TwistNHook: Last time we discussed the increasing "arms race" of college football, including increasing assistant coaches' salaries. We pick up today with Ragnarok being sad.
The point about the SAHPC debt is a good one, but another way to think of it is, we've already invested hundreds of millions of dollars into those facilities, so is it worth spending a little bit more to make sure we can reap the full dividends of those new facilities?
I mentioned at the top that I think there are basically two ways to field a successful football program - you can out-recruit other programs and beat them by fielding a more talented team, or you can outsmart or out-coach them. I think it's painfully clear that Tedford's program is not going outsmart many of our opponents, and lacking a decided talent advantage, I highly, highly doubt we will see results beyond what we've had for the last 5 years - 7 to 9 win seasons and mid level bowl appearances. If Tedford is going to reach a BCS game, he's going to need a very talented team, and as we just witnessed, it's going to be difficult to out-recruit the rest of the conference without shelling out more money. If we want to spend less to get more, we would need a different coach.
HydroTech: Since CBKWit suggests that Cal's problem is Tedford's ability to out-coach the other teams, then I pose these questions: How is Tedford failing to out-coach the other teams? And what can Tedford do differently to out-coach other teams?