Sorry, I mis-interpeted your phrasing. By saying Holmoe was a 'defensive guy' (instead of a 'defensive coordinator'), I took your meaning to say he was a head coach with defensive proclivities. That would describe Wilcox perfectly. Holmoe was a 'defensive coordinator', and not much more, football-wise, other than a high-quality individua…
Sorry, I mis-interpeted your phrasing. By saying Holmoe was a 'defensive guy' (instead of a 'defensive coordinator'), I took your meaning to say he was a head coach with defensive proclivities. That would describe Wilcox perfectly. Holmoe was a 'defensive coordinator', and not much more, football-wise, other than a high-quality individual. Wilcox did the hard work required to prepare himself for the head coaching position (ala Bruce Snyder), whereas Holmoe had it thrust upon him by an over-enthusiastic Mariucci. I don't think he had any ambition to be a head coach, but you're not going to turn it down. I distinctly remember at the time thinking the suits at Cal were enthralled by Mariucci and bought his endorsement, without the proper due diligence. And no, 2020 really doesn't count as far as evaluating a Wilcox's performance. Yes, it absolutely will count in the record books, but Wilcox shouldn't be judged by playing their first game of the season (UCLA had already played), an away game at UCLA on two(!) days notice, with a defensive line in quarantine, just has he shouldn't be given much credit by beating Oregon's reserves. Also, and uniquely Cal's issue, the city of Berkeley's super-tight covid restrictions (which in the historical view were probably the right calls) hobbled the Bears ability to hold practices and host games. In contrast to Wilcox, Holmoe's overall awful record was, I would say, only partially influenced by his 1-10 last season, but also factoring in would be his previous 3-8 season, and the 4-7 season prior to that. He never had a winning season. Wilcox may eventually fail, but any comparison to Holmoe are not apt.
Sorry, I mis-interpeted your phrasing. By saying Holmoe was a 'defensive guy' (instead of a 'defensive coordinator'), I took your meaning to say he was a head coach with defensive proclivities. That would describe Wilcox perfectly. Holmoe was a 'defensive coordinator', and not much more, football-wise, other than a high-quality individual. Wilcox did the hard work required to prepare himself for the head coaching position (ala Bruce Snyder), whereas Holmoe had it thrust upon him by an over-enthusiastic Mariucci. I don't think he had any ambition to be a head coach, but you're not going to turn it down. I distinctly remember at the time thinking the suits at Cal were enthralled by Mariucci and bought his endorsement, without the proper due diligence. And no, 2020 really doesn't count as far as evaluating a Wilcox's performance. Yes, it absolutely will count in the record books, but Wilcox shouldn't be judged by playing their first game of the season (UCLA had already played), an away game at UCLA on two(!) days notice, with a defensive line in quarantine, just has he shouldn't be given much credit by beating Oregon's reserves. Also, and uniquely Cal's issue, the city of Berkeley's super-tight covid restrictions (which in the historical view were probably the right calls) hobbled the Bears ability to hold practices and host games. In contrast to Wilcox, Holmoe's overall awful record was, I would say, only partially influenced by his 1-10 last season, but also factoring in would be his previous 3-8 season, and the 4-7 season prior to that. He never had a winning season. Wilcox may eventually fail, but any comparison to Holmoe are not apt.