November 20th, 2012 at 3:52 PM ^

Per Wikipedia, Tedford was 82-57 at Cal.  He was one of only three coaches to have a winning record while at Cal since 1956, and the other two were only ten total games over .500 in their eleven total seasons. 

Fun fact:  The most recent Cal coach with a better record than Tedford's was Pappy Waldorf, who went 67-32-4 from '47-'56.  Who didn't love Pappy Waldorf?  The Commies, that's who.


November 20th, 2012 at 5:23 PM ^

yeah it could have been him, I was thinking further back to Devin Lucien who went to UCLA. This was when I first started following recruiting, but if i remember correctly he was a guy who referrenced this blog in one of his interviews and that turned this place around when talking about recruits cause they look at the stuff talked about on here. I could be wrong but he visited and was talking about committing here and was told we were full 


November 20th, 2012 at 5:48 PM ^

I think that's match made in heaven. Petrino is perefect for big time SEC football at an institution that loves nothing more than looking the other way.


November 20th, 2012 at 5:55 PM ^

What a stupid ass move! They we competitive most years and had a coach who never wanted to leave a B rated football school. They had some big recruits coming in as well. Dumb move Cal!


November 20th, 2012 at 8:54 PM ^

This is just like Minny firing Glen Mason.  A coach turns a perennial doormat into a team that is slightly better than mediocre, but it isn't good enough.  Instead of realizing that the coach has reached the program's ceiling, the fans and admins become entitled and arrogant, and decide that they "deserve better."

Be careful what you ask for...


November 21st, 2012 at 2:03 AM ^

Sure, you can be 2-10, 1-11, or 0-12, but 3-9 means your team is absolutely terrible. Glen Mason went 3-9 his first year, then never worse than 4-7 after. He got fired at 6-7. There's plenty of room to fall from mediocre (as Illinois found out this year). There's no room to fall from 3-9.

Steve in PA

November 20th, 2012 at 9:17 PM ^

I remember reading that one reason UCLA has problems getting bigtime coaches is because it is part of the California university system, so their hands are quite tied as far as what they can offer for salaries.  I believe that heads/assistants are quite poorly paid in relation to other private schools for comparable talent.


November 21st, 2012 at 1:06 AM ^

which is more than what Hoke signed on for (~$2m), but less than RR ($2.5m). You can definitely get a good coach at that price, although it probably needs to be a Hoke type situation with a coach that has a relatively unproven track record but high upside in the intangibles department.