll just continue to carry around this piece of cake.
I like cake.
And wins.
Yeah, last week was really the first glimpse of the kind of excitement we used to have regularly with the special play of Ott, it seems like in many many years. Sure we've had many good wins, but Ott (supported by the entire team) displayed the kind of multi-faceted talent we haven't had in recent years. I was looking up how much success Sonny Dykes has had down at SMU and now at TCU and felt good for him but too bad he couldn't get it done here.
It took an all-time, record-setting offensive performance by Ott to achieve that Arizona look…that is not sustainable.
Question is: does Wilcox get a 3rd try at hiring an OC?
Yes. Take out the two COVID years, he has done well
Actually, he hasn’t, but you do love your Justin Wilcox.
He’s 10 games below .500 in conference…that’s not “doing well.”
Welp, expecting him to change horses midstream is not realistic. Loyalty and perseverance are JW's great hallmark. I like that he seeks to work through problems and not throw people under the bus, because this can build trust and confidence amongst both players and staff.
Our problem is that it's been about the same middling on this long road since Tedford's apex. With Tedford, we saw that Cal could be a national contender, but that elated expectation has been dying by middling, since. And it's frustrating as we not so patiently await the second coming of the Tedford Era.
If you’re waiting for a return to Tedford levels of success, you’ll be waiting for awhile. The academic landscape is completely different. Wilcox can only take up to 20% non-qualifiers. Tedford had no such restrictions, and frankly, it showed in graduation and academic progress rates in ways that I don’t think the admin wants to repeat.
And this from the school that is eliminating test results from the ACT and SAT as part of its new and woke admissions process. I am hopelessly hooked on the Cal football program, but less so on the people who run the university and its athletic department.
^^^^^THIS!
Gosh, it's almost like lower academic standards = better football teams. Who'da thunk?
Yeah, Cal football is a struggle against our academic rep, but, gee, how does Michigan, Wisconsin, Texas do it? Fact is their academic rep is not far behind us.
It’s not really about academic reputation. None of those schools have the same 20% non-qualifier restriction that Cal does. Nor do schools like Duke, Vandy, UVA, Stanford, USC, etc., all of which have great academic reps. I’m pretty sure it’s not even a UC restriction that UCLA has to comply with — it’s a Cal requirement.
Welp. You mean the leadership that secretly hates and resents football? Yes, it's a thing. They want enough success to make the payments on the stadium, while middling the football program. Or so it would seem.
Agreed — well, with everything except for “secretly.” Lol.
All those other schools we just listed are proof that you can have the best of both worlds with high academic standards AND a football program that actually generates revenue for the athletic department. It doesn’t mean we need to be SMU in the 1980’s, but the administration and the athletic department can all do a much better job balancing the two.
Welp, they need to make it look convincing when people suspect they are hobbling our program. So, if not "secretly," then veiled, perhaps thinly.
I think the second coming of the second half of Tedford's tenure at Cal is already here, and we are staring it in the face. You used the word perseverance when describing Wilcox' MO. He has the luxury of a $4.5 million salary guaranteed through 2027, so let him persevere. As fans, we have other options. I am really looking forward to the UCLA/Utah and USC/WSU games this weekend. The Colorado game...... not so much.
What Cal offense?