But what is he thanking him for? A recruiting service cannot set up trips for recruits. That is a flat out violation. Even if you want to argue that lyles didn't "steer" seastrunk to oregon, oregon still commited a violation. 3 of those players on that list were not tedford players. That means they are 12+ year nfl veterans which isn't exactly normal. Two of those players were all conference before Tedford took over. 5 other guys were on the roster when he took over. We are going to give him credit for that? I don't object to the argument that he has put people in the nfl, i object to the argument that he started the cal to nfl pipeline and that's complete bs. And the fact that all this nfl talent has come through cal and he still has a losing conference record over the past 5 years is not an argument in favor of him being a good coach. he had 7 guys drafted last year. 7! Yet won 7 games. Is larry coker a good coach too? The job of a college coach is to win games, not put players in the nfl. Over the past 5 years cal has probably put twice as many players as oregon in the nfl. I guess Tedford is a better coach than chip kelly. And it should also be noted that the majority of these players were 4 or 5 star recruits, so it's not a boise state situation where he is coaching up under the radar guys. It's a meaningless statistic. You will notice that most of the bowls that cal went to were in the 90s and 2000s. Why? because that's when the number of bowls completely exploded. If tedford had coached 30 years ago he'd have taken cal to two bowls tops in 04 and 06. And that is even up for debate. So the argument does not hold weight. So it's not as though no cal team had gone 6-5 or 7-4 or 8-3 before tedford arrived, they just didnt' get bowl games. And also tedford schedules a div 1aa team every year (something cal never used to do) and generally 2 other joke non conference games. He's made the schedule easier. His highest finish in the pac-12 in the past 5 years is 4th. The rest of the time he has finished in the bottom half of the conference.
Josiah. Nobody is disagreeing that Tedford brought Cal out of the dumps and made them respectable. The question is whether he can get them above this respectable but not good mid-level Pac-12 level. Droski says no. I tend to agree. Which means you thank him for what he's done and get someone who can. IMO
The question is whether he was the one who did it or whether he was there at the right time. I see him similar to rich brooks at oregon. Mediocre record and coach, yet better than those before him, but hardly someone who couldn't be replaced with someone better. of course at least brooks took oregon to a couple of rose bowls.
[QUOTE=droski;166563]But what is he thanking him for? A recruiting service cannot set up trips for recruits. That is a flat out violation. Even if you want to argue that lyles didn't "steer" seastrunk to oregon, oregon still commited a violation.
Tar Volon, I don’t have a dog in this fight and do agree that since 2010 the program has backslidden. If you look at droski’s initial post #17 where he first brought up TT, he stated that TT is a bad coach. I disagreed and began a dialogue providing facts (links) supporting my argument. Up to this point I have not stated one way or the other whether TT should stay or go. Personally, it may be for the best but that was not the point of discussion. The coaching environment over the past decade has changed, for the most part the days of “life time” / long tenured coaches are behind. Although I personally believe that TT is (still) a good coach it may be in everyone’s best interest that (by resignation or term) he moves on. Who would you like to see become CAL’s next HC?
I don't see how you pay a guy $25K for literally nothing. Thank him for "orchastrating everything", when the rules say he can't even make the phone call to get the recruit there, and then think you get off free. But you are allowed said opinion even if it's wrong. I'm saying it's unusual for players to play over 12 years. in other words, 10 years ago there were a lot of other cal guys in the nfl that you aren't counting. I have no idea where you get this stat " I stated that he has put more players into the league during his tenure than all 5 of his predecessors combined" but it's not very meaningful considering cal had 4 coaches in the 90s and only one from 2001-2012. All that would mean is he's averaging slightly more nfl players per year which is exactly what i sad btw. That there are more nfl players with him, but before him there were a lot as well. The point about the rankings is that tedford has had a crapload of talent at his disposal. good coaches coach up players. good coaches take said talent and you know win some games. It is absolutely not pure conjecture that he would have only gone to two bowl games. He finished 2nd in the league TWICE. No other time higher than 4th. 4th placed teams were not going to bowl games before the 90s. Hell many second placed teams didn't go to bowl games too. There is absolutely no argument he is a good coach unless you want to turn cal into vanderbilt which is isn't. cal has a higher winning % than oregon, oregon state, washington state, arizona, and arizona state. all of these teams with the exception of oregon state and wsu would have fired tedford by this point. many of these teams have fired coaches with similar records. You are the only man in america that thinks he's a good coach. And your entire argument seems to revolve around this theory that cal is baylor or washington state. from the 1910s to the free speech movement cal was one of the top programs west of the mississippi. from the free speech to the 90s the adminstration was outright toxic towards football. drastically raised the academic standards, refused to pay even wac level wages for a coach, and recruiting got killed because of the free speech movement. from the 90s on cal has been competitive when they have not had a terrible coach. there is no reason to think that cal will all of a sudden go to crap now that we are willing to pay a coach the same as chip kelly (actually more this year), more than chris peterson, more than steve sarkisian, more than mike riley, more than rich rodriquez, and more than jim mora. tedford makes more than all these guys. 20 years ago he'd be the worst paid coach in the league. your argument ignores the current situation. miami was terrible for years as well and they seemed to be ok. same for oregon. and cal has 10X the recruiting base as oregon.
Btw why do you refer to him as TT? his first name is Jeff. and since 2010 the program has backslidden? ONCE AGAIN, he's beaten ONE team with a winning conference record since 2007. ONE TEAM. His conference record since 2007 is below .500. And that includes some pretty terrible coaches. Want another stat? He has a losing record against every coach currently in the conference except embree (probably the worst coach in the country) and Jim mora (one game remember). So what does that mean? that means the overwelming majority of his victories the past 5 years (and btw he sucked against the good teams before that too. his alltime record against top 25 teams is something like 3-20) came from coaches that have been FIRED by other teams. FIRED.
No, my entire argument is based on what TT accomplished by comparison to his predecessors. You have a bad habit on taking things out of context. We can agree to disagree. I'll be interested to see who CAL's coach and where TT ends up in '13. We can revisit this in a few yrs to see where and how both are doing.
It's JT. There is no T in his first name. The context is what matters here. It is entirely relavant that he's had advantages that only 3 other coaches since the 1950s have had. You can't even spell the man's name right, but you seem to think what you are saying is gospel.
I've been a Cal fan the entire time he's been coach. I've posted on at least 3 different messageboards and talked to thousands of alumns. I've never heard him refered to as TT. JT all the time. NEVER TT. There is only one T in his name. No i'm not referencing games against Sacramento State, Presbyterian, and minnesota. Those are the type of games that even tom holmoe would win. Of course tedford lost to the likes of nevada and asu at home this year.
I doubt Joker has wasted the same type of talent Tedford has. Losing to inferior teams on a regular basis and then seeing your players dominate in the pros is very frustrating.
If it's possible to have South Carolina where they are right now (about a decade after 1-21), I have to think Cal can do better. And looking at his posts, Droski isn't exactly asking for a lot.
