[OutsiderFan]

Given both Cal fans and Stanford fans are ready to jettison their current football leadership, it seems fair to say the Big Game could potentially be played with jobs on the line this year. So a friend of mine (it really was not me) made a suggestion for a way fans can promote the game on social media:

No matter which team wins, their coach gets the axe!

Thoughts?

[OutsiderFan]

Given both Cal fans and Stanford fans are ready to jettison their current football leadership, it seems fair to say the Big Game could potentially be played with jobs on the line this year. So a friend of mine (it really was not me) made a suggestion for a way fans can promote the game on social media:

No matter which team wins, their coach gets the axe!

Thoughts?

[BostonCard]

Wait, I thought Wilcox was a master strategist who was going to bring Cal to new heights…

Yes, a little schadenfreude in these dark times. I wish I could have seen a really meaningful big game between two times fighting for the PAC-12 north championship.

BC

[BostonCard]

Wait, I thought Wilcox was a master strategist who was going to bring Cal to new heights…

Yes, a little schadenfreude in these dark times. I wish I could have seen a really meaningful big game between two times fighting for the PAC-12 north championship.

BC

[msqueri]

Actually, while I think we can/should shoot higher, there would be crazier things than trying to bring Wilcox in to replace Shaw. We could call it pulling an Esquer. As with baseball, the potential/base case of Stanford football is dramatically better than Cal football. Wilcox gets Teevens-esque results at Cal, all the way down to the similarities of a potent defense and a hopeless offensive line. What Wilcox at Stanford would mean for our defense would excite me. It's not crazy to think Wilcox could be a good coach at Stanford. Not one of the first 20 names I'd suggest, but this thread did make me think of the Esquer similarities.

[msqueri]

Actually, while I think we can/should shoot higher, there would be crazier things than trying to bring Wilcox in to replace Shaw. We could call it pulling an Esquer. As with baseball, the potential/base case of Stanford football is dramatically better than Cal football. Wilcox gets Teevens-esque results at Cal, all the way down to the similarities of a potent defense and a hopeless offensive line. What Wilcox at Stanford would mean for our defense would excite me. It's not crazy to think Wilcox could be a good coach at Stanford. Not one of the first 20 names I'd suggest, but this thread did make me think of the Esquer similarities.

[lex24]

Actually, while I think we can/should shoot higher, there would be crazier things than trying to bring Wilcox in to replace Shaw. We could call it pulling an Esquer. As with baseball, the potential/base case of Stanford football is dramatically better than Cal football. Wilcox gets Teevens-esque results at Cal, all the way down to the similarities of a potent defense and a hopeless offensive line. What Wilcox at Stanford would mean for our defense would excite me. It's not crazy to think Wilcox could be a good coach at Stanford. Not one of the first 20 names I'd suggest, but this thread did make me think of the Esquer similarities.

Wilcox supposedly turned down Washington.  Why would he accept Stanford job? He’s got a better situation right now.

[lex24]

Actually, while I think we can/should shoot higher, there would be crazier things than trying to bring Wilcox in to replace Shaw. We could call it pulling an Esquer. As with baseball, the potential/base case of Stanford football is dramatically better than Cal football. Wilcox gets Teevens-esque results at Cal, all the way down to the similarities of a potent defense and a hopeless offensive line. What Wilcox at Stanford would mean for our defense would excite me. It's not crazy to think Wilcox could be a good coach at Stanford. Not one of the first 20 names I'd suggest, but this thread did make me think of the Esquer similarities.

Wilcox supposedly turned down Washington.  Why would he accept Stanford job? He’s got a better situation right now.

[msqueri]

Actually, while I think we can/should shoot higher, there would be crazier things than trying to bring Wilcox in to replace Shaw. We could call it pulling an Esquer. As with baseball, the potential/base case of Stanford football is dramatically better than Cal football. Wilcox gets Teevens-esque results at Cal, all the way down to the similarities of a potent defense and a hopeless offensive line. What Wilcox at Stanford would mean for our defense would excite me. It's not crazy to think Wilcox could be a good coach at Stanford. Not one of the first 20 names I'd suggest, but this thread did make me think of the Esquer similarities.

Wilcox supposedly turned down Washington.  Why would he accept Stanford job? He’s got a better situation right now.

I never believed he was actually offered the Washington job. That felt like one of the classic agent trying to pump up client gambits. Wilcox would have been a pretty wildly uninspiring hire. DeBoer much more attractive.

I do not think Cal is a better situation than Stanford. Presumably Wilcox wants to win. Cal is one of the bottom tier Power Five programs. Stanford can reach higher heights. I am sure you and I disagree about that but I view Stanford as a fundamentally more attractive job than the Cal/Syracuse/Indiana/Rutgers/etc. of the world.

[msqueri]

Actually, while I think we can/should shoot higher, there would be crazier things than trying to bring Wilcox in to replace Shaw. We could call it pulling an Esquer. As with baseball, the potential/base case of Stanford football is dramatically better than Cal football. Wilcox gets Teevens-esque results at Cal, all the way down to the similarities of a potent defense and a hopeless offensive line. What Wilcox at Stanford would mean for our defense would excite me. It's not crazy to think Wilcox could be a good coach at Stanford. Not one of the first 20 names I'd suggest, but this thread did make me think of the Esquer similarities.

Wilcox supposedly turned down Washington.  Why would he accept Stanford job? He’s got a better situation right now.

I never believed he was actually offered the Washington job. That felt like one of the classic agent trying to pump up client gambits. Wilcox would have been a pretty wildly uninspiring hire. DeBoer much more attractive.

I do not think Cal is a better situation than Stanford. Presumably Wilcox wants to win. Cal is one of the bottom tier Power Five programs. Stanford can reach higher heights. I am sure you and I disagree about that but I view Stanford as a fundamentally more attractive job than the Cal/Syracuse/Indiana/Rutgers/etc. of the world.

[gailtate]

Actually, while I think we can/should shoot higher, there would be crazier things than trying to bring Wilcox in to replace Shaw. We could call it pulling an Esquer. As with baseball, the potential/base case of Stanford football is dramatically better than Cal football. Wilcox gets Teevens-esque results at Cal, all the way down to the similarities of a potent defense and a hopeless offensive line. What Wilcox at Stanford would mean for our defense would excite me. It's not crazy to think Wilcox could be a good coach at Stanford. Not one of the first 20 names I'd suggest, but this thread did make me think of the Esquer similarities.

Wilcox supposedly turned down Washington.  Why would he accept Stanford job? He’s got a better situation right now.

I never believed he was actually offered the Washington job. That felt like one of the classic agent trying to pump up client gambits. Wilcox would have been a pretty wildly uninspiring hire. DeBoer much more attractive.

I do not think Cal is a better situation than Stanford. Presumably Wilcox wants to win. Cal is one of the bottom tier Power Five programs. Stanford can reach higher heights. I am sure you and I disagree about that but I view Stanford as a fundamentally more attractive job than the Cal/Syracuse/Indiana/Rutgers/etc. of the world.

I am disappointed in Wilcox. I would have thought that, by now, he would have a higher winning percentage, have found a way to beat a beatable ND, and be more of a Brent Brennan.  See how he fares this season. I know where he can find another win.

[gailtate]

Actually, while I think we can/should shoot higher, there would be crazier things than trying to bring Wilcox in to replace Shaw. We could call it pulling an Esquer. As with baseball, the potential/base case of Stanford football is dramatically better than Cal football. Wilcox gets Teevens-esque results at Cal, all the way down to the similarities of a potent defense and a hopeless offensive line. What Wilcox at Stanford would mean for our defense would excite me. It's not crazy to think Wilcox could be a good coach at Stanford. Not one of the first 20 names I'd suggest, but this thread did make me think of the Esquer similarities.

Wilcox supposedly turned down Washington.  Why would he accept Stanford job? He’s got a better situation right now.

I never believed he was actually offered the Washington job. That felt like one of the classic agent trying to pump up client gambits. Wilcox would have been a pretty wildly uninspiring hire. DeBoer much more attractive.

I do not think Cal is a better situation than Stanford. Presumably Wilcox wants to win. Cal is one of the bottom tier Power Five programs. Stanford can reach higher heights. I am sure you and I disagree about that but I view Stanford as a fundamentally more attractive job than the Cal/Syracuse/Indiana/Rutgers/etc. of the world.

I am disappointed in Wilcox. I would have thought that, by now, he would have a higher winning percentage, have found a way to beat a beatable ND, and be more of a Brent Brennan.  See how he fares this season. I know where he can find another win.

[msqueri]

Actually, while I think we can/should shoot higher, there would be crazier things than trying to bring Wilcox in to replace Shaw. We could call it pulling an Esquer. As with baseball, the potential/base case of Stanford football is dramatically better than Cal football. Wilcox gets Teevens-esque results at Cal, all the way down to the similarities of a potent defense and a hopeless offensive line. What Wilcox at Stanford would mean for our defense would excite me. It's not crazy to think Wilcox could be a good coach at Stanford. Not one of the first 20 names I'd suggest, but this thread did make me think of the Esquer similarities.

Wilcox supposedly turned down Washington.  Why would he accept Stanford job? He’s got a better situation right now.

I never believed he was actually offered the Washington job. That felt like one of the classic agent trying to pump up client gambits. Wilcox would have been a pretty wildly uninspiring hire. DeBoer much more attractive.

I do not think Cal is a better situation than Stanford. Presumably Wilcox wants to win. Cal is one of the bottom tier Power Five programs. Stanford can reach higher heights. I am sure you and I disagree about that but I view Stanford as a fundamentally more attractive job than the Cal/Syracuse/Indiana/Rutgers/etc. of the world.

I am disappointed in Wilcox. I would have thought that, by now, he would have a higher winning percentage, have found a way to beat a beatable ND, and be more of a Brent Brennan.  See how he fares this season. I know where he can find another win.

Well he did get screwed out of that Notre Dame win. But nobody wins at Cal other than Jeff Tedford. They're losers. And that comes from somebody who roots for Cal in every game but one.

[msqueri]

Actually, while I think we can/should shoot higher, there would be crazier things than trying to bring Wilcox in to replace Shaw. We could call it pulling an Esquer. As with baseball, the potential/base case of Stanford football is dramatically better than Cal football. Wilcox gets Teevens-esque results at Cal, all the way down to the similarities of a potent defense and a hopeless offensive line. What Wilcox at Stanford would mean for our defense would excite me. It's not crazy to think Wilcox could be a good coach at Stanford. Not one of the first 20 names I'd suggest, but this thread did make me think of the Esquer similarities.

Wilcox supposedly turned down Washington.  Why would he accept Stanford job? He’s got a better situation right now.

I never believed he was actually offered the Washington job. That felt like one of the classic agent trying to pump up client gambits. Wilcox would have been a pretty wildly uninspiring hire. DeBoer much more attractive.

I do not think Cal is a better situation than Stanford. Presumably Wilcox wants to win. Cal is one of the bottom tier Power Five programs. Stanford can reach higher heights. I am sure you and I disagree about that but I view Stanford as a fundamentally more attractive job than the Cal/Syracuse/Indiana/Rutgers/etc. of the world.

I am disappointed in Wilcox. I would have thought that, by now, he would have a higher winning percentage, have found a way to beat a beatable ND, and be more of a Brent Brennan.  See how he fares this season. I know where he can find another win.

Well he did get screwed out of that Notre Dame win. But nobody wins at Cal other than Jeff Tedford. They're losers. And that comes from somebody who roots for Cal in every game but one.

[cardcrimson]

Well he did get screwed out of that Notre Dame win. But nobody wins at Cal other than Jeff Tedford. They're losers. And that comes from somebody who roots for Cal in every game but one.

Well. Mike White did okay. . . .

[cardcrimson]

Well he did get screwed out of that Notre Dame win. But nobody wins at Cal other than Jeff Tedford. They're losers. And that comes from somebody who roots for Cal in every game but one.

Well. Mike White did okay. . . .

[msqueri]

Well he did get screwed out of that Notre Dame win. But nobody wins at Cal other than Jeff Tedford. They're losers. And that comes from somebody who roots for Cal in every game but one.

Well. Mike White did okay. . . .

Never more than eight wins, only ranked once. Certainly excellent by Cal standards but makes my point. Four nine win seasons in 70 years. Only one by a non-Tedford coach. Compare that to 14 for Stanford, seven by non-Stanford coaches. Five different Stanford coaches (six if you count Walsh twice) have done what only two Cal coaches could do. Programs are not even comparable in terms of ceiling.

[msqueri]

Well he did get screwed out of that Notre Dame win. But nobody wins at Cal other than Jeff Tedford. They're losers. And that comes from somebody who roots for Cal in every game but one.

Well. Mike White did okay. . . .

Never more than eight wins, only ranked once. Certainly excellent by Cal standards but makes my point. Four nine win seasons in 70 years. Only one by a non-Tedford coach. Compare that to 14 for Stanford, seven by non-Stanford coaches. Five different Stanford coaches (six if you count Walsh twice) have done what only two Cal coaches could do. Programs are not even comparable in terms of ceiling.

[Giants]

Correction…

Wilcox received an offer from Oregon not Washington.  Wilcox said no to the Ducks and UO moved on to Lanning.  He never received any formal interest from UW. 

The problem at Cal is simple - an unbelievably bad AD.  I know that Muir is not the most popular guy at this website but he is an absolute prince compared to the guy at Cal.

To be kind, as long as the current incumbent is at Cal, the future of their athletic program is very, very grim (and he is under contract through 2029).

[Giants]

Correction…

Wilcox received an offer from Oregon not Washington.  Wilcox said no to the Ducks and UO moved on to Lanning.  He never received any formal interest from UW. 

The problem at Cal is simple - an unbelievably bad AD.  I know that Muir is not the most popular guy at this website but he is an absolute prince compared to the guy at Cal.

To be kind, as long as the current incumbent is at Cal, the future of their athletic program is very, very grim (and he is under contract through 2029).

[TonyLima]

Well he did get screwed out of that Notre Dame win. But nobody wins at Cal other than Jeff Tedford. They're losers. And that comes from somebody who roots for Cal in every game but one.

Well. Mike White did okay. . . .

Some of us remember Joe Kapp.

[TonyLima]

Well he did get screwed out of that Notre Dame win. But nobody wins at Cal other than Jeff Tedford. They're losers. And that comes from somebody who roots for Cal in every game but one.

Well. Mike White did okay. . . .

Some of us remember Joe Kapp.

[Goose]

Well he did get screwed out of that Notre Dame win. But nobody wins at Cal other than Jeff Tedford. They're losers. And that comes from somebody who roots for Cal in every game but one.

Well. Mike White did okay. . . .

Some of us remember Joe Kapp.

As a player or as a coach? As a coach, he was 20-34-1.

[Goose]

Well he did get screwed out of that Notre Dame win. But nobody wins at Cal other than Jeff Tedford. They're losers. And that comes from somebody who roots for Cal in every game but one.

Well. Mike White did okay. . . .

Some of us remember Joe Kapp.

As a player or as a coach? As a coach, he was 20-34-1.

[TonyLima]

Well he did get screwed out of that Notre Dame win. But nobody wins at Cal other than Jeff Tedford. They're losers. And that comes from somebody who roots for Cal in every game but one.

Well. Mike White did okay. . . .

Some of us remember Joe Kapp.

As a player or as a coach? As a coach, he was 20-34-1.

Big Game 1982 iirc

[TonyLima]

Well he did get screwed out of that Notre Dame win. But nobody wins at Cal other than Jeff Tedford. They're losers. And that comes from somebody who roots for Cal in every game but one.

Well. Mike White did okay. . . .

Some of us remember Joe Kapp.

As a player or as a coach? As a coach, he was 20-34-1.

Big Game 1982 iirc

[JeffInCorvallis]

Well he did get screwed out of that Notre Dame win. But nobody wins at Cal other than Jeff Tedford. They're losers. And that comes from somebody who roots for Cal in every game but one.

Well. Mike White did okay. . . .

Some of us remember Joe Kapp.

As a player or as a coach? As a coach, he was 20-34-1.

Big Game 1982 iirc

Life isn't fair, I swear to God it isn't.

[JeffInCorvallis]

Well he did get screwed out of that Notre Dame win. But nobody wins at Cal other than Jeff Tedford. They're losers. And that comes from somebody who roots for Cal in every game but one.

Well. Mike White did okay. . . .

Some of us remember Joe Kapp.

As a player or as a coach? As a coach, he was 20-34-1.

Big Game 1982 iirc

Life isn't fair, I swear to God it isn't.

[Mick]

Bruce Snyder.  24-4-4, 10-2 and defeated Clemson in a bowl game his last season. Snyder claimed that outgoing AD Dave Maggard and he had a handshake deal for a new contract.  Incoming AD Bob Bockrath refused to honor it.  Snyder was a good coach for Cal and achieved a higher AP rating than did Tedford, in fact achieved the highest rating since Pappy Waldorf's fourth season (of ten).

[Mick]

Bruce Snyder.  24-4-4, 10-2 and defeated Clemson in a bowl game his last season. Snyder claimed that outgoing AD Dave Maggard and he had a handshake deal for a new contract.  Incoming AD Bob Bockrath refused to honor it.  Snyder was a good coach for Cal and achieved a higher AP rating than did Tedford, in fact achieved the highest rating since Pappy Waldorf's fourth season (of ten).

[Giants]

Bruce Snyder.  24-4-4, 10-2 and defeated Clemson in a bowl game his last season. Snyder claimed that outgoing AD Dave Maggard and he had a handshake deal for a new contract.  Incoming AD Bob Bockrath refused to honor it.  Snyder was a good coach for Cal and achieved a higher AP rating than did Tedford, in fact achieved the highest rating since Pappy Waldorf's fourth season (of ten).

Forcing Snyder out was the worst decision made by a Cal AD since their last Rose Bowl win (85 years and counting).

He was on the verge of signing a stellar class, including Rashaan Salaam, who won the H.eisman at CU and a host of others who formed the core of Snyder’s Rose Bowl winning ASU team.

Given Cal’s penchant for living in the past (see 1982), they still complain regularly about the debacle that was Snyder moving on to Arizona State.

[Giants]

Bruce Snyder.  24-4-4, 10-2 and defeated Clemson in a bowl game his last season. Snyder claimed that outgoing AD Dave Maggard and he had a handshake deal for a new contract.  Incoming AD Bob Bockrath refused to honor it.  Snyder was a good coach for Cal and achieved a higher AP rating than did Tedford, in fact achieved the highest rating since Pappy Waldorf's fourth season (of ten).

Forcing Snyder out was the worst decision made by a Cal AD since their last Rose Bowl win (85 years and counting).

He was on the verge of signing a stellar class, including Rashaan Salaam, who won the H.eisman at CU and a host of others who formed the core of Snyder’s Rose Bowl winning ASU team.

Given Cal’s penchant for living in the past (see 1982), they still complain regularly about the debacle that was Snyder moving on to Arizona State.