Since 2010 Cal is 60-80 in football. I don’t know why we’re takings thing back to a 2006 PAC-10 championship to make that football program look accomplished.
This is the same BS that drives me nuts with Nebraska fans. What matters is where things stand today. Iowa State is currently in a much stronger position than Cal in both major sports.
20 years is my go-to window for such things. It certainly isn’t perfect, but it isn’t entirely arbitrary or meant to make a program look
accomplished.
Typically you get a coaching change (or two). It is often enough time to soften the effects of a particularly good (or bad) recruiting class (or two).
The Nebraska comparison is off for a host of reasons. The most obvious is that until last week there weren’t any structural changes affecting Cal that landed in that window. They’ve had the same advantages/disadvantages as always.
I couldn’t disagree more on your statement that
“What matters is where things stand today” in the sense you seem to mean it. It is an important factor in predicting results on a horizon of
maybe 3-4 years for football and 1-2 for basketball. Hopefully it is self-evidently a
near non-factor in the bigger picture of evaluating the value of a school’s athletic department.