LeonPowe: This is less than optimal. I feel like I wrote that yesterday.
Berkelium97:I'm not as concerned about the loss of Kiesau, but this one still stings. It stings because UW is raiding our coaching staff and giving them unbeatable offers. Meanwhile, our former commits consider following them over to UW. There's nothing wrong with it, per se, but it is a very unusual tactic---one we have not seen much in the increasingly shady recruiting game.
Hide yo Michalczik, hide yo Blasquez, they hirin' errbody out here!
Yellow Fever:I'm a little confused though - didn't Washington beat us? Why are they so interested in our coaches? That would be like the Celtics suddenly poaching Avery Johnson and P.J. Carlesimo. What?
OhioBear: So much for the old gang being back together. It lasted only a year.
If we were talking about simply losing a position coach, it wouldn't be so bad. But we're talking about losing an offensive coordinator (at least the "passing game" guy) and a guy who had a rapport with the head coach. And last, but not least, we lose a guy who was to be the position coach for what was supposed to be an excellent WR recruiting class. It remains to be seen what the impact of losing him will be on that class -- we'll have to wait and see the dust settle on (and maybe after) NLOI day. But yeah: less than optimal.
I'm not climbing out on any ledges, throwing things, or kicking dogs over this. I guess what bothers me most in this is the realization that we may not be able to compete in this "arms race" that is college football. Just when we think we have the facilities to compete, something like this happens. For us to lose Kiesau on the heels of Lupoi, to a division rival who made a lucrative offer we apparently couldn't match is very unsettling. It's a reminder of what we're not: we're not a legacy program with the fat wallet to bankroll assistant coaches. If we're going to compete in the Pac-12 North, we're going to have to make the most of what we have with little margin for error.
We are what we are. And we are not Washington.
Kodiak: Kiesau was great with the wide receivers and reportedly also a very good recruiter. I'm not sure about him as an OC, however.
It looks like UW made this move to boost their recruiting. I'm sure they're hoping that some of our 3 and 4* WR commits flip.
Price is a pretty darn good QB and they've got some good talent at the skill positions. I'm sure that'll make Kiesau look better than he did at Colorado.
Here's hoping they feel some serious buyer's remorse down the road.
Atomsareenough: "We are not Washington."
I don't know about the rest of you, but that's an awfully depressing statement. Washington is not even remotely the yardstick that I want Cal to compare to, and yet we're somehow not in their league? How the hell are we EVER going to win a Rose Bowl then?
Avinash: Recruiting. Cal had the best WR class in the Pac-12. Now it's all to crap.
If Kiesau can land two or three of these guys and make up for the losses they'll experience in Seattle, the balance of power potentially shifts up to Washington as the main challenger to dethrone Oregon in the North.
OhioBear: We spent 1976 to 2001 losing to Washington. Every. Single. Time. Washington has been to the Rose Bowl nine times since we last went. And one Orange Bowl. They were a power under Don James, Jim Lambright, and Rick Neuheisel. (And prior to Don James, they had their glory moments under Jim Owens.)
Washington was down before Sark took over, no doubt about it. I looked at what happened to them in the 2000s as an example of how badly Keith Gilbertson and Tyrone Willingham failed. Washington has every reason to be a power: good school, nice city, good football tradition, rabid fanbase, great gameday atmosphere, huge resources (even more so than I thought). Washington SHOULD be a power. They're just getting back to where they were and where I knew in my heart of hearts they'd again if they got the right guy in there.
So while I don't like what is happening and agree that it is depressing, I wouldn't necessarily say that Washington isn't "remotely the yardstick" to which we should compare ourselves or aspire. Yeah, we should aim higher, I'll grant you that. But we could do a lot worse than being like Washington.
And we are pretty good at being worse than that.
Atomsareenough: I don't give a damn about Washington, or their history, or our history of losing. I don't.
I want to win. *WE* have plenty of reasons to be a power: EXCELLENT, top-tier school with a worldwide reputation, great place to live with lots of stuff to do and public transit to get to it, great gameday atmosphere, rich history, good fanbase (maybe not as big or rabid as UW's, but we've gotten good attendance in this decade), new facilities. We SHOULD be a power.
And yes, Washington was down. WAY down. 0-12 is as bad as it can get, and it happened while we were winning 8-10 games per year. So we are starting at a much higher level than they are. That national championship stuff is really ancient history, not just to me, but especially to recruits who weren't even born at the time. Heck, it may as well be Pappy Waldorf or The Play as far as an 18-year-old is concerned. To see them potentially leapfrog us is extremely disturbing to me. Do you not feel the same?
OhioBear: Heck yeah, it's disturbing. I don't mean to make it seem as if I'm not disturbed by what has happened. It's disappointing. I guess my point is simply that, though disappointed, I am not stunned by Washington's power play. They have a lot going for them and they (obviously) have the donor base and financial resources to make an enormous investment in the football program in ways that we apparently can't.
Should we be a power? I don't know if "should" is the right word. Not sure if we "should." But I think we "can" be one. But this is a reminder of what we DON'T have: enough well heeled donors who will fund the football program to the same degree as the legacy programs out there. Don't get me wrong: I think it's great we built the SAHPC and I think it should never be forgotten that Jeff Tedford helped build it by bringing Cal football back from nothing. But we are apparently not in a position to step up in the way Washington just did.
Solarise: I have some immediate and long term concerns. Marvin Jones, Michael Calvin, Tevin Carter, and Kaelin Clay's departure left our program short-handed at WR with KA21, Bryce McGovern, and Jackson Bouza with significant to some on-the-field experience going into 2012. We are looking to Bryce Treggs, Cedric Dozier, Darius Powe, Chris Harper, and Kenny Walker to contribute immediately. Losing Coach Kiesau is going to hurt right away. He was heavily involved in the recruiting of Treggs. We not only need to get new WRs involved right away but also work in a couple of new position coaches with the staff. 2012 suddenly looks like another rebuilding year.
We at CGB have exhaustively explored the mediocrity of the Golden Bears programs post Aaron Rodgers. One of the factors identified was the instability with our coaching staff. The 2011 season hasn't worked out any differently. From my perspective, Tedford got his old gang back to make a run at ending our 50+ years drought to the Rose Bowl with the renovated Memorial Stadium, new Simpsons Student Athlete High Performance Center, Cal's academics, and family atmosphere as his weapons of Pac-12 annihilation. Everything seems to be working according to plans until Sark came to demolish our hopes and dreams with his Godfather offers. I haven't seen any evidence suggesting that this trend of successful coaches under Tedford leaving for greener pastures would end. As a fan I am finding it hard to hope for coaches to stay long term to develop players for Cal's long term success. My audacity to sunshine pump has been greatly diminished. Send us some positive signs Sandy & Jeff. Make us proud to support our Cal Golden Bears.
Ohio Bear: Maybe it's a function of me coming of age at a time that Washington was a football power, but I did not expect Washington to be down for long. Frankly, they were down longer than I thought they'd be. If they're on the way back to football prominence, I'm even more disappointed that we didn't take advantage of our window of opportunity in the 2000s.
In order to provide our users with a better overall experience, we ask for more information from Facebook when using it to login so that we can learn more about our audience and provide you with the best possible experience. We do not store specific user data and the sharing of it is not required to login with Facebook.