After a bit of reflection however we did have a possible title contender team with Kidd and Gray but injuries and Kidd going pro ended that.

If our academic standards are so high, how did we get Kidd?

Finally I’ve seen UCLA fans argue their standards for jocks are as high or higher than ours.

Michigan does have much lower standards for its jocks as its otherwise a fine school.

I did some digging around. It wasn’t that difficult. Go look up the bios of players on the team web sites. Let’s compare this year’s Cal Bears starters to those for the Arizona Wildcats in terms of their major..what are they studying? Whoops, can’t be done!

The Cats site has line after line of detailed basketball highlights for each player on almost every game they’ve played. There’s not a single thing mentioned about what their players have as hobbies outside of basketball let alone anything about their major or even if they are undeclared.

For the Bears, it says that Kravish is considering med school and has interest in being a pediatrician after basketball – imagine, a 6′ 10″ pediatrician! Harper Kamp is an American studies major and lists chess as a hobby (okay, we know that he was sort of a chess prodigy as a kid). The other three starters for the Bears have drawing and traveling listed as hobbies. Jorge lists interdisciplinary studies as his major. The other two are undeclared at this point. I think you get the point. you would think that two Pac-12 schools like Az and Cal would be similar, but perhaps not on second glance.

Let’s get a few things straight about the ground rules here. Cal is never going to consistently best the likes of Arizona, UCLA, or IU in the recruiting department. First, I believe that the admission standards are much higher at Cal than those places (not based on any inside information; rather just an educated guess based on many years of observing who couldn’t get into Cal and who could get in elsewhere). “Great academics” is sometimes a nice drawing card for certain recruits, but not for the guys who will be playing at the next level.

So, it goes without saying that we shouldn’t hold our collective breath waiting for a few of those one-and-dones to drop from the sky to take us to a Sweet 16.

Second, although we have a great campus and some nice facilities, Cal can’t come anywhere near the “atmosphere” that most big-time recruits are looking for. We’re on the West Coast, so that’s strike one. Since most impact players want maximum national TV exposure opportunities, playing in the Pacific time zone is an immediate negative.

Also, the Bay Area is a large media market, but not for college sports. This is a pro sports area, and that isn’t going to change, barring a decades-long run of success by a local program. And maybe not even then. There are no dedicated media outlets here focusing on college sports nor is there a rabid year-round fan base to give these recruits a sense that they’re at a national program. Maybe the Pac 12 Network will improve that exposure in the short run (and perhaps even help expand that fan base in the long run), but any such benefit would come well after Monty is retired.

Let’s face it. We are an academic school with a couple of really nice things going for us (attractive location, good facilities). The success we have will not be built on top 50 recruits. It will be built on well-coached teams of smart, veteran players who play better than their collective talent. Which means that success will be intermittent at best, as no one can have a junior- and senior-laden team every year.

So let’s judge Monty on that basis. Blue chip California players who have legitimate NBA prospects are as likely to seek the spotlight offered by the (mostly Midwest and East Coast) big basketball factories as their counterparts from other places. It’s unlikely that there is some extra effort or benefit (legal ones anyway) that Monty or any other Bay Area coach can use to tempt them to stay here.

If you want to criticize Montgomery’s recruiting, compare it to other schools that are similarly situated.

How do Cal standards compare to the Pac 12 but I’d also be curious to see a comparison to the Big Ten. Cody Zeller only got one B in high school and spent much of his recruiting time comparing business schools when he chose Indiana.

I believe Michigan has a much lower standard for jocks- what about Indiana and Wisconsin?

I know that academic standards for acceptance for athletes is lower for Cal than for its general student population (or else we’d be playing in the Ivy League), but is that lower standard higher than the standard that, say, Arizona uses to accept students who will be getting an athletic scholarship to that school. Optimally, it would be great to know the comparative standard for acceptance for athletes at all the Pac 12 schools.

Let’s look at your point #5. Why can’t we draw on the same pool of kids as other Pac 10 schools? What is the inherent weakness about Cal that UCLA Oregon and Arizona doesn’t suffer? ( I left out UNLV as they often have had academic issues)

Yes, it would be nice to have better recruiting classes, but Cal is not going to be able to get the kids that go to many other schools. Yes, Stanford has been able to get some athletic kids but I think there are some advantages to being a private university.

Other relevant points:

5. The pool of kids that Cal can draw from is not the same as other schools like SDSU, UNLV, or even a school like Arizona – just need to keep this in mind.

4. Cal needs to improve their ability to recruit locally.

3. Cal’s offense probably needs a little retooling – maybe they were a little too predictable.

2. Need more people to turn out for games – need to make it more attractive for more alum and students to attend the games.

1. Still wouldn’t trade Montgomery for any other coach – let him stay until he retires – for recruiting is not a level playing field for Cal, it’s nice to have an advantage when it comes to coaching.

If we don’t even make the NCAA’s I will be sure to point it out to Takeoff who will change his position.

The coach for Ohio University is getting consideration from Illinois – he would probably be fine at Cal.

Cal’s starting five was probably the best in the league, but by the time the season was close to an end, they were worn out. Cal undoubtedly had the weakest bench in the league after Soloman was suspended because of poor grades.

Plus, teams had learned that Cal did not have a real inside threat and so expanded their defense to make it tough on the guards and small forward to score. Montgomery said as much after the last Colorado loss. BTW, I thought Colorado looked pretty good in both games against Cal, and had a lot of talent. That was proven by their NCAA win over UNLV.

Next year, Soloman (hopefully) returns, but we lose Guitierrez and Kamp, not a good exchange at all. So unless the couple of incoming freshmen we have are really good, we won’t have as much talent next year as this year. But UCLA, Stanford, and other teams seem to be doing much better than us on recruiting for next year. All I’m asking is that Cal consider giving Monty more help in recruiting, so he can work his coaching magic on a better set of recruits. In this respect, i agree with you — over the long haul the rankings of recruits makes a difference, most likely a big one, in terms of results.