03-16-2016, 01:30 PM
I think that jacketree's perspective, that the postseason is what really matters, is at the crux of the conversation.
From a purely postseason perspective, Dawkins' 8 years aren't all that different from Montgomery's:
Dawkins: One NCAA Sweet Sixteen, Two NIT championships, One additional NIT appearance
Montgomery: Two NCAA First Rounds, One NIT championship, Three additional NIT appearances
But I remember the excitement during the Montgomery I era, and it couldn't have been due to just the "once every 49 years" phenomenon. There was something tangible, and it was the regular conference season performance, at which Montgomery's teams were far superior to Dawkins'.
If our next coach goes 82-62 in conference in his first eight years--that's equal to Monty's first nine years minus 1992-93--then everything will be fine in my book. The postseason will be icing on the cake.
From a purely postseason perspective, Dawkins' 8 years aren't all that different from Montgomery's:
Dawkins: One NCAA Sweet Sixteen, Two NIT championships, One additional NIT appearance
Montgomery: Two NCAA First Rounds, One NIT championship, Three additional NIT appearances
But I remember the excitement during the Montgomery I era, and it couldn't have been due to just the "once every 49 years" phenomenon. There was something tangible, and it was the regular conference season performance, at which Montgomery's teams were far superior to Dawkins'.
If our next coach goes 82-62 in conference in his first eight years--that's equal to Monty's first nine years minus 1992-93--then everything will be fine in my book. The postseason will be icing on the cake.
If there's one thing people have learned in Berkeley, it's that you can't put "Cal football" and "Rose Bowl" in the same sentence. The words just don't fit. You'd be better off linking "covered wagons" with "Mars travel." (Bruce Jenkins, Cal '70, SF Chronicle, Nov. 11, 2017)