Quantcast
 

Does anyone see Jeff Tedford keeping his job after this season?

Be Sociable, Share!

Comments

11 Comments

  1. mbabco

    They may decide to give him another year — this is really the first year that he’s had the revamped stadium and team room. Isn’t Sandy Barbour the Athletic Director? Does the Tedford hire pre-date her?

    November 8th, 2012 12:58 pm

  2. RYD

    Sadly no. The wild card is if the contract is too big to buy out or something along those lines

    Nice man but over time all coaches seem to need to move on.

    November 8th, 2012 1:07 pm

  3. Steve

    Only if he’s got some incriminating photos.

    November 8th, 2012 1:28 pm

  4. Stan

    2.8 million walks..but not away-he’s no fool. And neither is Cal. What I do see is Tedford hating to be criticized with blistering heat after all he’s done. So,I see he dedicates himself to find hotter recruiter coaches,and a real QB. He always has the running game and a fair D. The QB’s have been near terrible.
    I cant see his being a coaching Beidrens..take the losses in stride,just bank the money. I hope I’m right.

    November 8th, 2012 1:59 pm

  5. Mike

    If the logic is that he got that new stadium built, and in order to do that had to sacrifice recruiting for a couple of years, then I believe they will give him one more year.

    If the logic is that of angry fans, well, we know what happens next.

    He is pumping out pro players. Just very strange the QB position is not even close to being pro caliber since that is how he got the gig. From the Cal fans living around me in Oakland, they seem to be indicating that a stud QB is coming in next season.

    November 8th, 2012 3:17 pm

  6. Steve

    Mike, that’s the point. Cal is producing a number of pro players, but they’re not playing up to their potential under Tedford. Stanford and San Jose State are totally outclassing Cal on the football field and both programs have excellent coaching staffs. I’m guessing they’ll be singing “Goodbye Tedford” in a few weeks.

    November 8th, 2012 4:17 pm

  7. jason

    According to Wilner…. Tedford is guaranteed $6.9 million for 2013-2015.

    There is no way the cash strapped UC will absorb that hit and pay the big bucks necessary to hire a top notch new coach. Not unless the alums chip in big. After digging deep into their pockets to help with Memorial stadium, they’re not in a chipping in mood.

    We’re gonna be stuck with Tedford for a while longer.

    November 8th, 2012 4:24 pm

  8. Neal

    He is the Aaron Rowland of Baseball, with a big salary, but can’t coach a lick.

    November 8th, 2012 9:21 pm

  9. BRUCE

    People forget that the majority of his salary is paid by donors not the University. The money is there to make a transition if the right person who knows how to build a program appears. There is a new variable with the new chancellor whether he support sports or not. Coming from Columbia will see.

    November 9th, 2012 9:42 am

  10. Stan

    I must be getting older no.459,768: next week is Cal’s last game of the season. Didn’t it just start a couple of weeks ago?
    College football coach must be a great job..the schedule has to be shortest of any major sport. Sept-Nov..and hit the beach in Hawaii.
    Tedford would never resign. Who would?

    November 11th, 2012 8:37 am

  11. mbabco

    Well, this is kind of a late post for this thread but I’ve been thinking about this lately. There have been numerous points of view in the local papers.

    Monte Poole informs in today’s (11/15) Oakland Tribune that Tedford should go because “23-26 over the past four [years] clearly is unacceptable.“ [At least to him.] Same day in the Chronicle John Crumpacker compares Tedford to Mike Riley, coach of Oregon State who had a couple of lean years and rebounded this year. The article’s name? “Oregon St. shows patience with coach is a virtue.”

    In Tuesdays Oakland Tribune there was a long article by Jon Wilner – “What Went Wrong with Cal’s Jeff Tedford.” He paints a picture of a head coach that is lost in x’s and o’s, is not in touch with his players or coaching staff and who has set an identity for his team. He blames an “inordinate amount of staff turnover” (6 offensive coordinators in 8 years) and a lack of continuity on Tedford’s “constantly changing offense — and his hand-on approach to tactics.”

    In 11 seasons Tedford’s record is 82-56. That’s .594%. At Cal! He replaced Ted Holmoe, who had a record of 16-39 (1-10 in his final year). Cal has gone to bowl games 8 times in 11 years. Glenn Dickey, in his pay-for-view site on Wednesday talked about the reality of college football: that the schools that make no academic demands on students have an immense advantage. Cal expects student-athletes. Over the past few years Tedford has had serious handicaps with the lack of facilities and the tree-sitters: he’s had obstacle above and beyond the normal ones posed by working for an institution that expects athletes to actually be students.

    Both Crumpacker and Dickey point out that there’s a very strong freshman, red-shirted freshmen and sophomore contingent: could it in part be because the recruiting obstacle of poor facilities has been taken care of?

    Might another reason for the assistant coach turnover be money? Poole talks about two assistants (Tosh Lupoi and Eric Kiesau) who left Cal for University of Washington for three year salaries worth up to $1.25 million each; at Cal they were making less than $175,00 each, so they more than doubled their salaries. UW is paying their defensive coordinator a reported $2.4 million over 3 years. An assistant coach, for heaven’s sake. I don’t think the staff turnover is all Tedford’s fault. Poole is the only writer that points out: “Cal . . . has to decide if it’s willing to play when such figures are the cost of competing.”

    Dickey is the only one that points out that we’re dealing with student-athletes. Most of the discussion about Tedford seems to assume that Cal Football exists only to have a winning team for our enjoyment. No one else talks about the graduation rate (which is down at Cal currently, though it was excellent before). It seems to me an indication of very distorted priorities that you CAN have a discussion about a college coach and not even talk about the graduation rate of his players.

    [That’s a whole other discussion: what role should athletics and football in particular play at institutions that exist primarily in order to provide education to men and women, not to provide entertainment to the rest of the world. Personally, I’d like to see the number of scholarships, bowl and poll eligibility be based on reaching a certain minimum graduation rate. But that would be bad for business.]

    Personally, I think Tedford has earned another year by the body of his work. Yes, it’s not been so great for the last 3 years (5-7 in 2010, 7-6 in 2011, 3-8 in 2012) but it was 9-4 in 2008 & 8-5 in 2009. There are those 8 bowl games in 11 years. There’s the disadvantage he’s been at with the facility question. There’s an apparently good freshman & sophomore class, which he recruited. There’s the fact that he has not able to compete financially for assistant coaches. I think he deserves another year.

    Besides, as Dickey points out, “There isn’t a group of successful coaches lining up to coach Cal football.” All of you who want to fire him: who replaces him? Can you guarantee they get anyone better?

    November 15th, 2012 1:17 pm

Submit Your Comments

Required

Required, will not be published