Well, I had to take a break from our Family Ski vacation to travel over to the Tahoe Biltmore and watch the Bears vs. the Air Force. I have to say that I was glad I did. I also got to lay some coin down and get a bit of a nice return.
This was an interesting game.
First, Nate Longshore was yanked early, when the Bears were down 21-0. But let's be honest - it was not Nate's fault. Nate was 5 for 8, and the last play of the second drive was dropped (on a 4th and something). It was a pass to Layrelle Cunningham, I think. Because Nate did not have the ability to pass to Jordan or DeSean Jackson, who were sitting out the first quarter.
So, Nate got two series with the second team offense, and was yanked. The Bears were down by 21, because of poor defense (DeCoud was also out the first quarter) and poor special teams (the Falcons recoved a non-onside kick for the first time I think I have ever seen that).
Then, Kevin Riley came in and dominated the game. He had 8 series - all of them went for scores, or were the end of the halfs. And both of those there was no doubt that if time had not run out, the Bears would have scored.
It was almost as if this was orchestrated by Tedford to make the transition to Riley. The announcers had all of the details to make the public case for Riley. The lopsided score was just what Tedford needed to bring Riley in to make his presentation, and he did a terrific job. The details were not that important as opposed to the final result, but they were impressive. I think only three missed completions, one of which was a dropped Hail Mary at the end of the first half which should been caught by Hawkins, and was in fact the most apparent pass interference I have ever seen. He ran for first downs, he scored rushing touchdowns. In fact, he threw tight passes.
The difference was when he was in there, the offense clicked. Also, that we called a different game. Forsett was not as featured in the Riley offense. It was much more of a spread feel with the occasional rushing play, as opposed to the pro-style of Nate's offense. But in any event, Forsett had a great game. He ended with 140 yards, but did have the last quarter fumble that could have been a difference maker. But it was nice to see him with 1500 yards for the season.
The worst part of the game was watching Nate on the sidelines. It was a three hour second by second ruination of a career. It was like watching one of those movies where you can see what is coming, the guys falls, and by the end of the film you know he knows it was all over. Except that you know Nate know it as soon as he was taken out. I mean, even if Riley breaks his leg, the chants for Mansion will be too much to overcome. I really feel for the guy.
The defense still had a lot of issues, but Air Force was a good, tough option running team, which is hard to defend against. Their QB is (or, was, after a nasty leg injury) a very good runner and passer. The style of offense they run is the spread run as opposed to the spread pass. The interesting thing is that thier QB was a very good passer. They were a tough team, well coached, and did not give up. Let's face it, they scored more on us than Tennessee, USC, or Oregon did.
The general proposition is that in Bowl games, the teams that were ranked higher at the beginning of the season generally win the Bowl Game. This is based on the fact that they have more overall talent, that the lay-off is too much for most teams that won on momentum lost that momentum, and that the bowl process itself sort of loses the focus of the game, and the most talented teams win. I think that was clearly the case this year, in this bowl. Air Force is a good team, but clearly less talented than the Bears. Cal has a tremendous amount of offensive power, and can overwhelm you. The defense had issues stopping the two talented Air Force offensive weapons. But once the QB was out, the game was over.
So now, what happens? Does everyone think that Riley would have brought us to the National Championship game? Did playing Nate ruin his career? Is there a real competition? Or does winning the Bowl MVP give you the leg up for next year? Does the SAHPC ruling come in our favor? Does Tedford blow his entire half million bonus tonight on a great New Year Party?
More to come from as the Bears turn...
GO BEARS!!
Monday, December 31, 2007
Sunday, December 23, 2007
Devon Hardin
As Devon goes, so go the Bears.
In Cal's two loses this year, Devon is the one element that has not played up to potential, and has cost Cal the game. We need for him, a senior, to be the leader on the team. More importantly, we need him to be consistent.
Last night, he was double teamed and failed to have a big impact. When Leon Powe was in the same situation, he more often than not was the dominant player on the floor. If Devon wants to make it to the next level, he needs to step up a bit, from a consistency standpoint. He is going to be doubled up all year long. Against Kansas State, he took himself out of the game and gave them the lead.
The good news in both of these loses is that the Bears battled back. They certainly have the talent. They just need to be more consistent.
As far as it goes, the calculations remain the same. Cal needs to win 18 games to get into the tournament. That means that we need to now win at least half of our Pac 10 games. That could be a tall order this year, for any Pac 10 team. It certainly will be tough for Cal. Not that I do not expect us to be a tournament team. But it is not going to be easy, even with the quality team that we have this year.
Happy Holidays. More next week before the Bowl Game, and the opening of the Pac 10 for the hoops team.
GO BEARS!!
In Cal's two loses this year, Devon is the one element that has not played up to potential, and has cost Cal the game. We need for him, a senior, to be the leader on the team. More importantly, we need him to be consistent.
Last night, he was double teamed and failed to have a big impact. When Leon Powe was in the same situation, he more often than not was the dominant player on the floor. If Devon wants to make it to the next level, he needs to step up a bit, from a consistency standpoint. He is going to be doubled up all year long. Against Kansas State, he took himself out of the game and gave them the lead.
The good news in both of these loses is that the Bears battled back. They certainly have the talent. They just need to be more consistent.
As far as it goes, the calculations remain the same. Cal needs to win 18 games to get into the tournament. That means that we need to now win at least half of our Pac 10 games. That could be a tall order this year, for any Pac 10 team. It certainly will be tough for Cal. Not that I do not expect us to be a tournament team. But it is not going to be easy, even with the quality team that we have this year.
Happy Holidays. More next week before the Bowl Game, and the opening of the Pac 10 for the hoops team.
GO BEARS!!
Monday, December 17, 2007
Tedford and Cal
FIrst, it has been nice not posting for a while. I got to do a bit of Christmas shopping, meet my kids, get some work done. The weekly pools that I participate in have all dried up. Kids are in finals. The only thing going on is the coaching carnage, which I never believed would impact Cal in the least, at least as far as Tedford goes.
It looks like Cal is starting to get some depth at wide receiver in the recruiting class. I think every Cal fan right now should be praying for Nyan Boeting's final exam grades. But it is nice to see us get some guys over 6 feet tall coming in.
As far as the coaching carnage, there was no way JT was going to go to any of the jobs that opened up. Think about it: He has already moved Cal up to the level of Michigan, or Ohio State. Cal was ranked #9 to #12 pre-season, after losing our three best players to the NFL. That is just like an Ohio State, or a Michigan. We were ranked #2 in the country, and after losing dropped to number 8. That is just like a Michigan or Ohio State. There is a lot of respect out there already for Tedford, the Cal program, and all of that stuff. Yes, we do not have the long tradition of winning, but we do have a long tradition of football, and we do have arguable 5 national championships. We can build what we need over the next 15 or twenty years, and we will also be one of the perennial powerhouses. At least, that is a vision that JT can see, and I think that is a vision that a lot of Cal fans and supporters can see.
Cal is first and foremost an academic institution. But I think everyone realizes the benefits of a strong athletic department. It raises the sense of school pride, it generates income to the school, and it generates a legacy of giving. And, as the state moves away from state funding, the University is going to have to come after the private donor to support the school. This is going to be done in a lot of ways, but I think that the University knows that athletic success is a huge way to involve the community in supporting the school.
There was a pretty good article in the Wall Street Journal last week by Faye Vincent about the endowments at Harvard, Yale and some other big time academic colleges. The general premise is that because of the dominant level of their endowments, they will be able to offer to students free tuition. Right now, if your parents make under $60,000, Harvard is free. Now, they are going to a place where if you make under $200,000, you only have to pay 10% of your income to school tuition. In other words, a 50% discount. Soon, it will come to a point where the school itself will be free.
Cal and other top public schools, on the other hand, are going in the opposite direction. They are starting to charge top dollar for the professional gradutate schools. Law, business, medical and other graduate schools are around $45,000 in just tuition now. The difference is that we were too late in the game. Harvard has a $35 billion dollar endowment. That would fund the entire University of California each year - not just Cal, but UCLA, Irvine, etc.
For Cal to reach the level of academic success to compete against the Harvards and the Yales, and even Stanford, the school needs to reach out to the community to fund it's success. Athletics is a big part of that process. And we need, more than anything, a successful football program to do that. And I think JT knows that. And certainly so does Sandy and the administration. It is nice to get half a billion from BP for energy study. But Cal is not going to sell itself entirely to the highest bidder. We need to have the funds to succeed from the people in our community.
GO Bears!!
It looks like Cal is starting to get some depth at wide receiver in the recruiting class. I think every Cal fan right now should be praying for Nyan Boeting's final exam grades. But it is nice to see us get some guys over 6 feet tall coming in.
As far as the coaching carnage, there was no way JT was going to go to any of the jobs that opened up. Think about it: He has already moved Cal up to the level of Michigan, or Ohio State. Cal was ranked #9 to #12 pre-season, after losing our three best players to the NFL. That is just like an Ohio State, or a Michigan. We were ranked #2 in the country, and after losing dropped to number 8. That is just like a Michigan or Ohio State. There is a lot of respect out there already for Tedford, the Cal program, and all of that stuff. Yes, we do not have the long tradition of winning, but we do have a long tradition of football, and we do have arguable 5 national championships. We can build what we need over the next 15 or twenty years, and we will also be one of the perennial powerhouses. At least, that is a vision that JT can see, and I think that is a vision that a lot of Cal fans and supporters can see.
Cal is first and foremost an academic institution. But I think everyone realizes the benefits of a strong athletic department. It raises the sense of school pride, it generates income to the school, and it generates a legacy of giving. And, as the state moves away from state funding, the University is going to have to come after the private donor to support the school. This is going to be done in a lot of ways, but I think that the University knows that athletic success is a huge way to involve the community in supporting the school.
There was a pretty good article in the Wall Street Journal last week by Faye Vincent about the endowments at Harvard, Yale and some other big time academic colleges. The general premise is that because of the dominant level of their endowments, they will be able to offer to students free tuition. Right now, if your parents make under $60,000, Harvard is free. Now, they are going to a place where if you make under $200,000, you only have to pay 10% of your income to school tuition. In other words, a 50% discount. Soon, it will come to a point where the school itself will be free.
Cal and other top public schools, on the other hand, are going in the opposite direction. They are starting to charge top dollar for the professional gradutate schools. Law, business, medical and other graduate schools are around $45,000 in just tuition now. The difference is that we were too late in the game. Harvard has a $35 billion dollar endowment. That would fund the entire University of California each year - not just Cal, but UCLA, Irvine, etc.
For Cal to reach the level of academic success to compete against the Harvards and the Yales, and even Stanford, the school needs to reach out to the community to fund it's success. Athletics is a big part of that process. And we need, more than anything, a successful football program to do that. And I think JT knows that. And certainly so does Sandy and the administration. It is nice to get half a billion from BP for energy study. But Cal is not going to sell itself entirely to the highest bidder. We need to have the funds to succeed from the people in our community.
GO Bears!!
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
Cal Basketball and other stuff
I did not want to post before the Kansas State game for fear of what would most certainly have been too gushing of a post after dominating a very weak team for 117 points.
However, even in the loss, it was clear that the Bears were the better team on the road against a terrible refereeing crew from the Big 12. It was shame because the Bears would have moved into the top 25 for the first time in a while with a victory. The refereeing was TRULY a joke. This was the most one-sided game ever called in the history of basketball (well, I am just guessing). But it was bad.
All that aside, the Bears should have won anyway. DeVon Hardin played poorly, as is his MO when he gets into early foul trouble, and the Bears got out-rebounded by a significant margin. In addition, there were 20 turnovers. So that is a lot to make up when you are playing with one hand tied behind your back. We needed to be stronger on the boards.
As far as it goes, losing to Kansas State does not do much for us either way. We are ranked currently at 74 in the RPI, and Kansas State is number 86. So it is a fairly close loss. We dropped from 55 after the loss.
We do have two good pre-season wins which will help us down the line in Missouri and San Diego State, both in the top 50 RPI and hopefully staying there. San Diego State has a strong possibility of contending for their conference crown for the third year in a row, and Missouri is also pretty good. So if they play strong, and Kansas State does well, our pre-season will be one that people are semi-impressed about.
Instead, St. Mary's took our spot in the top 25 by beating San Diego State over the weekend, and moving to 24 in the polls. They are also, at 6 - 0, number 1 in the RPI. That is very impressive for the boys from Moraga.
I am assuming that we win out in our preseason, going into the season with an RPI in the mid-40s. Most of the games remaining are against teams that we should definitely beat. And all are at home. The toughest will be against Utah, who has lost to Washington, Oregon and Santa Clara. All tough teams, but the Bears should be as good as that crew.
I just got my East Bay Business times in the mail. There is a postcard advertisement for the Bears, which is pretty impressive. It says something like: Two Naismith Candidates, Three Returning Starters, Seven Returning Lettermen, and the biggest front line in all of NCAA basketball. When you think about it, it is pretty impressive. This should be a great season for the Bears, and I am starting to get excited.
Although not as excited as I was at the beginning of football season. And we all know how that went.
But I do think that the Bears will be playing past the first weekend in the tournament. I think they can win half the games in the Pac 10, which will give them a definite tournament seeding in the top 32. I can see the Pac 10 getting in 7 teams easily, perhaps 8 if Washington can turn it around.
Hopefully, getting Boykins and Theo back will be a positive to the team. I think it gives a bit more flexibility in the lineup to move from a big to small (but not too small) lineup which can be good. This team is so athletic this year, there really is no excuse for not succeeding.
*******************
I apologize that I have not said this before, but CONGRATULATIONS TO THE MEN'S WATERPOLO TEAM for a dominating defense of their National Title. That is the best news in a while. It is great to see Cal at the top again in this sport, where we belong. I always though of Water Polo, Crew and Rugby as the sports where we should win every year. These are sports with a long tradition of victory at the University and we need to ensure that we stay on top.
It would be nice to say that football and basketball have a long history of victory and achievement. But of course we are trying to build that. Two things come to mind when building long term success: Coaches who are good, competent and with a ton of integrity, who can connect with their players and get them to give their best, and coaches who stay at programs long enough for those qualities to be recognized and rewarded with the best recruits. I think in many of our sports, we have started down that path. If you look at the big winners over time (Jack Clark of Cal Rugby, Mike Krzyzewski of Duke, Lute Olsen, Pete Cutino, John Wooden, etc), you will that is the recipe for success. Both Bobby Bowden and Joe Paterno had that (until they got too old and probably do not have the pulse of what is really going on now). I think that is what we are trying to do with Jeff Tedford and Ben Braun. I think both of those men have had failures, but the idea is that the program is a positive one, that positive consistency means that players come to you. In other words, if you are 10 years old and look up to the best in the business right now, you would consider Jeff Tedford and Cal one of those. If he is still there in 8 years, that is probably a place where you want to go, if you have a choice, and your parents are smart. It is comforting to know that a good program is in place. That is why Lute Olsen is getting paid big bucks to tell people he will be back next year.
So it is nice to see that in other Cal sports as well - trying to make a transition from a sometime winner to a consistent winner. Our Soccer Teams are trying to get to that level, and our Women's basketball team is certainly building that. Also, Women's Volleyball is doing well for the third straight year (actually beating Nebraska - defending champs - and making it into the final four).
I think a lot of this has to do with an re-emphasis on athletics at Cal, and a lot of this has to do with increasing contributions from alumni due to the success of the football team over the past few year. But most of this has to do with hiring the right coaches, paying them a competitive salary, and making it comfortable for well qualified athletes to make Cal home. But certainly California Athletics is on a very positive upswing over the past 5 years or so.
GO BEARS!!
However, even in the loss, it was clear that the Bears were the better team on the road against a terrible refereeing crew from the Big 12. It was shame because the Bears would have moved into the top 25 for the first time in a while with a victory. The refereeing was TRULY a joke. This was the most one-sided game ever called in the history of basketball (well, I am just guessing). But it was bad.
All that aside, the Bears should have won anyway. DeVon Hardin played poorly, as is his MO when he gets into early foul trouble, and the Bears got out-rebounded by a significant margin. In addition, there were 20 turnovers. So that is a lot to make up when you are playing with one hand tied behind your back. We needed to be stronger on the boards.
As far as it goes, losing to Kansas State does not do much for us either way. We are ranked currently at 74 in the RPI, and Kansas State is number 86. So it is a fairly close loss. We dropped from 55 after the loss.
We do have two good pre-season wins which will help us down the line in Missouri and San Diego State, both in the top 50 RPI and hopefully staying there. San Diego State has a strong possibility of contending for their conference crown for the third year in a row, and Missouri is also pretty good. So if they play strong, and Kansas State does well, our pre-season will be one that people are semi-impressed about.
Instead, St. Mary's took our spot in the top 25 by beating San Diego State over the weekend, and moving to 24 in the polls. They are also, at 6 - 0, number 1 in the RPI. That is very impressive for the boys from Moraga.
I am assuming that we win out in our preseason, going into the season with an RPI in the mid-40s. Most of the games remaining are against teams that we should definitely beat. And all are at home. The toughest will be against Utah, who has lost to Washington, Oregon and Santa Clara. All tough teams, but the Bears should be as good as that crew.
I just got my East Bay Business times in the mail. There is a postcard advertisement for the Bears, which is pretty impressive. It says something like: Two Naismith Candidates, Three Returning Starters, Seven Returning Lettermen, and the biggest front line in all of NCAA basketball. When you think about it, it is pretty impressive. This should be a great season for the Bears, and I am starting to get excited.
Although not as excited as I was at the beginning of football season. And we all know how that went.
But I do think that the Bears will be playing past the first weekend in the tournament. I think they can win half the games in the Pac 10, which will give them a definite tournament seeding in the top 32. I can see the Pac 10 getting in 7 teams easily, perhaps 8 if Washington can turn it around.
Hopefully, getting Boykins and Theo back will be a positive to the team. I think it gives a bit more flexibility in the lineup to move from a big to small (but not too small) lineup which can be good. This team is so athletic this year, there really is no excuse for not succeeding.
*******************
I apologize that I have not said this before, but CONGRATULATIONS TO THE MEN'S WATERPOLO TEAM for a dominating defense of their National Title. That is the best news in a while. It is great to see Cal at the top again in this sport, where we belong. I always though of Water Polo, Crew and Rugby as the sports where we should win every year. These are sports with a long tradition of victory at the University and we need to ensure that we stay on top.
It would be nice to say that football and basketball have a long history of victory and achievement. But of course we are trying to build that. Two things come to mind when building long term success: Coaches who are good, competent and with a ton of integrity, who can connect with their players and get them to give their best, and coaches who stay at programs long enough for those qualities to be recognized and rewarded with the best recruits. I think in many of our sports, we have started down that path. If you look at the big winners over time (Jack Clark of Cal Rugby, Mike Krzyzewski of Duke, Lute Olsen, Pete Cutino, John Wooden, etc), you will that is the recipe for success. Both Bobby Bowden and Joe Paterno had that (until they got too old and probably do not have the pulse of what is really going on now). I think that is what we are trying to do with Jeff Tedford and Ben Braun. I think both of those men have had failures, but the idea is that the program is a positive one, that positive consistency means that players come to you. In other words, if you are 10 years old and look up to the best in the business right now, you would consider Jeff Tedford and Cal one of those. If he is still there in 8 years, that is probably a place where you want to go, if you have a choice, and your parents are smart. It is comforting to know that a good program is in place. That is why Lute Olsen is getting paid big bucks to tell people he will be back next year.
So it is nice to see that in other Cal sports as well - trying to make a transition from a sometime winner to a consistent winner. Our Soccer Teams are trying to get to that level, and our Women's basketball team is certainly building that. Also, Women's Volleyball is doing well for the third straight year (actually beating Nebraska - defending champs - and making it into the final four).
I think a lot of this has to do with an re-emphasis on athletics at Cal, and a lot of this has to do with increasing contributions from alumni due to the success of the football team over the past few year. But most of this has to do with hiring the right coaches, paying them a competitive salary, and making it comfortable for well qualified athletes to make Cal home. But certainly California Athletics is on a very positive upswing over the past 5 years or so.
GO BEARS!!
Wednesday, December 5, 2007
Things
First of all, interesting to note that the real story finally comes out about Nate's ankle. He has a bone chip in it (which, I am sure, swells up during the game) which probably causes him more paid as the game goes on. Who would have guessed?
But enough of that.
It was interesting that the Pac 10 all Academic Team was released. USC had QB Sanchez on as honorable mention. Good thing Booty got injured of they would have been shut out.
Stanford had the most, which is not surprising with their grade inflation. But I was most impressed with Washington State, who had 12 honorees - 6 on the first team. Of course, they immediately fired their coach, since that is not the type of program they want to be running.
Cal came in with 10, which I think was third on the list. Justin Forsett made the grade with a 3.03 GPA in interdisciplinary Studies, for the second team selection. Alex Mack was first team with a 3.5 in legal studies - the only Bear on the first team.
Dennis Dixon made the second team as well. I am sorta impressed by that guy.
GO BEARS!!
But enough of that.
It was interesting that the Pac 10 all Academic Team was released. USC had QB Sanchez on as honorable mention. Good thing Booty got injured of they would have been shut out.
Stanford had the most, which is not surprising with their grade inflation. But I was most impressed with Washington State, who had 12 honorees - 6 on the first team. Of course, they immediately fired their coach, since that is not the type of program they want to be running.
Cal came in with 10, which I think was third on the list. Justin Forsett made the grade with a 3.03 GPA in interdisciplinary Studies, for the second team selection. Alex Mack was first team with a 3.5 in legal studies - the only Bear on the first team.
Dennis Dixon made the second team as well. I am sorta impressed by that guy.
GO BEARS!!
Tuesday, December 4, 2007
Hawaii - Tebow controversy
There is an interesting article on CNN/SI.com which talks about June Jones calling Tim Tebow a system quarterback, and how Colt Brennan is really the best QB, because he runs a pro-style offense. It is actually pretty interesting reading.
I think he may have a point. tim tebow is a man, but he does run the same offense that Urban Meyer ran at Utah, which showcased Alex Smith. And Cal fans (as well as 49er fans) know how that goes.
I guess the question will be should you not draft an Urban Meyer QB? I mean, looking at what Tedford's guys have done recently in the NFL (Rodgers and Boller this past week) compared to Alex Smith's three years at the helm of the sinking ship 49ers, it appears that he is an inadequate developer of NFL talent at the QB position.
I am just kidding - sort of. It is an interesting theory.
Actually, Timmy Chang from Hawaii is a case study in a system QB. But that being said, it is true that Brennan was going to start for Colorado at one point before he went to Hawaii. So he is not just a system QB - he is a damn good QB and highly recruited.
Actually, the Hawaii - Georgia game is the only BCS game that I will definitely watch.
GO BEARS!!
I think he may have a point. tim tebow is a man, but he does run the same offense that Urban Meyer ran at Utah, which showcased Alex Smith. And Cal fans (as well as 49er fans) know how that goes.
I guess the question will be should you not draft an Urban Meyer QB? I mean, looking at what Tedford's guys have done recently in the NFL (Rodgers and Boller this past week) compared to Alex Smith's three years at the helm of the sinking ship 49ers, it appears that he is an inadequate developer of NFL talent at the QB position.
I am just kidding - sort of. It is an interesting theory.
Actually, Timmy Chang from Hawaii is a case study in a system QB. But that being said, it is true that Brennan was going to start for Colorado at one point before he went to Hawaii. So he is not just a system QB - he is a damn good QB and highly recruited.
Actually, the Hawaii - Georgia game is the only BCS game that I will definitely watch.
GO BEARS!!
Monday, December 3, 2007
Pac 10 gets screwed
Once again, the Pac 10 gets screwed by the BCS - costing us 4 million bucks.
Arizona State gets passed over by Illinois. Ron Zooks Illini are in a BCS game. Yes, it hurts. A lot.
If I were Arizona State, and I got screwed by the folks in my own home town from the Fiesta Bowl, I am not sure what I would do. But I sure as hell would stop eating Tostitos. That surely sucks.
The big issue here is the Rose Bowl. Because of their conference tie-ins, they have USC playing Illinois. Who wants to see that game? Illinois is not BCS quality - they lost three games in the BIG 10! - the worst major conference (well, maybe the ACC). ASU lost to USC and Oregon, both ranked in the top 10 when they played them - yes Oregon lost a few games later after Dixon was hurt, but they were the best team in the country at the time.
And the Rose Bowl get's USC and Illinois. That is sad. They should have told the Big 10 to blow off, taken Georgia, and be done with it. Instead, we have these tepid match-ups. They need to change thier rule - only take the winners of the Big 10 or Pac 10, and if they are in the National Championship game, then they get an at large. But it does not have to be a crappy team like Illinois.
This is how the BCS games should have been, based on the current ratings and what I think would have been the best matchups:
Championship Game
Ohio State vs LSU
Rose
USC vs Georgia
Fiesta
Arizona State vs Oklahoma
Orange
Virginia Tech vs Hawaii
Sugar
West Virginia vs Missouri
We would get to see what would have happened if the last two 1 and 2 didn't choke. We would get to see the SEC vs Pac 10 thing. We would get to see the Dennis Erickson eviscerate the Stoops brothers. We would get to see Hawaii lose brutally to a decent team (well, you can't have it all). We would still be stuck with a lousy Championship game, but we would have something to do over the holidays. Oh well.
The conference affiliation thing for the Rose Bowl really screwed the pooch this year. I am still a BCS supporter, but they need to have some flexibility.
And Kansas getting in over Missouri is a joke. Big time.
Arizona State gets passed over by Illinois. Ron Zooks Illini are in a BCS game. Yes, it hurts. A lot.
If I were Arizona State, and I got screwed by the folks in my own home town from the Fiesta Bowl, I am not sure what I would do. But I sure as hell would stop eating Tostitos. That surely sucks.
The big issue here is the Rose Bowl. Because of their conference tie-ins, they have USC playing Illinois. Who wants to see that game? Illinois is not BCS quality - they lost three games in the BIG 10! - the worst major conference (well, maybe the ACC). ASU lost to USC and Oregon, both ranked in the top 10 when they played them - yes Oregon lost a few games later after Dixon was hurt, but they were the best team in the country at the time.
And the Rose Bowl get's USC and Illinois. That is sad. They should have told the Big 10 to blow off, taken Georgia, and be done with it. Instead, we have these tepid match-ups. They need to change thier rule - only take the winners of the Big 10 or Pac 10, and if they are in the National Championship game, then they get an at large. But it does not have to be a crappy team like Illinois.
This is how the BCS games should have been, based on the current ratings and what I think would have been the best matchups:
Championship Game
Ohio State vs LSU
Rose
USC vs Georgia
Fiesta
Arizona State vs Oklahoma
Orange
Virginia Tech vs Hawaii
Sugar
West Virginia vs Missouri
We would get to see what would have happened if the last two 1 and 2 didn't choke. We would get to see the SEC vs Pac 10 thing. We would get to see the Dennis Erickson eviscerate the Stoops brothers. We would get to see Hawaii lose brutally to a decent team (well, you can't have it all). We would still be stuck with a lousy Championship game, but we would have something to do over the holidays. Oh well.
The conference affiliation thing for the Rose Bowl really screwed the pooch this year. I am still a BCS supporter, but they need to have some flexibility.
And Kansas getting in over Missouri is a joke. Big time.
Now what?
After the horrible mess on Saturday, where everyone decided to act like 5 year olds and sit and cry on the sidelines and not play, I go to the message boards and it was a blood-bath. Fire the coach, change it all - I am not going to go to any more Cal games any more - BOO- HOO.
Good riddance, losers. Go away.
This is the result of Jeff Tedford being too nice a guy and providing for us Bear fans a new level of expectation.
Tedford goes to the families of his players, recruits them, brings in guys who have good families, who have solid backgrounds, who have good skills, and who want to go the most prestigious university in the world. They come for the degree, and the chance to play big-time football on a big-time team.
In other words, they are spoiled little kids. And at the first sign of adversity, they quit on their coach, and on themselves. Nate is not having a good year, I quit. I am not getting enough receptions, I guess i'll drop the ones I do get. Even Forsett didn't look himself on Saturday.
Tedford doesn't understand that these players are not killing themselves like he did, because they have something to fall back on. They get the Cal degree, so they don't have to make it in the league. Zack Follett was inspired, played well, and called the team out. We need more Zack Folletts.
These guys are babies, and the played like it. Sometimes, you have to go through a bunch of adversity to finally grow up. I have hired college kids who think they know it all, and are lousy employees. You have to fire those guys or they will never get it. You have to be brutal and tell them they suck, learn from you elders, and stop being a bunch of smart-ass kids. I think we have a bunch of smart-ass kids who have a lot of talent, and who think they know it all. The Bears need a bunch of guys who have been through adversity.
So Tedford is to blame for that. He is looking for leaders on the team. Well, he has to create them. I would start by opening every job up for competition for the bowl game. I would throw it all away. I would find the guys who want to play. That is what USC does, and I think they are pretty successful. Yes, they are USC and they get the good players, but they have hard competition every week. We have lost these last 6 games on the line of scrimmage on both sides. We probably have the best offensive line in the Pac 10 physically, yet we let Stanford and Washington push up around. We have defensive linemen who were supposed to be great. It is not that hard to play the guys who want to play. But they were crap this year. We had no warriors out there.
Yes, Nate had problems, but this is clearly not a Nate issue. We should have had 45 points in most games. Nate still threw for 60% on the season. Yes, he had turnovers, but so did every other team in the Pac 10. This was a team that thought they deserved it - not that they had to earn it. They crushed Tennessee, and they thought it was gravy from there. That is the problem.
Dennis Erickson plays it differently, and that is why he is successful. He gets guys that only have one shot - make it big in football or else you got nothing. Cal does not have those players. Now, Dennis Erickson is slime. But that aspect of his program is part of what makes his guys play tough.
We need some of those kids on our team. We are not tough. Everyone has too many aspiration - Michalczik - want to be a head coach, forgot that the game is won on the line of scrimmage. Gregory is busy thinking about Washington State. Tedford is frankly the only one who is focused on his job, but forgot that the National Championship is not a goal. Winning each game is the goal. He forgot that, and left Nate in all season, ruining Nate's career.
The good news is, this is just the thing we needed. We will get the kids in who want to play. And we will be much better going forward for this. I truly believe that. Some coaches and players will be let go. The guys who want to win will stay. Because it clearly is not talent. It is will to win, and to put in the hard work. and not to quit.
GO BEARS!!
Good riddance, losers. Go away.
This is the result of Jeff Tedford being too nice a guy and providing for us Bear fans a new level of expectation.
Tedford goes to the families of his players, recruits them, brings in guys who have good families, who have solid backgrounds, who have good skills, and who want to go the most prestigious university in the world. They come for the degree, and the chance to play big-time football on a big-time team.
In other words, they are spoiled little kids. And at the first sign of adversity, they quit on their coach, and on themselves. Nate is not having a good year, I quit. I am not getting enough receptions, I guess i'll drop the ones I do get. Even Forsett didn't look himself on Saturday.
Tedford doesn't understand that these players are not killing themselves like he did, because they have something to fall back on. They get the Cal degree, so they don't have to make it in the league. Zack Follett was inspired, played well, and called the team out. We need more Zack Folletts.
These guys are babies, and the played like it. Sometimes, you have to go through a bunch of adversity to finally grow up. I have hired college kids who think they know it all, and are lousy employees. You have to fire those guys or they will never get it. You have to be brutal and tell them they suck, learn from you elders, and stop being a bunch of smart-ass kids. I think we have a bunch of smart-ass kids who have a lot of talent, and who think they know it all. The Bears need a bunch of guys who have been through adversity.
So Tedford is to blame for that. He is looking for leaders on the team. Well, he has to create them. I would start by opening every job up for competition for the bowl game. I would throw it all away. I would find the guys who want to play. That is what USC does, and I think they are pretty successful. Yes, they are USC and they get the good players, but they have hard competition every week. We have lost these last 6 games on the line of scrimmage on both sides. We probably have the best offensive line in the Pac 10 physically, yet we let Stanford and Washington push up around. We have defensive linemen who were supposed to be great. It is not that hard to play the guys who want to play. But they were crap this year. We had no warriors out there.
Yes, Nate had problems, but this is clearly not a Nate issue. We should have had 45 points in most games. Nate still threw for 60% on the season. Yes, he had turnovers, but so did every other team in the Pac 10. This was a team that thought they deserved it - not that they had to earn it. They crushed Tennessee, and they thought it was gravy from there. That is the problem.
Dennis Erickson plays it differently, and that is why he is successful. He gets guys that only have one shot - make it big in football or else you got nothing. Cal does not have those players. Now, Dennis Erickson is slime. But that aspect of his program is part of what makes his guys play tough.
We need some of those kids on our team. We are not tough. Everyone has too many aspiration - Michalczik - want to be a head coach, forgot that the game is won on the line of scrimmage. Gregory is busy thinking about Washington State. Tedford is frankly the only one who is focused on his job, but forgot that the National Championship is not a goal. Winning each game is the goal. He forgot that, and left Nate in all season, ruining Nate's career.
The good news is, this is just the thing we needed. We will get the kids in who want to play. And we will be much better going forward for this. I truly believe that. Some coaches and players will be let go. The guys who want to win will stay. Because it clearly is not talent. It is will to win, and to put in the hard work. and not to quit.
GO BEARS!!
Saturday, December 1, 2007
Cal vs Missouri
There is a big game today for the Bears, and it takes place in Haas Pavillion. The Bears vs Missouri will be a big indicator of how well we are going to be this year.
Missouri has played 8 games this year, losing twice to Arkansas and Michigan State, two teams who have a strong shot at playing well into march. And they lost both of those by three points. So they are definitely a good team - a type of team that the Bears have to play and win if they want to have any shot of getting through the Pac 10 season semi-intact. In fact, the Bears have a somewhat tougher pre-season than any that I can remember us playing, facing San Diego State, Missouri, and Utah and Kansas State coming up. These are all teams that can win games and will be RPI 100 teams or better at the end of the season. In other words, just about as good or better than Cal last year.
For the Bears to make the Tournament, I think they have to win 18 games. If they do, they have a shot. For a team that for most analysts is the 7th or 8th best in the Pac 10, that is a tough order. The nice thing is, we do have a tougher pre-season than most so we will be able to get in with less than a winning Pac 10 record. I think if we can move through the pre-season undefeated, we will need only 7 or so Pac 10 wins. That would be all victories against the teams slated below us, plus an upset somewhere along the line. The only games that we SHOULD win are against Oregon State and Arizona State. Everything else is going to be a struggle.
So, having the toughest Pac 10 season in years, plus the toughest out of conference schedule in years is a recipe for either the greatest season we will have had in years, or disaster. Tonight will be a big test.
Here is looking at a great Bears season.
GO BEARS!!
Missouri has played 8 games this year, losing twice to Arkansas and Michigan State, two teams who have a strong shot at playing well into march. And they lost both of those by three points. So they are definitely a good team - a type of team that the Bears have to play and win if they want to have any shot of getting through the Pac 10 season semi-intact. In fact, the Bears have a somewhat tougher pre-season than any that I can remember us playing, facing San Diego State, Missouri, and Utah and Kansas State coming up. These are all teams that can win games and will be RPI 100 teams or better at the end of the season. In other words, just about as good or better than Cal last year.
For the Bears to make the Tournament, I think they have to win 18 games. If they do, they have a shot. For a team that for most analysts is the 7th or 8th best in the Pac 10, that is a tough order. The nice thing is, we do have a tougher pre-season than most so we will be able to get in with less than a winning Pac 10 record. I think if we can move through the pre-season undefeated, we will need only 7 or so Pac 10 wins. That would be all victories against the teams slated below us, plus an upset somewhere along the line. The only games that we SHOULD win are against Oregon State and Arizona State. Everything else is going to be a struggle.
So, having the toughest Pac 10 season in years, plus the toughest out of conference schedule in years is a recipe for either the greatest season we will have had in years, or disaster. Tonight will be a big test.
Here is looking at a great Bears season.
GO BEARS!!
Friday, November 30, 2007
Oski Talk
I guess I am pretty surprised at the idiocy going on in Media world. Yes, the Bears took a big fall at the end of this year - but it is pretty simple to figure out why. It is not rocket science to see that Nate was hurt, played poorly, and the team lost focus and desire after they were number 1 in the country for three hours.
So now it is time to change everything about the program? Ratto suggesting that Tedford may be considering moving on? Wilner suggesting that Tedford is ready to leave now that his kid is done with High School? What a load of crap. Jeff Tedford will be the coach of the Bears for the next 15 years if he wants, even if we never get to a rose bowl or National Championship game. Years and years of winning 8,9 and 10 games per season will be just fine with the powers that be at Cal, and frankly, for fans like me who are used to winning four and five games per year.
The issue is, it probably is not fine for Tedford. He is the one who will decide what the issue is, what to do about it, and who is going to be doing it. And no one else.
I can see how dealing with these idiots may make him want to leave. But he would get that anywhere.
Lets face it - they are just pissed off that JT says nothing in the press conferences that is juicy enough to write salacious stories about. Wilner whined - 'he ALWAYS protects his players!" I think that is why the players like him. But I can guarantee you that it is not that way in practice. I am sure that the players have a healthy respect and fear for the coach.
That is what the is most impressive about JT. He cares about his team and what they are going through, and he will not throw them under the bus, like the media wants. Remember last year, when Ayoob was told he was not going to start, and JT though he would transfer for his senior year. He was so impressed with Joe that he stayed at Cal. He was impressed because JT keeps his QB through the year, and will not play games like that. No Matter What. So if you do not like that, then forget being a fan of the Bears. If you are OK with that, take if for what it is worth, and move on with your life. The idiots who think he was about to start Kevin Riley are the same idiots who think Kevin Riley would transfer. He will never leave because he knows once it is his turn the coach has his back TOTALLY. Riley will get the job, then Mansion, then whoever else is the annointed one. That is why Reed left, and Riley will stay.
That is probably a flaw but it is the way it is and it probably will not change. JT firmly believes that the QB is the most important position on the team - not just a physical leader but the primary leader from an emotional standpoint as well. And that leader must be protected as much as possible. Even to the degree that they let the guy struggle a bit and lose a game or two because that individual is playing poorly. There will be no in-season QB controversy in Tedford's mind.
That being said, there is no way in hell that the Bears lose tomorrow. They made a strong statement by benching guys who were not playing on defense. The offense at Washington actually played well. But the defense played poorly, just about as poorly as they ever have under JT.
In any event, after the season, there will be time for everyone to settle down, and Tedford to figure out who is left from the coaching changes that look like they may take place - like Gregory leaving. I have to say, for the people on the message boards, there is a lot of discussion about how Gregory is the scourge of the team, etc. But no where else do people bag on Cal's defense. In fact Stewart Mandel has been complimentary of Gregory and Cal's defense in the past, calling for him to move up to the head coaching ranks in prior seasons. I do not think that the Cal defense is that big of an issue. I mean, we held USC to 24, Oregon to 24. We laid an egg at Washington. But frankly, if Cal could have average 32 points a game, like we have every other year of Tedford's tenure on campus, we would have won all but one game - the Washington game. And a few of those scores are Defensive scores - like at UCLA, on the Pick Six, or the short fields after all of Nate's touchdowns.
So I think looking at it, if we lose Gregory, we will be in pain. Gregory has a good, complimentary defense that matches JT style. We just need to score at least 30 per game to win. And that really should not be a problem for our team.
I am not going to analyze Stanfurd. There is no point. They are terrible. They have lousy players. We should trounce them. If we don't it will be disappointing to say the least. But I think, sad as it is, this is a statement game for our players. And I think they will say something.
So now it is time to change everything about the program? Ratto suggesting that Tedford may be considering moving on? Wilner suggesting that Tedford is ready to leave now that his kid is done with High School? What a load of crap. Jeff Tedford will be the coach of the Bears for the next 15 years if he wants, even if we never get to a rose bowl or National Championship game. Years and years of winning 8,9 and 10 games per season will be just fine with the powers that be at Cal, and frankly, for fans like me who are used to winning four and five games per year.
The issue is, it probably is not fine for Tedford. He is the one who will decide what the issue is, what to do about it, and who is going to be doing it. And no one else.
I can see how dealing with these idiots may make him want to leave. But he would get that anywhere.
Lets face it - they are just pissed off that JT says nothing in the press conferences that is juicy enough to write salacious stories about. Wilner whined - 'he ALWAYS protects his players!" I think that is why the players like him. But I can guarantee you that it is not that way in practice. I am sure that the players have a healthy respect and fear for the coach.
That is what the is most impressive about JT. He cares about his team and what they are going through, and he will not throw them under the bus, like the media wants. Remember last year, when Ayoob was told he was not going to start, and JT though he would transfer for his senior year. He was so impressed with Joe that he stayed at Cal. He was impressed because JT keeps his QB through the year, and will not play games like that. No Matter What. So if you do not like that, then forget being a fan of the Bears. If you are OK with that, take if for what it is worth, and move on with your life. The idiots who think he was about to start Kevin Riley are the same idiots who think Kevin Riley would transfer. He will never leave because he knows once it is his turn the coach has his back TOTALLY. Riley will get the job, then Mansion, then whoever else is the annointed one. That is why Reed left, and Riley will stay.
That is probably a flaw but it is the way it is and it probably will not change. JT firmly believes that the QB is the most important position on the team - not just a physical leader but the primary leader from an emotional standpoint as well. And that leader must be protected as much as possible. Even to the degree that they let the guy struggle a bit and lose a game or two because that individual is playing poorly. There will be no in-season QB controversy in Tedford's mind.
That being said, there is no way in hell that the Bears lose tomorrow. They made a strong statement by benching guys who were not playing on defense. The offense at Washington actually played well. But the defense played poorly, just about as poorly as they ever have under JT.
In any event, after the season, there will be time for everyone to settle down, and Tedford to figure out who is left from the coaching changes that look like they may take place - like Gregory leaving. I have to say, for the people on the message boards, there is a lot of discussion about how Gregory is the scourge of the team, etc. But no where else do people bag on Cal's defense. In fact Stewart Mandel has been complimentary of Gregory and Cal's defense in the past, calling for him to move up to the head coaching ranks in prior seasons. I do not think that the Cal defense is that big of an issue. I mean, we held USC to 24, Oregon to 24. We laid an egg at Washington. But frankly, if Cal could have average 32 points a game, like we have every other year of Tedford's tenure on campus, we would have won all but one game - the Washington game. And a few of those scores are Defensive scores - like at UCLA, on the Pick Six, or the short fields after all of Nate's touchdowns.
So I think looking at it, if we lose Gregory, we will be in pain. Gregory has a good, complimentary defense that matches JT style. We just need to score at least 30 per game to win. And that really should not be a problem for our team.
I am not going to analyze Stanfurd. There is no point. They are terrible. They have lousy players. We should trounce them. If we don't it will be disappointing to say the least. But I think, sad as it is, this is a statement game for our players. And I think they will say something.
Wednesday, November 28, 2007
Pac 10 Coaching
Well, it looks like there are going to be some coaching changes. The Washington State job is interesting - there are a whole bunch of people who are interested in it and they are interested in them. Dirk Koetter, both of our own Coordinators (Gregory and Michalczik), Mike Price, and a host of others, including the current offensive coordinator for Missouri.
The one thing I would say is that this is a job that will go to a coordinator. Koetter fits the bill, currently the offensive coordinator for the Jaguars. So do our two guys. I guess the thing that is interesting is that Washington State will not have a ton of money to give to the new coach, and certainly not the new assistant coaches. So it will either be a re-tread (a la Tony Bennett with the basketball team) or a young guy trying to make his mark. All of the assistants have been let go at this point. So the cougs are out almost three million this year. The new guy will be paid probably about the same as Doba was, which is about half a million per year. While that is a step up for most college assistants, for another College Head coach, or a pro assistant, it is not a big financial upgrade. I do not think that Koetter is making significantly less at Jacksonville than he would be in Washington, and frankly, I think if he does a good job, he may be setting his sights on a NFL slot. So he may not want to leave. Besides, it is a lot warmer in Florida.
So, if you look at Mike Price, he may fit the bill, but I bet it is not a huge increase in salary from the UTEP job. While Washington State is a big BCS school, it is still in the middle of nowhere with a problem with recruiting from urban areas on the west coast. It has lost some of it's appeal as the maid draw from Idaho and Utah, with the continued strong teams from Boise and BYU, so it is not an easy project. At least at UTEP, you have a much larger pool to recruit from, and you ought to be able to make some headway there.
The best candidate for the cougars would be Dave Christensen, who is the offensive coordinator for Missouri. He is a three time Broyles award nominee, and will probably win it this year. He is in his 7th year at Missouri, and was 7 years prior to that at Toledo. He has been a coach and player in Washington State and Idaho, before moving to Toledo. He is clearly not afraid of the cold miserable weather in Eastern Washington, since that is the same, cold miserable weather he gets in Missouri. He may miss the barbeque,. But clearly he runs the type of high volume passing attack that washington State needs to be successful, like they run at Boise. Having that type of coach there would be fun for all those recruits who may be too small to play elsewhere, but are fast and could be a good fit for Washington State. If I were the athletic director that is who I would take.
The only issue is, Missouri is going to be playing until January 8, so he may miss out on some of these coaching opportunities. But Washington State is the place where I think he would fit in best.
The guy at Boise makes more than Doba did, and I do not see him moving to what is essentially a lateral position (although going 11 - 1 and not making a BCS game has to be a little frustrating). He has already said he is not leaving.
But there are our two guys out there as well. It sounded like Gregory (who is a Broyles award guy himself) is a candidate for the job, and Michalczik threw his hat in the ring. Both are Washington State grads, so there is a degree of loyalty there. I think Gregory is probalbly the leading candidate, since he has been a coordinator longer, but Michalczik has been the assistant head coach at Cal for a few years, and is well regarded.
I can see a lot of scenarios where either of those guys go. Frankly, I do not think that that the salary is a big deal, but they would probably get a fairly significant bump up. But we do pay our assistants well. So the biggest thing would be, do you want to be a head coach. And clearly, these guys do. i think either would be gone in a flash if they were given the opportunity.
The other thing that will happen is that UCLA will have a bunch of assistants who are going to be leaving, along with a head coach. One of the most interesting thing that could happen is if Washington State picks up Dorrell. They are very interested in hiring an african american coach and Dorrell clearly has the experience. Also, he has the recruiting connections in Southern California that they would love to have. And, frankly, he is cheap - he was making only $900,000 at UCLA. He would go for about $600,000 to Washington State. And he could bring in a staff ready made.
Now, the issue is, is Dorrell a good coach. Well, he is good enough. If he can bring his defensive coordinator with him, and get a good spread offensive guy, I think that they would be a strong team. DeWayne Walker would be a strong candidate as head coach as well.
Another option would be for Gregory to move to Washington State. How fast do you think Tedford would be on the phone to Walker after he gets let go on Saturday at 8:00 PM?
It will be interesting to see what happens. i think these changes will move along pretty quickly next week. I frankly do no see Christensen moving before the Championship game. If it was just another BCS game, maybe. But this is a once in a lifetime thing. So if he does not Washington State is frankly in a tough bind. They need to move quickly to get the recruits in house, which is the main reason they canned Doba.
Also, surprisingly, Harbaugh is being brought up as coaching material. You have got to be kidding me! But he is on the list for the Michigan folks. I suggest we do the nice folks from Michigan a favor and crush the Furds this weekend, so they do not get the idea that he can coach. The Mouth that Roared maybe is what those guys need after a few years of the walking dead. Who knows.
My guess is that Washington is still OK with Willingham, although losing to Washington State had to hurt. If they take Hawaii out of the BCS this year, preserving the Pac 10 second slot for sure, he deserves another shot.
And the idiots at Arizona have already given Stoopid another vote of confidence. They will probably name the town after him if they be Arizona State.
Anyway, it will be fun to watch. If we do not lose someone right away, then I assume that we will wait until we make any changes in our staff until after the bowl game.
GO BEARS!!
The one thing I would say is that this is a job that will go to a coordinator. Koetter fits the bill, currently the offensive coordinator for the Jaguars. So do our two guys. I guess the thing that is interesting is that Washington State will not have a ton of money to give to the new coach, and certainly not the new assistant coaches. So it will either be a re-tread (a la Tony Bennett with the basketball team) or a young guy trying to make his mark. All of the assistants have been let go at this point. So the cougs are out almost three million this year. The new guy will be paid probably about the same as Doba was, which is about half a million per year. While that is a step up for most college assistants, for another College Head coach, or a pro assistant, it is not a big financial upgrade. I do not think that Koetter is making significantly less at Jacksonville than he would be in Washington, and frankly, I think if he does a good job, he may be setting his sights on a NFL slot. So he may not want to leave. Besides, it is a lot warmer in Florida.
So, if you look at Mike Price, he may fit the bill, but I bet it is not a huge increase in salary from the UTEP job. While Washington State is a big BCS school, it is still in the middle of nowhere with a problem with recruiting from urban areas on the west coast. It has lost some of it's appeal as the maid draw from Idaho and Utah, with the continued strong teams from Boise and BYU, so it is not an easy project. At least at UTEP, you have a much larger pool to recruit from, and you ought to be able to make some headway there.
The best candidate for the cougars would be Dave Christensen, who is the offensive coordinator for Missouri. He is a three time Broyles award nominee, and will probably win it this year. He is in his 7th year at Missouri, and was 7 years prior to that at Toledo. He has been a coach and player in Washington State and Idaho, before moving to Toledo. He is clearly not afraid of the cold miserable weather in Eastern Washington, since that is the same, cold miserable weather he gets in Missouri. He may miss the barbeque,. But clearly he runs the type of high volume passing attack that washington State needs to be successful, like they run at Boise. Having that type of coach there would be fun for all those recruits who may be too small to play elsewhere, but are fast and could be a good fit for Washington State. If I were the athletic director that is who I would take.
The only issue is, Missouri is going to be playing until January 8, so he may miss out on some of these coaching opportunities. But Washington State is the place where I think he would fit in best.
The guy at Boise makes more than Doba did, and I do not see him moving to what is essentially a lateral position (although going 11 - 1 and not making a BCS game has to be a little frustrating). He has already said he is not leaving.
But there are our two guys out there as well. It sounded like Gregory (who is a Broyles award guy himself) is a candidate for the job, and Michalczik threw his hat in the ring. Both are Washington State grads, so there is a degree of loyalty there. I think Gregory is probalbly the leading candidate, since he has been a coordinator longer, but Michalczik has been the assistant head coach at Cal for a few years, and is well regarded.
I can see a lot of scenarios where either of those guys go. Frankly, I do not think that that the salary is a big deal, but they would probably get a fairly significant bump up. But we do pay our assistants well. So the biggest thing would be, do you want to be a head coach. And clearly, these guys do. i think either would be gone in a flash if they were given the opportunity.
The other thing that will happen is that UCLA will have a bunch of assistants who are going to be leaving, along with a head coach. One of the most interesting thing that could happen is if Washington State picks up Dorrell. They are very interested in hiring an african american coach and Dorrell clearly has the experience. Also, he has the recruiting connections in Southern California that they would love to have. And, frankly, he is cheap - he was making only $900,000 at UCLA. He would go for about $600,000 to Washington State. And he could bring in a staff ready made.
Now, the issue is, is Dorrell a good coach. Well, he is good enough. If he can bring his defensive coordinator with him, and get a good spread offensive guy, I think that they would be a strong team. DeWayne Walker would be a strong candidate as head coach as well.
Another option would be for Gregory to move to Washington State. How fast do you think Tedford would be on the phone to Walker after he gets let go on Saturday at 8:00 PM?
It will be interesting to see what happens. i think these changes will move along pretty quickly next week. I frankly do no see Christensen moving before the Championship game. If it was just another BCS game, maybe. But this is a once in a lifetime thing. So if he does not Washington State is frankly in a tough bind. They need to move quickly to get the recruits in house, which is the main reason they canned Doba.
Also, surprisingly, Harbaugh is being brought up as coaching material. You have got to be kidding me! But he is on the list for the Michigan folks. I suggest we do the nice folks from Michigan a favor and crush the Furds this weekend, so they do not get the idea that he can coach. The Mouth that Roared maybe is what those guys need after a few years of the walking dead. Who knows.
My guess is that Washington is still OK with Willingham, although losing to Washington State had to hurt. If they take Hawaii out of the BCS this year, preserving the Pac 10 second slot for sure, he deserves another shot.
And the idiots at Arizona have already given Stoopid another vote of confidence. They will probably name the town after him if they be Arizona State.
Anyway, it will be fun to watch. If we do not lose someone right away, then I assume that we will wait until we make any changes in our staff until after the bowl game.
GO BEARS!!
Monday, November 26, 2007
Stuff
I spoke too soon - the Bears did get an at large invitation to the NCAA tournament even though they came in third in the MPSF tournament for Water Polo. So we get a shot at the National Championship game. This will take place this weekend. We got back in it by beating Stanford, which was pretty nice. So we came in third in our conference tournament, but got the invitation to the NCAAs over UC Irvine, which beat us but was #5 coming into the tournament.
In any event, it is great to get a shot at the National Championship again. Most likely it will come down to Cal vs USC for the final prize. That will be at Stanford this weekend.
Onto football - Steward Mandel has the Bears projected to play in the Emerald Bowl against Maryland. I think that would be great. First of all, he is assuming we beat Stanfurd. I am assuming that as well, but I have been wrong before this season. But i think that would be great for Cal - we are going into Maryland next year on the road early. That is the kind of game that can freak out a young team. It would be nice for us to have some sort of measuring stick against those guys. I am hoping that JT has whipped the team into shape by December 28th and we could come out and crush those guys. It is essentially a home game for Bears fans (at AT&T Park) and it will help in the early part of next year. I think Bear Fans would be lucky to get that bid. I mean, what else can we hope for?
I do want to mention that Stanfurd lost to Notre Dame. Oregon lost to UCLA, who sucked in victory, in what was by far the worst football game in history. And it is clear that the only thing holding Oregon together the last two years was Dennis Dixon. When he was on last year, they were good. When we went down hill after we beat him, they sucked. When he was hurt this year, they were done. Washington lost to Washington State, whose Coach is most likely getting the boot. I feel confident that next year, there will be 5 teams that we will be better than in the Pac 10. That is an improvement on this year. I also think that our schedule is much easier. So that helps.
Also, after watching a bunch of football and not having to worry about another loss this weekend, I have a new perspective on the Washington game. I think it was just what the doctor ordered. Let's face it - that was the most embarrassing loss in a long time, to Washington, the cellar dwellar. If that doesn't trigger some introspection and ass-kicking, then nothing will. I think we will see a new team. And frankly, I doubt that Tedford lets that happen again. At least I hope so.
I also think that there is something to be said for the lack of competition in practices as the season goes on. USC is better in November because they are constantly making the guys go full speed in practice, even late in the season. I think it is important that when it starts to get cold, and the guys are tired that they go full speed, even at the risk of injury. I think a lot of coaches are somewhat against that - they want their guys fresh. But if you are too tired to practice, you are going to be out muscled in games late in the season. I think the Bears always generally look pretty good in Bowl games (Texas Tech excepted) because that is the time JT lets the younger guys get in there and go full speed in practice. So the really banged up starters get a chance to sit out, but the other guys who are able to practice go up against a guy who want to show what they can do. It makes them better. That is why I think we always tend to slow down at the end of the season. Too much scheming and not enough head knocking. I hope that this weeks practice was all about head knocking.
GO BEARS!!
In any event, it is great to get a shot at the National Championship again. Most likely it will come down to Cal vs USC for the final prize. That will be at Stanford this weekend.
Onto football - Steward Mandel has the Bears projected to play in the Emerald Bowl against Maryland. I think that would be great. First of all, he is assuming we beat Stanfurd. I am assuming that as well, but I have been wrong before this season. But i think that would be great for Cal - we are going into Maryland next year on the road early. That is the kind of game that can freak out a young team. It would be nice for us to have some sort of measuring stick against those guys. I am hoping that JT has whipped the team into shape by December 28th and we could come out and crush those guys. It is essentially a home game for Bears fans (at AT&T Park) and it will help in the early part of next year. I think Bear Fans would be lucky to get that bid. I mean, what else can we hope for?
I do want to mention that Stanfurd lost to Notre Dame. Oregon lost to UCLA, who sucked in victory, in what was by far the worst football game in history. And it is clear that the only thing holding Oregon together the last two years was Dennis Dixon. When he was on last year, they were good. When we went down hill after we beat him, they sucked. When he was hurt this year, they were done. Washington lost to Washington State, whose Coach is most likely getting the boot. I feel confident that next year, there will be 5 teams that we will be better than in the Pac 10. That is an improvement on this year. I also think that our schedule is much easier. So that helps.
Also, after watching a bunch of football and not having to worry about another loss this weekend, I have a new perspective on the Washington game. I think it was just what the doctor ordered. Let's face it - that was the most embarrassing loss in a long time, to Washington, the cellar dwellar. If that doesn't trigger some introspection and ass-kicking, then nothing will. I think we will see a new team. And frankly, I doubt that Tedford lets that happen again. At least I hope so.
I also think that there is something to be said for the lack of competition in practices as the season goes on. USC is better in November because they are constantly making the guys go full speed in practice, even late in the season. I think it is important that when it starts to get cold, and the guys are tired that they go full speed, even at the risk of injury. I think a lot of coaches are somewhat against that - they want their guys fresh. But if you are too tired to practice, you are going to be out muscled in games late in the season. I think the Bears always generally look pretty good in Bowl games (Texas Tech excepted) because that is the time JT lets the younger guys get in there and go full speed in practice. So the really banged up starters get a chance to sit out, but the other guys who are able to practice go up against a guy who want to show what they can do. It makes them better. That is why I think we always tend to slow down at the end of the season. Too much scheming and not enough head knocking. I hope that this weeks practice was all about head knocking.
GO BEARS!!
Sunday, November 25, 2007
Cal Water Polo
I think the Bears are out of the National Championship hunt.
Cal lost to UC Irvine and in the MPSF semifinals. That means that Cal plays Stanford for third place. Only two teams from the MPSF can get invitations to the NCAA championship finals. So the Bears are most likely out of the National Championship hunt. I think USC is probably now the favorite.
That sucks.
GO BEARS!!
Cal lost to UC Irvine and in the MPSF semifinals. That means that Cal plays Stanford for third place. Only two teams from the MPSF can get invitations to the NCAA championship finals. So the Bears are most likely out of the National Championship hunt. I think USC is probably now the favorite.
That sucks.
GO BEARS!!
What I noticed watching the SEC and the Big 12 Play
It was interesting watching football this weekend. First, I noticed what a gambling defense can do. LSU had 8 in the box almost all night, and was totally burned by McFadden, because as soon as he broke through the first level, he was gone . Gregory's defense would not have allowed that to happen, at least with LSUs players. LSU would have won with Gregory as the Defensive Coordinator. That being said, they still did not put enough pressure on the Arkansas QB to make mistakes (when he actually was in there).
It also was interesting to see how mobility at the QB position changed the game for Arkansas. When McFadden was lined up back there, they all knew he was going to run, but they had no ability to stop him many times. Which is why I have been a little confused why we ahve not been lining up Forsett in the backfield later in the season, as we did earlier. It was interesting how Houston Nutt stole the Tim Tebow from Florida with McFadden at QB. I love the power run at the goal line, and then stop and todd it right over the middle to the Tight End.
LSU, the Greatest Team Ever (with 2 losses) was really pretty average this year. They have struggled through games and have won when they offensively have gambled, but the defense has been relatively strong. But they have given up a LOT of big plays. I think that when playing in a run - strong conference like the SEC, it is important to oversell the run. But frankly, it is difficult to play that way and not give up a lot of big plays.
This was also the first time I saw Missouri play. I loved that offense. That is what Cal should look like. If we had Aaron Rogers another year, that is what we would have looked like. Before watching that game, I was sold on McFadden for Heisman. After watching that, I was close to becoming a Chase Daniels for Heisman guy. Both of them were fantastic.
I hope Tedford was at home watching that game.
The other thing I loved was the absolute gutsy-ness of the Missouri attack. Fake field goals to start the game (we never do that!!!) - using the Tight Ends all over the field. This was the year that we had all of the great position guys, but out QB got hurt, was not that mobile to begin with, and the backup was a head case. What those guys had at Missouri is what the TedSpread should have been. Kansas, on the other hand, was more predictable, less gutsy, and therefore lost. The Kansas defense was also less able than Missouri's. But that was a great game and a great educational experience.
Florida is interesting. It is the Tim Tebow show. I do not know what else they have, though. He will also be in NY at the Heisman ceremonies. Those three guys are the guys. If they invite Dixon, or Colt Brennan, it will just be to be nice.
That being said, I am still in the Nate camp. I believe in the guy, and more to the point, I believe that in the Pac 10 a Senior QB is the best weapon that you can have. We have two games to win. I think Nate is probably done with school after this year, and will be pretty focused next year. At least, I hope that is the case. If not, yeah, bring in Riley or Mansion. But get it done early.
Anyway, I hope everyone had a good Holiday. I was thankful that the Bears had a week off after the crapfest of last week.
GO BEARS!!
It also was interesting to see how mobility at the QB position changed the game for Arkansas. When McFadden was lined up back there, they all knew he was going to run, but they had no ability to stop him many times. Which is why I have been a little confused why we ahve not been lining up Forsett in the backfield later in the season, as we did earlier. It was interesting how Houston Nutt stole the Tim Tebow from Florida with McFadden at QB. I love the power run at the goal line, and then stop and todd it right over the middle to the Tight End.
LSU, the Greatest Team Ever (with 2 losses) was really pretty average this year. They have struggled through games and have won when they offensively have gambled, but the defense has been relatively strong. But they have given up a LOT of big plays. I think that when playing in a run - strong conference like the SEC, it is important to oversell the run. But frankly, it is difficult to play that way and not give up a lot of big plays.
This was also the first time I saw Missouri play. I loved that offense. That is what Cal should look like. If we had Aaron Rogers another year, that is what we would have looked like. Before watching that game, I was sold on McFadden for Heisman. After watching that, I was close to becoming a Chase Daniels for Heisman guy. Both of them were fantastic.
I hope Tedford was at home watching that game.
The other thing I loved was the absolute gutsy-ness of the Missouri attack. Fake field goals to start the game (we never do that!!!) - using the Tight Ends all over the field. This was the year that we had all of the great position guys, but out QB got hurt, was not that mobile to begin with, and the backup was a head case. What those guys had at Missouri is what the TedSpread should have been. Kansas, on the other hand, was more predictable, less gutsy, and therefore lost. The Kansas defense was also less able than Missouri's. But that was a great game and a great educational experience.
Florida is interesting. It is the Tim Tebow show. I do not know what else they have, though. He will also be in NY at the Heisman ceremonies. Those three guys are the guys. If they invite Dixon, or Colt Brennan, it will just be to be nice.
That being said, I am still in the Nate camp. I believe in the guy, and more to the point, I believe that in the Pac 10 a Senior QB is the best weapon that you can have. We have two games to win. I think Nate is probably done with school after this year, and will be pretty focused next year. At least, I hope that is the case. If not, yeah, bring in Riley or Mansion. But get it done early.
Anyway, I hope everyone had a good Holiday. I was thankful that the Bears had a week off after the crapfest of last week.
GO BEARS!!
Pac 10 BCS Chances
Right now, the entire conference should be hoping that Arizona State does not pull it's regularly scheduled meltdown at the end of the season, and actually beats Arizona. They will go to a BCS game if they win. If they do not, the Pac 10 most likely will not have two representatives in the BCS and the conference will forfeit the extra 4.5 million for the second BCS entry.
USC is most likely going to go to the Rose Bowl. If they lose, they still have 9 wins and will probably make a game somewhere in the BCS. If UCLA goes to the Rose Bowl, I think I will never watch another college football game. USC has got to win for the good of the conference.
The BCS has a difficult issue this year. The limitation of only two teams for BCS games means that the Big 12 and the SEC can only have two each. The Big 10 currently only has one eligible ( with Illinois being the closest to being eligible at 15). Oregon is at 18, but has another game to play, and would probably slide over Illinois in the polls. They already are ahead in the computers. The ACC currently has two teams eligible but Boston College will be eliminated when they lose to Virginia Tech again in the ACC championship game. Or else Virginia Tech will be eliminated. Either way, there is only one team from the ACC, Big East (West Virginia) and Big 10. With Hawaii sneaking in (with the worst strength of schedule in the history of the BCS), that leaves the requirement that the SEC, Big 12 and Pac 10 provide two conference picks. The voters saved the BCS this week by putting Hawaii in the top 10 for votes. If they lose to Washington, the BCS will have to change it's rules to allow a non-top 14 team into the series. Which would be either the loser of the ACC championship game (could be likely if VA Tech loses) or Illinois. If Oregon wins, ASU loses and USC wins, Oregon may make it back into the BCS mix.
For the second time this season, both the number 1 and number 2 teams lost the same weekend. In fact, both times, it was LSU who was number 1. I do not think that a number 1 teams has lost twice in the same season and been number 1 both times before. What a whacky season. Of course, the last time that happened was when Cal lost to Oregon State.
Ohio State is in the hunt for the National Championship game, waiting for Missouri to lose the Big 12. Based on what I saw during the game, the Big 12 championship game is going to be a doozy. I think that Missouri wins, giving Kansas the slot for the Big 12. Missouri is a damn good team. What a game that was. Hopefully they do not lose, since I, for one, do not think that the Big 10 deserves to have their champion play for the top prize. Nor, frankly, do I think that West Virginia deserves to play for it either. The Big East was fairly weak. Kansas, by virtue of losing yesterday, is guaranteed a spot in the BCS since they do not have the ability to lose another game in the Big 12 championship.
It was nice to see Tennessee win the SEC east. I hope they beat the crap out of LSU, whose boss is busy this week negotiating with Michigan. If Tennessee wins, they go to the Sugar Bowl. If they lose, they are not eligible for a BCS berth, and LSU will go to the Sugar Bowl. No matter what, Georgia goes to a BCS bowl game, as the second rated SEC team. Lucky for them they do not have to play in the SEC title game.
Cal, by the way, is 43rd in the BCS standing. Good news - we are the highest rated 6-5 team!
USC is most likely going to go to the Rose Bowl. If they lose, they still have 9 wins and will probably make a game somewhere in the BCS. If UCLA goes to the Rose Bowl, I think I will never watch another college football game. USC has got to win for the good of the conference.
The BCS has a difficult issue this year. The limitation of only two teams for BCS games means that the Big 12 and the SEC can only have two each. The Big 10 currently only has one eligible ( with Illinois being the closest to being eligible at 15). Oregon is at 18, but has another game to play, and would probably slide over Illinois in the polls. They already are ahead in the computers. The ACC currently has two teams eligible but Boston College will be eliminated when they lose to Virginia Tech again in the ACC championship game. Or else Virginia Tech will be eliminated. Either way, there is only one team from the ACC, Big East (West Virginia) and Big 10. With Hawaii sneaking in (with the worst strength of schedule in the history of the BCS), that leaves the requirement that the SEC, Big 12 and Pac 10 provide two conference picks. The voters saved the BCS this week by putting Hawaii in the top 10 for votes. If they lose to Washington, the BCS will have to change it's rules to allow a non-top 14 team into the series. Which would be either the loser of the ACC championship game (could be likely if VA Tech loses) or Illinois. If Oregon wins, ASU loses and USC wins, Oregon may make it back into the BCS mix.
For the second time this season, both the number 1 and number 2 teams lost the same weekend. In fact, both times, it was LSU who was number 1. I do not think that a number 1 teams has lost twice in the same season and been number 1 both times before. What a whacky season. Of course, the last time that happened was when Cal lost to Oregon State.
Ohio State is in the hunt for the National Championship game, waiting for Missouri to lose the Big 12. Based on what I saw during the game, the Big 12 championship game is going to be a doozy. I think that Missouri wins, giving Kansas the slot for the Big 12. Missouri is a damn good team. What a game that was. Hopefully they do not lose, since I, for one, do not think that the Big 10 deserves to have their champion play for the top prize. Nor, frankly, do I think that West Virginia deserves to play for it either. The Big East was fairly weak. Kansas, by virtue of losing yesterday, is guaranteed a spot in the BCS since they do not have the ability to lose another game in the Big 12 championship.
It was nice to see Tennessee win the SEC east. I hope they beat the crap out of LSU, whose boss is busy this week negotiating with Michigan. If Tennessee wins, they go to the Sugar Bowl. If they lose, they are not eligible for a BCS berth, and LSU will go to the Sugar Bowl. No matter what, Georgia goes to a BCS bowl game, as the second rated SEC team. Lucky for them they do not have to play in the SEC title game.
Cal, by the way, is 43rd in the BCS standing. Good news - we are the highest rated 6-5 team!
Tuesday, November 20, 2007
The State of Cal Football
AAAAAGGGGGHHH!!!
Guys - it is not that bad.
The Basketball team looks like it has something going for it this year - Hardin, Anderson and Christopher look to be a killer front line, and when the injuries come back, we will be pretty deep for the front 9 or 10.
As far as football, reading the blogs and the boards, we should just roll it up. And I agree - An 8 win season is not enough anymore. National Championship, or else fire the coach. Let's get Tom Osborn back. To the Glory Days!!! I am tired for the Black Shirts getting their asses run all over the field. I am tired of getting beaten by Oklahoma and Texas and....
Wait - we're not Nebraska fans. Sorry - my mistake. Hard to tell for a moment.
Must be Alabama.
Look - it is simple. Nate got hurt, and the wheels came off. It is not the first time and it certainly won't be the last time that happens. Look at Oregon this year with Dixon done. Oh year, and last year as well. Look at SC - Booty gets hurt and they lose two games. Look at Oklahoma - Bradford is hurt and they lose to Texas Tech. Look at UCLA. Look at Arizona State last year - their senior QB is run out of town, and they get the Redshirt Freshman (Kevin Riley, anyone?) who leads them no where except to a fired coach.
That is the long and the short of it. And if you are troubled by the team giving up, don't be. These guys wanted the National Championship, or certainly the Pac 10 title. And they lost 4 games practically in a row because the QB was injured. And it was cold and rainy. So they were down and they did not try. They are 20 years old. I can guarantee you that next week will be different. Because whatever has happened in the past, Tedford never saw his team give up (well, maybe against Texas Tech). I do not think he through they ever would. But they did and so now that veil of respect and mystery is gone. He is gonna ride their asses until they understand that they will produce or die trying. At least, I have faith that he will and they will.
As far as the other stuff - should we or shouldn't we with Gregory, or Alamar, or Delgado, who knows. I do know this: winning solves all of these issues. And there will be a bunch of openings in the Pac 10 on the coaches side. Dorrell, Doba and possibly Harbaugh (if Michigan is stupid). Maybe Gregory goes to one of those and the issue is resolved. I frankly do not see Tedford firing the guy. Except for the laying down saturday, the defense has not been doing a bad job from a scoring perspective. With better defensive linemen, this is a very good defense to run in the Pac 10. But you need guys up front who can stop the run (Brandon Mebane) and rush the passer. Also, relying on a freshman CB is a recipe for disaster. But Conte is going to be better. So next year, defensively, I think we have a good unit if some of the young guys can improve and we maybe get a run stopper in the recruiting class somewhere. Hill I think will develop into a good one.
I also think of what Cortez is doing right now. Doesn't if seem like we did a lot better with that guy there? Did he really add nothing to the equation? We need him or someone like him back. If this is the offense with an offensive lineman running the OC slot, give me a receiver or a QB coach, please. Are we going to wait for Daft to morph into Cortez, with JT coaching him along? Are we going to get Dilfer on staff next year (or will he be starting!). All of this is just fluff in the wind. We lost this year because our QB got injured and played poorly after that. It happens. I think he is better now, and I think that the team is going to be better. We'll see.
The one thing that this season did teach me is how much Tedford expects the QB to be THE leader on the team. It is a pretty dangerous thing. But it is a young team in a lot of ways. I think we will be fine.
GO BEARS!!
Guys - it is not that bad.
The Basketball team looks like it has something going for it this year - Hardin, Anderson and Christopher look to be a killer front line, and when the injuries come back, we will be pretty deep for the front 9 or 10.
As far as football, reading the blogs and the boards, we should just roll it up. And I agree - An 8 win season is not enough anymore. National Championship, or else fire the coach. Let's get Tom Osborn back. To the Glory Days!!! I am tired for the Black Shirts getting their asses run all over the field. I am tired of getting beaten by Oklahoma and Texas and....
Wait - we're not Nebraska fans. Sorry - my mistake. Hard to tell for a moment.
Must be Alabama.
Look - it is simple. Nate got hurt, and the wheels came off. It is not the first time and it certainly won't be the last time that happens. Look at Oregon this year with Dixon done. Oh year, and last year as well. Look at SC - Booty gets hurt and they lose two games. Look at Oklahoma - Bradford is hurt and they lose to Texas Tech. Look at UCLA. Look at Arizona State last year - their senior QB is run out of town, and they get the Redshirt Freshman (Kevin Riley, anyone?) who leads them no where except to a fired coach.
That is the long and the short of it. And if you are troubled by the team giving up, don't be. These guys wanted the National Championship, or certainly the Pac 10 title. And they lost 4 games practically in a row because the QB was injured. And it was cold and rainy. So they were down and they did not try. They are 20 years old. I can guarantee you that next week will be different. Because whatever has happened in the past, Tedford never saw his team give up (well, maybe against Texas Tech). I do not think he through they ever would. But they did and so now that veil of respect and mystery is gone. He is gonna ride their asses until they understand that they will produce or die trying. At least, I have faith that he will and they will.
As far as the other stuff - should we or shouldn't we with Gregory, or Alamar, or Delgado, who knows. I do know this: winning solves all of these issues. And there will be a bunch of openings in the Pac 10 on the coaches side. Dorrell, Doba and possibly Harbaugh (if Michigan is stupid). Maybe Gregory goes to one of those and the issue is resolved. I frankly do not see Tedford firing the guy. Except for the laying down saturday, the defense has not been doing a bad job from a scoring perspective. With better defensive linemen, this is a very good defense to run in the Pac 10. But you need guys up front who can stop the run (Brandon Mebane) and rush the passer. Also, relying on a freshman CB is a recipe for disaster. But Conte is going to be better. So next year, defensively, I think we have a good unit if some of the young guys can improve and we maybe get a run stopper in the recruiting class somewhere. Hill I think will develop into a good one.
I also think of what Cortez is doing right now. Doesn't if seem like we did a lot better with that guy there? Did he really add nothing to the equation? We need him or someone like him back. If this is the offense with an offensive lineman running the OC slot, give me a receiver or a QB coach, please. Are we going to wait for Daft to morph into Cortez, with JT coaching him along? Are we going to get Dilfer on staff next year (or will he be starting!). All of this is just fluff in the wind. We lost this year because our QB got injured and played poorly after that. It happens. I think he is better now, and I think that the team is going to be better. We'll see.
The one thing that this season did teach me is how much Tedford expects the QB to be THE leader on the team. It is a pretty dangerous thing. But it is a young team in a lot of ways. I think we will be fine.
GO BEARS!!
Saturday, November 17, 2007
Cal at Washington
Well, this has to be the most painful loss since Tedford has been coach. And I went to Tennessee last year.
1) The defense played horribly. And I will posit to say that it is because Gregory gave up his bend but don't break philosophy, bowing to the crowd and trying to come after a QB who is just starting the first time this year. In fact, what all the clowns on the message boards have been saying to do, he does, and the results are just like Lyle Setencinch got when we played Washington when he was DC. When you have a defensive line that is not that physically strong, then you have to play your position and stay in the gaps, not try to gamble. This is what would have happened to every team that we have played if Gregory does not play his bend but don't break. This was a clear failure of that strategy. It is not like Washington had the best offensive line that we have seen all year.
2) On a day when Nate played GREAT, and Justin Forsett played great, the team gets only 23 points. Yes, there was an interception for basically a score. But there were plenty of opportunities. This was a team that we should have completely dominated. We lost because the rest of the team gave up. I was pretty disappointed with Lavelle Hawkins - he dropped a few passes that were critical that he catch. Also, losing DeSean is a blow, but we had more than adequate back-up. The biggest issue was stupid penalties, poor special teams play, and turnovers, once again. This was a very undisciplined team today.
3) Tedford called a pretty good offensive game plan. But if the team does not do the basics correctly, then there will not be scores. My guess is that there is too much time game planning, and putting in the offense, and not enough teaching the guys about the basics, like holding on and playing smart. By the middle of the season, he probably moves on to other lessons. And these guys are college football players. So they barely remember last week. Last year, when we went to the Holiday Bowl, the team had a month, and they went back to basics. And they crushed. This year, at the beginning of the year, they played Tennessee tough, and had a great start. I think that Cal does not focus on the basics of playing football enough and they focus too much on scheme.
4) This was a passionless team.
Anyway, I will calm down and post more later. But I really feel like this was the worst loss of the Tedford era, more because of what this represents than the game itself. In other words, this is the first time I think he has a team that has given up.
Go Bears!!
1) The defense played horribly. And I will posit to say that it is because Gregory gave up his bend but don't break philosophy, bowing to the crowd and trying to come after a QB who is just starting the first time this year. In fact, what all the clowns on the message boards have been saying to do, he does, and the results are just like Lyle Setencinch got when we played Washington when he was DC. When you have a defensive line that is not that physically strong, then you have to play your position and stay in the gaps, not try to gamble. This is what would have happened to every team that we have played if Gregory does not play his bend but don't break. This was a clear failure of that strategy. It is not like Washington had the best offensive line that we have seen all year.
2) On a day when Nate played GREAT, and Justin Forsett played great, the team gets only 23 points. Yes, there was an interception for basically a score. But there were plenty of opportunities. This was a team that we should have completely dominated. We lost because the rest of the team gave up. I was pretty disappointed with Lavelle Hawkins - he dropped a few passes that were critical that he catch. Also, losing DeSean is a blow, but we had more than adequate back-up. The biggest issue was stupid penalties, poor special teams play, and turnovers, once again. This was a very undisciplined team today.
3) Tedford called a pretty good offensive game plan. But if the team does not do the basics correctly, then there will not be scores. My guess is that there is too much time game planning, and putting in the offense, and not enough teaching the guys about the basics, like holding on and playing smart. By the middle of the season, he probably moves on to other lessons. And these guys are college football players. So they barely remember last week. Last year, when we went to the Holiday Bowl, the team had a month, and they went back to basics. And they crushed. This year, at the beginning of the year, they played Tennessee tough, and had a great start. I think that Cal does not focus on the basics of playing football enough and they focus too much on scheme.
4) This was a passionless team.
Anyway, I will calm down and post more later. But I really feel like this was the worst loss of the Tedford era, more because of what this represents than the game itself. In other words, this is the first time I think he has a team that has given up.
Go Bears!!
Thursday, November 15, 2007
Cal Hoops
Hey there, Cal fans! What a game last night against a fairly tough Southern Mississippi team. The Bears prevailed, on the strength of Devon Hard and Patrick Christopher, and Ryan Anderson coming in the last few minutes after being out most of the second half.
Anderson could not see out of one of his eyes - no reason. Just could not see. That is not a good sign. He says it happened to him once in high school. That is pretty scary. Hopefully it is not a sign of something really major.
The Bears should have won more convincingly. But it is a good win nonetheless. The next game against Nicholls State is a gimme, but then the Bears have San Diego, which is doing well and beat us last year. I think they made the Tournament. And then we go to Nevada, which is always tough. I wouldn't be surprised to see the Bears at 2-2 early in the season. We also have a few other tough pre-season games with Missouri and Kansas State.
If we can get through the preseason undefeated, then I think we will be in a good position for a Tournament run. We would probably need to finish no worse than 8-10 in the Pac 10, which I think is doable with this team. For every team that we lose to pre-season, we will have to win an additional game in the Pac 10 season, which is going to be tough.
Injuries will be tough this year. We are already down three key players - all of whom should be back before the Pac 10 season. However, if we lose others, we are pretty thin.
I also am excited by the recruiting class which we picked up yesterday. We have some talented young guys coming in at the guard slots which we need - that is crucial for playing in the Pac 10 and getting far in the tournament. So there is a lot to be happy about right now with Cal basketball. Remember - John Wooden didn't win until his 10th season!
GO BEARS!!
Anderson could not see out of one of his eyes - no reason. Just could not see. That is not a good sign. He says it happened to him once in high school. That is pretty scary. Hopefully it is not a sign of something really major.
The Bears should have won more convincingly. But it is a good win nonetheless. The next game against Nicholls State is a gimme, but then the Bears have San Diego, which is doing well and beat us last year. I think they made the Tournament. And then we go to Nevada, which is always tough. I wouldn't be surprised to see the Bears at 2-2 early in the season. We also have a few other tough pre-season games with Missouri and Kansas State.
If we can get through the preseason undefeated, then I think we will be in a good position for a Tournament run. We would probably need to finish no worse than 8-10 in the Pac 10, which I think is doable with this team. For every team that we lose to pre-season, we will have to win an additional game in the Pac 10 season, which is going to be tough.
Injuries will be tough this year. We are already down three key players - all of whom should be back before the Pac 10 season. However, if we lose others, we are pretty thin.
I also am excited by the recruiting class which we picked up yesterday. We have some talented young guys coming in at the guard slots which we need - that is crucial for playing in the Pac 10 and getting far in the tournament. So there is a lot to be happy about right now with Cal basketball. Remember - John Wooden didn't win until his 10th season!
GO BEARS!!
Tuesday, November 13, 2007
Further USC thoughts and stuff
1) One thing that really got to me was the 3rd and long at the goal line, when we ran the draw up the middle. Why would we do that? We set it up for the field goal, instead of going for the TD.
I know that Forsett had a great game, but that was not a call expecting to score a TD. That was a call expecting to set up for the field goal. And that was very disappointing to me. I mean, why do it that way? That is now 14 rushes in a row inside the 10 yard line, I believe. There is very clearly something that say to Jeff Tedford that there is NO WAY they are not going to run inside the 10. And I can not for the life of me think what that is.
So far this year, I think we have fumbled twice in those situations. Would throwing a pick be worse than that? I guess they would get it on the 20 instead of the 2, but let's face it, we would have more points to offset the loss of 18 yards twice per year.
It is getting to the point where we can only score on 20+yard run or pass plays into the end zone because our play calling inside the red zone is so predictable. When Tedford first came to Cal, our Redzone offense was something to behold. Now, it is average and getting worse.
2) I really loved the Joe Roth Memorial uniforms. I thought they looked great (much better than some of the other old school throwback stuff I have seen). And, the ENTIRE SET IS FOR SALE! Yes, that's right, folks - you can purchase the uniforms worn in the game by going to here and bidding on the uniforms. It is a great fundraiser idea. I hope they do this on a regular basis. This is your opportunity to own DeSean's helmet from the game which will be worth millions when he is 40 years old. So it is a small price to pay. I only wish that the Bears had won like Joe did his last year.
3) I really do think we have a great program. All of that crap I wrote at the beginning of the season I still believe. I think that the team is great, that the coaches are great, and that we have talent to last for years. The team has lost 4 games on 5 plays. And I do believe that. We very easily could be undefeated, in what is probably the toughest conference. That being said, it is also interesting how quickly a program can fall apart. I do not think the Bears are falling apart. They are not as bad as many think they are, and they are not as good as I thought we were.
The good news to me is that, no one else is anymore, either. USC is not a dominating presence - and booty or Sanchez are not their saviors. ASU is not, either. Oregon is great this year, but we beat them. And next year, they will not have Dixon, who has been spectacular, and will probably win the Heisman. Who would have thought that last year? There is a lot of parity in College Football, and this seasons has seen many of the old stereotypes discredited. Look at Notre Dame - they are crap. The SEC will not have anyone with less than 2 loses at the end of the season - I can very easily see Tennessee winning the championship over LSU in the Championship game. The Big 10 is lousy, the Big East is lousy, and the leaders in the Big 12 are Kansas and Missouri. And who cares about the ACC?
I guess I am crying about what could have been - this was the year that we easily could have won the National Title, and I think if Nate was not injured we would have, or at least come a damn site closer. And if you are the coach, and you know that you have the ability to compete for the big prize with this guy, and probably get there, then it is not unexpected that you stick with him, probably for too long. So that was an error. But in my view, not an unforgivable error. If we went with Kevin Riley, I doubt that we would have won all three of the other loses. He would have had a bad game, and he would have made some mistakes. The world would not have been all sunshine - it would have still rained on Saturday. So I guess what I am saying is that it really is that close in college football - you go the way your QB goes. Dennis Dixon was a bust last year, and will win the Heisman this year. That is a bit of perspective that Bear fans need to think about.
I know that Forsett had a great game, but that was not a call expecting to score a TD. That was a call expecting to set up for the field goal. And that was very disappointing to me. I mean, why do it that way? That is now 14 rushes in a row inside the 10 yard line, I believe. There is very clearly something that say to Jeff Tedford that there is NO WAY they are not going to run inside the 10. And I can not for the life of me think what that is.
So far this year, I think we have fumbled twice in those situations. Would throwing a pick be worse than that? I guess they would get it on the 20 instead of the 2, but let's face it, we would have more points to offset the loss of 18 yards twice per year.
It is getting to the point where we can only score on 20+yard run or pass plays into the end zone because our play calling inside the red zone is so predictable. When Tedford first came to Cal, our Redzone offense was something to behold. Now, it is average and getting worse.
2) I really loved the Joe Roth Memorial uniforms. I thought they looked great (much better than some of the other old school throwback stuff I have seen). And, the ENTIRE SET IS FOR SALE! Yes, that's right, folks - you can purchase the uniforms worn in the game by going to here and bidding on the uniforms. It is a great fundraiser idea. I hope they do this on a regular basis. This is your opportunity to own DeSean's helmet from the game which will be worth millions when he is 40 years old. So it is a small price to pay. I only wish that the Bears had won like Joe did his last year.
3) I really do think we have a great program. All of that crap I wrote at the beginning of the season I still believe. I think that the team is great, that the coaches are great, and that we have talent to last for years. The team has lost 4 games on 5 plays. And I do believe that. We very easily could be undefeated, in what is probably the toughest conference. That being said, it is also interesting how quickly a program can fall apart. I do not think the Bears are falling apart. They are not as bad as many think they are, and they are not as good as I thought we were.
The good news to me is that, no one else is anymore, either. USC is not a dominating presence - and booty or Sanchez are not their saviors. ASU is not, either. Oregon is great this year, but we beat them. And next year, they will not have Dixon, who has been spectacular, and will probably win the Heisman. Who would have thought that last year? There is a lot of parity in College Football, and this seasons has seen many of the old stereotypes discredited. Look at Notre Dame - they are crap. The SEC will not have anyone with less than 2 loses at the end of the season - I can very easily see Tennessee winning the championship over LSU in the Championship game. The Big 10 is lousy, the Big East is lousy, and the leaders in the Big 12 are Kansas and Missouri. And who cares about the ACC?
I guess I am crying about what could have been - this was the year that we easily could have won the National Title, and I think if Nate was not injured we would have, or at least come a damn site closer. And if you are the coach, and you know that you have the ability to compete for the big prize with this guy, and probably get there, then it is not unexpected that you stick with him, probably for too long. So that was an error. But in my view, not an unforgivable error. If we went with Kevin Riley, I doubt that we would have won all three of the other loses. He would have had a bad game, and he would have made some mistakes. The world would not have been all sunshine - it would have still rained on Saturday. So I guess what I am saying is that it really is that close in college football - you go the way your QB goes. Dennis Dixon was a bust last year, and will win the Heisman this year. That is a bit of perspective that Bear fans need to think about.
Monday, November 12, 2007
USC Thoughts
1) Justing Forsett was tremendous. He will be a big loss next year. He is my favorite player this year. I can see him getting 1500 yards on the year, which would be for third place in the Cal record books (ahead of Marshawn).
2) The offensive line had a great day as well. I don't know if it was the rain, but is sure was nice to see us able to run through the USC defense and keep protection. Longshore had plenty of time most of the day.
3) Nate Longshore looked healthier until the middle part of the 4th quarter when he started to limp. My buddy started freaking out then, calling doom and gloom on the Bears. i guess he was right. As far as it goes, 13 for 29 is a very poor showing, and throwing the last pick was heartbreaking. That being said, the guy sounds like he need a year in Tahiti to get back his confidence. You have to feel for the guy. I am sure JT is taking the blame to deflect as much from him as possible and hope that he can get through the season so that he is available for next year. More on that later.
4) The defense looked pretty good as well. I think the Chauncy Washington killed us - we had many opportunities to take him down, and he put three or four Bears on his back and drove down the field another 4 or 5 yards. He had a great game. I am not so sure he does that if the weather is better. Same with Forsett, actually. I think the offensive player has the advantage in the running game in wet weather. But we played well enough on defense to win if we were connecting on a 50% level on offense.
5) Turnovers killed us once again. Clearly, this game was lost by mistakes and once again the interception and fumble by Nate in the 4th quarter left us out in the cold.
6) It was nice to see all those Bear fans in the rain. 6 years ago when SC crushed us in the rain, the final nail in the Holmoecaust was hammered in, and there were about 12 Bear fans left at the end. That was a nighmare. The next time the Trojans came to Memorial, the Bears beat them in triple overtime.
So what happens now? I do not think there is any benefit to Tedford benching Nate at this time. That time was four weeks ago, and that ship has sailed. Now that Nate is healthy, there is no benefit to it. He could have played Riley when Nate was out due to injury, and gone with that. But he seemed to be really pissed off about that move by Riley at the end of the Oregon State game (which to me indicated a player who was too much of a cowboy for Jeff Tedford to put his trust in). It was kind of sad watching Kevin Riley warm up to go in for Nate and then have Nate walk right in front of him to go into the huddle after that timeout. Riley was clearly deflated. But now, JT is going with Nate because there is not a lot of difference in the season at this point in terms of who starts, who wins, etc. And, he does need Nate back next year (I do not think he is going pro, by the way).
I do not think that means that Nate is guaranteed the starting job next year. I think it will be open to all three - Mansion, Riley and Longshore. Nate probably has the advantage because of his experience, but I think there will be a fierce competition and I am not so sure the outlook is settled. I know that Tedford will make his decision based on his criteria, the most important one being game management. So that does give Nate the top slot going in. That is why Riley does not play now - his game management cost us a victory. It is Nate's physical limitation (his inability to hit his receivers) which has caused his downfall, but he has been an efficient game manager. And frankly, that has put us in a position to win every game we have been in this year. So it is not so outrageous to understand why Tedford has continued to support Nate. I do not think it is because he is his father figure, or any of that other stuff. He supports Nate because Nate has the intellectual capability to run this team better than anyone else. And he does have a good arm, and all that other stuff. Tedford is calculating and understands that he needs to have the right cog to run his machine. Nate fits that bill. Riley does not at this point.
The interesting thing would be, when Mansion comes into the picture, if he is better than the rest, what happens? I think Mansion has a great opportunity to get the starting nod, with Riley back at third string. Then, the question comes up, what does Kevin Riley do? That could be difficult for the team. Nate would be stuck with us - not much else he could do. But Riley would still have some time to go somewhere else and play, a la Kyle Reed. But if we had Mansion with Nate backing him up and Riley leaving, we would still be OK, I think. We would have some younger guys coming in, and Mansion would get a year of experience with a strong, experience leader behind him. So for all the Kevin Riley guys out there who are scared he will leave, while I do think that would be bad, it would not be the unmitigated disaster that it seems.
Anyway, it is clear to me that USC is not a great team anymore (although a very good team) and that the mystique is gone. I can see them losing to Arizona State and going to the Holiday Bowl. Or vice versa. In any case, if the Bears can get it together, I see us able to compete with them on a regular basis going forward. Unless Mitch Mustain is really their savior and gets it together for them next year.
Oregon next year will be worse. Arizona State will be better or the same - I think they will be a tough game but we get them at home. It will be interesting to see what happens at UCLA. They could be improved with just a better coach, like Arizona State is. But they will be losing most of the defensive players, who are the core of the team.
The Bears will have probably a better defense and probably a better offense (compared to the last five weeks). So that is good news. We do have a ton of young play-makers. I see Best at Wide Receiver 50% of the time next year, with Montgomery in the backfield and Best running all sorts of play fakes and reverses, and lining up sometimes as a running back. It could be fun.
Not that I am writing off this season....
GO BEARS!!
2) The offensive line had a great day as well. I don't know if it was the rain, but is sure was nice to see us able to run through the USC defense and keep protection. Longshore had plenty of time most of the day.
3) Nate Longshore looked healthier until the middle part of the 4th quarter when he started to limp. My buddy started freaking out then, calling doom and gloom on the Bears. i guess he was right. As far as it goes, 13 for 29 is a very poor showing, and throwing the last pick was heartbreaking. That being said, the guy sounds like he need a year in Tahiti to get back his confidence. You have to feel for the guy. I am sure JT is taking the blame to deflect as much from him as possible and hope that he can get through the season so that he is available for next year. More on that later.
4) The defense looked pretty good as well. I think the Chauncy Washington killed us - we had many opportunities to take him down, and he put three or four Bears on his back and drove down the field another 4 or 5 yards. He had a great game. I am not so sure he does that if the weather is better. Same with Forsett, actually. I think the offensive player has the advantage in the running game in wet weather. But we played well enough on defense to win if we were connecting on a 50% level on offense.
5) Turnovers killed us once again. Clearly, this game was lost by mistakes and once again the interception and fumble by Nate in the 4th quarter left us out in the cold.
6) It was nice to see all those Bear fans in the rain. 6 years ago when SC crushed us in the rain, the final nail in the Holmoecaust was hammered in, and there were about 12 Bear fans left at the end. That was a nighmare. The next time the Trojans came to Memorial, the Bears beat them in triple overtime.
So what happens now? I do not think there is any benefit to Tedford benching Nate at this time. That time was four weeks ago, and that ship has sailed. Now that Nate is healthy, there is no benefit to it. He could have played Riley when Nate was out due to injury, and gone with that. But he seemed to be really pissed off about that move by Riley at the end of the Oregon State game (which to me indicated a player who was too much of a cowboy for Jeff Tedford to put his trust in). It was kind of sad watching Kevin Riley warm up to go in for Nate and then have Nate walk right in front of him to go into the huddle after that timeout. Riley was clearly deflated. But now, JT is going with Nate because there is not a lot of difference in the season at this point in terms of who starts, who wins, etc. And, he does need Nate back next year (I do not think he is going pro, by the way).
I do not think that means that Nate is guaranteed the starting job next year. I think it will be open to all three - Mansion, Riley and Longshore. Nate probably has the advantage because of his experience, but I think there will be a fierce competition and I am not so sure the outlook is settled. I know that Tedford will make his decision based on his criteria, the most important one being game management. So that does give Nate the top slot going in. That is why Riley does not play now - his game management cost us a victory. It is Nate's physical limitation (his inability to hit his receivers) which has caused his downfall, but he has been an efficient game manager. And frankly, that has put us in a position to win every game we have been in this year. So it is not so outrageous to understand why Tedford has continued to support Nate. I do not think it is because he is his father figure, or any of that other stuff. He supports Nate because Nate has the intellectual capability to run this team better than anyone else. And he does have a good arm, and all that other stuff. Tedford is calculating and understands that he needs to have the right cog to run his machine. Nate fits that bill. Riley does not at this point.
The interesting thing would be, when Mansion comes into the picture, if he is better than the rest, what happens? I think Mansion has a great opportunity to get the starting nod, with Riley back at third string. Then, the question comes up, what does Kevin Riley do? That could be difficult for the team. Nate would be stuck with us - not much else he could do. But Riley would still have some time to go somewhere else and play, a la Kyle Reed. But if we had Mansion with Nate backing him up and Riley leaving, we would still be OK, I think. We would have some younger guys coming in, and Mansion would get a year of experience with a strong, experience leader behind him. So for all the Kevin Riley guys out there who are scared he will leave, while I do think that would be bad, it would not be the unmitigated disaster that it seems.
Anyway, it is clear to me that USC is not a great team anymore (although a very good team) and that the mystique is gone. I can see them losing to Arizona State and going to the Holiday Bowl. Or vice versa. In any case, if the Bears can get it together, I see us able to compete with them on a regular basis going forward. Unless Mitch Mustain is really their savior and gets it together for them next year.
Oregon next year will be worse. Arizona State will be better or the same - I think they will be a tough game but we get them at home. It will be interesting to see what happens at UCLA. They could be improved with just a better coach, like Arizona State is. But they will be losing most of the defensive players, who are the core of the team.
The Bears will have probably a better defense and probably a better offense (compared to the last five weeks). So that is good news. We do have a ton of young play-makers. I see Best at Wide Receiver 50% of the time next year, with Montgomery in the backfield and Best running all sorts of play fakes and reverses, and lining up sometimes as a running back. It could be fun.
Not that I am writing off this season....
GO BEARS!!
Friday, November 9, 2007
Cal vs USC
I just read the October 22 issue of Sports Illustrated, where Marvin Jones goes though his journey to making a decision to select Cal over Oregon as a scholarship player for 2008. I almost cried.
The article goes though the process of Jones going to Oregon, very impressed by the situation there, with the fancy locker room, and the very impressive facilities. He says he "liked it even more than he thought he would."
Then, he goes to Cal. And it goes through the process of staying at the Claremont Hotel, then moving in with the team for the Oregon State game at the Berkeley Marriott, and then going to the game (which we lost, by the way). He goes to a party at the dorms (Clark Kerr, formerly Dwight Derby when I went there). He was impressed with the facilities (because football is not just the weight room, baby - you actually have to live there too). But more importantly, he was impressed with the people and the team. He felt at home.
I think that is the best thing about Cal. There is something for everyone. It is so diverse, that anyone can find a home there, and no one feels left out. That is what a family should feel like, and that is what makes Cal great. Excellent academics, excellent student body, and excellent diversity of opinion and thought. It is not all about football, or whatever else you may think it is about. There is no typical Cal student.
It is great students striving to make the best of themselves. Some of them do it on the athletic field, and some in the other areas. But all make their way through the great University and grow to become something better than when they came. It is a great experience in itself.
When you think about the kids who are playing tomorrow (almost today - it is getting late), you realize that they are not half as hard on themselves as us fans are on them or on the program. They are having a good time, they are working their ass off, but they are also being college students. And that means, doing the stupid things that College kids do, and not always trying as hard as they possibly can, and having lapses in judgement. And all of that is OK. It is not the end of the world. But at the end of the day, when they go out there, they give it their best and if it works out good, then that is all gravy. Sometimes it does not work out. That is OK too. We will all wake up tomorrow.
As Cal fans, we have all been in situations over the past 50 YEARS where the best was not good enough to get to the top of the Pac 10, let alone the national conversation. The past few years, we have been in the national conversation, and that is because we have a coach who has been able to focus those college kids into a group that has, for whatever reason, been able to do well on the field. Some of them are great athletes that he has recruited, and some of them are strong persons who have decided to make a strong effort and dominate. And some are both. And when you get someone where the coach is excited to have them, and the player is excited to come, that is a great combination. Hence, I almost cried when I read that Sports Illustrated article. Those are the type of kids that I want playing for my University.
We have a coach that has dedicated himself to growing the type of team at Cal that is perfect for Cal - diverse, intelligent, and hard working. Kids who strive for the best but are not entirely focused on the game. But, like all Cal fans, they have dedicated themselves to the knowledge that beating those arrogant bastards from USC is the sole defining purpose in their lives.
Football is a true team sport - if someone is injured, or someone is not pulling the weight, then the whole team is impacted. That has been the case with the Bears, and frankly, the Trojans for the last few weeks. Both teams have had their leader out, injured and not playing up to the level expected of a leader.
If you look at USC over the past few years, you can see that their team has been a QB driven team, with Carson Palmer and Matt Leinart leading them through the tough times, and doing a great job, and winning championships. Booty has also been a leader, although not quite up to the level of the other two. Yet, he still was a very good QB last year, and USC tied with Cal for the Pac 10 championship.
Cal, on the other hand, has had spotty leadership on the QB front. We had a damaged Kyle Boller, who stayed for a year, and frankly was healed under our coach. Then, we had a great guy who went pro after two years, but brought us to our pinnacle in 2004 (Aaron Rodgers). We then had a major injury, and our leader was out for the season. So Joe Ayoob came in. Joe was a good QB, but not what we needed. We needed our leader. And Nate was out. So we struggled. Then, our leader came back and started to get us back in the game, and we excelled. We beat Tennessee, Oregon, Texas A&M. We were golden. But he got hurt, and we have been hurt ever since. The coach knows this, and has tried to finesse the situation, but it has not worked entirely.
Last week, it looks like USC got their leader back. So far, we have not. Tomorrow is the chance to get ours back. If we do, we have a very good chance of beating these guys.
We do have a better team. We have the better program. We may not have all of the better players, but we do have the better focus. We have the better University. What we need is a better leader than them on the field. And if we have that, then we win.
If we don't, then I guess we can always hire an SC grad to clean our pool or something, and feel better about that.
***************************
SC has not played well in the last few weeks. Against Oregon State, Arizona and Oregon, they only has two scoring drives longer than 25 yards each game. They have been opportunistic, and still created TOs that lead to their victory in two of the three games. But Baring that, they would have lost all of them.
Cal, on the other hand, would have won each game but for the turnovers.
It is easy to see the difference and what the focus should be - avoid the interception and the fumble, and we win. Lose the ball, and it is all over for us.
That is what I think the coaches believe, and that is what USC will play for. Therefore, they will blitz, and they will stunt, and the will be a little aggressive on defense. We just need to have a QB who can take advantage of that. Nate will play, and play the whole game. He needs to be rested and ready. We can not afford to make mistakes and make the errors that we have been making. In other words, we need to play looser than we have. I am hoping that a wet field helps us out (it generally helps the offense, and SC strength is defensive). I also believe that Nate is finally feeling better. If the crowd helps him, I think we can play a dominating game on both sides of the ball, and come out with our first victory against these guys in four years. The coaches will play a ball control offense. I just want them to play a ball control offense with 20 yard passes in the red zone, so we do not have to run it up the middle there.
GO BEARS!!
The article goes though the process of Jones going to Oregon, very impressed by the situation there, with the fancy locker room, and the very impressive facilities. He says he "liked it even more than he thought he would."
Then, he goes to Cal. And it goes through the process of staying at the Claremont Hotel, then moving in with the team for the Oregon State game at the Berkeley Marriott, and then going to the game (which we lost, by the way). He goes to a party at the dorms (Clark Kerr, formerly Dwight Derby when I went there). He was impressed with the facilities (because football is not just the weight room, baby - you actually have to live there too). But more importantly, he was impressed with the people and the team. He felt at home.
I think that is the best thing about Cal. There is something for everyone. It is so diverse, that anyone can find a home there, and no one feels left out. That is what a family should feel like, and that is what makes Cal great. Excellent academics, excellent student body, and excellent diversity of opinion and thought. It is not all about football, or whatever else you may think it is about. There is no typical Cal student.
It is great students striving to make the best of themselves. Some of them do it on the athletic field, and some in the other areas. But all make their way through the great University and grow to become something better than when they came. It is a great experience in itself.
When you think about the kids who are playing tomorrow (almost today - it is getting late), you realize that they are not half as hard on themselves as us fans are on them or on the program. They are having a good time, they are working their ass off, but they are also being college students. And that means, doing the stupid things that College kids do, and not always trying as hard as they possibly can, and having lapses in judgement. And all of that is OK. It is not the end of the world. But at the end of the day, when they go out there, they give it their best and if it works out good, then that is all gravy. Sometimes it does not work out. That is OK too. We will all wake up tomorrow.
As Cal fans, we have all been in situations over the past 50 YEARS where the best was not good enough to get to the top of the Pac 10, let alone the national conversation. The past few years, we have been in the national conversation, and that is because we have a coach who has been able to focus those college kids into a group that has, for whatever reason, been able to do well on the field. Some of them are great athletes that he has recruited, and some of them are strong persons who have decided to make a strong effort and dominate. And some are both. And when you get someone where the coach is excited to have them, and the player is excited to come, that is a great combination. Hence, I almost cried when I read that Sports Illustrated article. Those are the type of kids that I want playing for my University.
We have a coach that has dedicated himself to growing the type of team at Cal that is perfect for Cal - diverse, intelligent, and hard working. Kids who strive for the best but are not entirely focused on the game. But, like all Cal fans, they have dedicated themselves to the knowledge that beating those arrogant bastards from USC is the sole defining purpose in their lives.
Football is a true team sport - if someone is injured, or someone is not pulling the weight, then the whole team is impacted. That has been the case with the Bears, and frankly, the Trojans for the last few weeks. Both teams have had their leader out, injured and not playing up to the level expected of a leader.
If you look at USC over the past few years, you can see that their team has been a QB driven team, with Carson Palmer and Matt Leinart leading them through the tough times, and doing a great job, and winning championships. Booty has also been a leader, although not quite up to the level of the other two. Yet, he still was a very good QB last year, and USC tied with Cal for the Pac 10 championship.
Cal, on the other hand, has had spotty leadership on the QB front. We had a damaged Kyle Boller, who stayed for a year, and frankly was healed under our coach. Then, we had a great guy who went pro after two years, but brought us to our pinnacle in 2004 (Aaron Rodgers). We then had a major injury, and our leader was out for the season. So Joe Ayoob came in. Joe was a good QB, but not what we needed. We needed our leader. And Nate was out. So we struggled. Then, our leader came back and started to get us back in the game, and we excelled. We beat Tennessee, Oregon, Texas A&M. We were golden. But he got hurt, and we have been hurt ever since. The coach knows this, and has tried to finesse the situation, but it has not worked entirely.
Last week, it looks like USC got their leader back. So far, we have not. Tomorrow is the chance to get ours back. If we do, we have a very good chance of beating these guys.
We do have a better team. We have the better program. We may not have all of the better players, but we do have the better focus. We have the better University. What we need is a better leader than them on the field. And if we have that, then we win.
If we don't, then I guess we can always hire an SC grad to clean our pool or something, and feel better about that.
***************************
SC has not played well in the last few weeks. Against Oregon State, Arizona and Oregon, they only has two scoring drives longer than 25 yards each game. They have been opportunistic, and still created TOs that lead to their victory in two of the three games. But Baring that, they would have lost all of them.
Cal, on the other hand, would have won each game but for the turnovers.
It is easy to see the difference and what the focus should be - avoid the interception and the fumble, and we win. Lose the ball, and it is all over for us.
That is what I think the coaches believe, and that is what USC will play for. Therefore, they will blitz, and they will stunt, and the will be a little aggressive on defense. We just need to have a QB who can take advantage of that. Nate will play, and play the whole game. He needs to be rested and ready. We can not afford to make mistakes and make the errors that we have been making. In other words, we need to play looser than we have. I am hoping that a wet field helps us out (it generally helps the offense, and SC strength is defensive). I also believe that Nate is finally feeling better. If the crowd helps him, I think we can play a dominating game on both sides of the ball, and come out with our first victory against these guys in four years. The coaches will play a ball control offense. I just want them to play a ball control offense with 20 yard passes in the red zone, so we do not have to run it up the middle there.
GO BEARS!!
How 'Bout them Bears!
The Cal Men's basketball team kicked off their season with a 100 - 42 drubbing on Alaska Fairbanks last night.
The good news is that Cal has some shooters, which we need. Patrick Christopher had 32 points, but more importantly was 5 for 9 for three points. That is great because if the Bears have a chance at all this season in a very, very tough Pac 10, he is going to have to be the man. Theo Robinson is hurt, with the hip surgery. There is no telling how he will be when he gets back from that. But my guess is it won't help. So Patrick Christopher is going to have to play huge this year for the Bears to dominate.
Ryan also had 23 points, which is good. Those two are going to be the keys to this team this year. They both need to step up.
Devon Hardin had 8 points, and was 4 for 8 against a team whose tallest guy was 6 foot 7 inches. I don't know what to say about that except that he is back. Jordan Wilkes was 1 for 2 from the three point spot, and 2 for 5 overall. He had 10 rebounds in 20 minutes. His line was just about as good as Hardin's - that is good news.
Max Zhang also got in for a bit, and hit the final free throw that put the game to 100 points.
If the Bears can get the front court going defensively, and get a bunch of rebounds, we should be OK. Against a small team, we got 14 offensive rebounds to their 21 defensive. That is a pretty good ratio. The sad thing is, they got 15 offensive rebounds (we did get 38, so the ratio was better). They just missed a bunch of shots (17 of 69 vs 35 of 65 for the Bears).
Anyway, this is just an exhibition against a small team. But is is fun to see a bunch of guys who need to step up seem like they can. And it is fun to see a bunch of guys back from injury.
We have definite problems with depth at the guard slots. Here is the guard walk-on report:
Nican Robinson - 16 minutes
Thomas Fang - 2 minutes
Eddy Miller - 10 minutes
David Liss - 12 minutes
Patrick Armstrong - 3 minutes
Total - 43 minutes, or a little more than 1 full time player. 4 for 11 from the floor, with 11 rebounds. 4 assists and three turnovers.
Knezevic was held scoreless in 21 minutes of play (0 for 2), but he did have 7 assists and only two turnovers. So that is great. The walk-ons will not help in the real games.
Harper Kamp played great as a true freshman, with 11 points, two rebounds and two blocks in 19 minutes. He, Vierneisel, Anderson, and Christopher will be a nice rotation on the wings, with Hardin, Zhang and Wilkes inside. But we need to support the guard slot, and we just do not have anyone at this point to spell Knezevic.
So some good news. At least our walk-ons are getting some early time and will have more experience when we get to real games, but we really need our injured guys back. Randle is slated to come back in a few weeks, so that is great. And his deal was not a physical injury, but a medical issue. So he should be healthy and strong when he gets back.
In fact, any other year I would feel pretty good about this team. But the Pac 10 is so good this year. So we will see.
GO BEARS!!
The good news is that Cal has some shooters, which we need. Patrick Christopher had 32 points, but more importantly was 5 for 9 for three points. That is great because if the Bears have a chance at all this season in a very, very tough Pac 10, he is going to have to be the man. Theo Robinson is hurt, with the hip surgery. There is no telling how he will be when he gets back from that. But my guess is it won't help. So Patrick Christopher is going to have to play huge this year for the Bears to dominate.
Ryan also had 23 points, which is good. Those two are going to be the keys to this team this year. They both need to step up.
Devon Hardin had 8 points, and was 4 for 8 against a team whose tallest guy was 6 foot 7 inches. I don't know what to say about that except that he is back. Jordan Wilkes was 1 for 2 from the three point spot, and 2 for 5 overall. He had 10 rebounds in 20 minutes. His line was just about as good as Hardin's - that is good news.
Max Zhang also got in for a bit, and hit the final free throw that put the game to 100 points.
If the Bears can get the front court going defensively, and get a bunch of rebounds, we should be OK. Against a small team, we got 14 offensive rebounds to their 21 defensive. That is a pretty good ratio. The sad thing is, they got 15 offensive rebounds (we did get 38, so the ratio was better). They just missed a bunch of shots (17 of 69 vs 35 of 65 for the Bears).
Anyway, this is just an exhibition against a small team. But is is fun to see a bunch of guys who need to step up seem like they can. And it is fun to see a bunch of guys back from injury.
We have definite problems with depth at the guard slots. Here is the guard walk-on report:
Nican Robinson - 16 minutes
Thomas Fang - 2 minutes
Eddy Miller - 10 minutes
David Liss - 12 minutes
Patrick Armstrong - 3 minutes
Total - 43 minutes, or a little more than 1 full time player. 4 for 11 from the floor, with 11 rebounds. 4 assists and three turnovers.
Knezevic was held scoreless in 21 minutes of play (0 for 2), but he did have 7 assists and only two turnovers. So that is great. The walk-ons will not help in the real games.
Harper Kamp played great as a true freshman, with 11 points, two rebounds and two blocks in 19 minutes. He, Vierneisel, Anderson, and Christopher will be a nice rotation on the wings, with Hardin, Zhang and Wilkes inside. But we need to support the guard slot, and we just do not have anyone at this point to spell Knezevic.
So some good news. At least our walk-ons are getting some early time and will have more experience when we get to real games, but we really need our injured guys back. Randle is slated to come back in a few weeks, so that is great. And his deal was not a physical injury, but a medical issue. So he should be healthy and strong when he gets back.
In fact, any other year I would feel pretty good about this team. But the Pac 10 is so good this year. So we will see.
GO BEARS!!
Thursday, November 8, 2007
Cal vs Washington State Re-watch
Well, I finally watched the game again last night.
It wasn't as bad as I thought.
Yes, the Bears made a lot of mistakes. Three turnovers were critical and drive killing.
There were three penalties, one of which killed a drive.
But looking at it again, Nate looked a lot better than I thought. Hawkins, who had a pretty good game, also dropped a TON of passes, which would have opened up a ton of scoring and kept drives alive. I actually think he holds the majority of the blame for the seemingly lackluster effort on Saturday.
So, yes, we only scored twenty. And good teams do not make those mistakes. But the Bears certainly have the players and the talent and actually played a game, with a game plan, where they should have scored at least 48 points. It should have been that big of a difference.
I was more impressed with Justin Forsett. He moved the chains in the middle of the field. I know that his average was only 2.8 yards per carry before his long run. But you also have to include in that the short yardage runs at the goal line, which I think were 7 for 8 yards. That has to kill the average. In the middle of the field, the play calling was mixed up pretty well, and the Bears run and pass combination seemed to work fine. Goal line running was still an issue that the Bears need to work on.
I guess what I am saying is that I am not quite as petrified about Saturday as I was before looking at the game again.
If the Bears can play together, and stop turning the ball over, and actually make the easy catches. then I think they win. Because, lets face it - USC has not played that well this year. Their out of conference schedule (Notre Dame, Nebraska and Utah State) are among the three worst programs in college football this year. They have played the worst of the Pac 10, except for Oregon, where they were outclassed. They still have to play the Bears, Arizona State, and UCLA. So it is difficult to say how good they are.
It is also difficult to say how good we are. We have played like UCLA this season (Horrors!!!). WE have the talent and the ability to have won all of the games that we have played, and mistakes have doomed us. For us it is a confidence issue. I actually think we have the better team that USC this year, and hopefully our confidence is getting better.
News is that Nate is looking good, that he practiced fine for two full days this week. Hopefully that translates into better confidence for the rest of the team. He is the leader of the squad, whether you like to admit it or not. If he plays well, the team plays well.
If our defense can play like we did against Washington State, and our offense can play like we did against Oregon and Tennessee, we win this game easily. Also, I was pleased with the special teams (particularly Kickoff coverage) at Washington State.
All we need to do is throw the ball into the end zone once or twice inside the 10 and I think we have it made...
Well see.
Go Bears!!!
It wasn't as bad as I thought.
Yes, the Bears made a lot of mistakes. Three turnovers were critical and drive killing.
There were three penalties, one of which killed a drive.
But looking at it again, Nate looked a lot better than I thought. Hawkins, who had a pretty good game, also dropped a TON of passes, which would have opened up a ton of scoring and kept drives alive. I actually think he holds the majority of the blame for the seemingly lackluster effort on Saturday.
So, yes, we only scored twenty. And good teams do not make those mistakes. But the Bears certainly have the players and the talent and actually played a game, with a game plan, where they should have scored at least 48 points. It should have been that big of a difference.
I was more impressed with Justin Forsett. He moved the chains in the middle of the field. I know that his average was only 2.8 yards per carry before his long run. But you also have to include in that the short yardage runs at the goal line, which I think were 7 for 8 yards. That has to kill the average. In the middle of the field, the play calling was mixed up pretty well, and the Bears run and pass combination seemed to work fine. Goal line running was still an issue that the Bears need to work on.
I guess what I am saying is that I am not quite as petrified about Saturday as I was before looking at the game again.
If the Bears can play together, and stop turning the ball over, and actually make the easy catches. then I think they win. Because, lets face it - USC has not played that well this year. Their out of conference schedule (Notre Dame, Nebraska and Utah State) are among the three worst programs in college football this year. They have played the worst of the Pac 10, except for Oregon, where they were outclassed. They still have to play the Bears, Arizona State, and UCLA. So it is difficult to say how good they are.
It is also difficult to say how good we are. We have played like UCLA this season (Horrors!!!). WE have the talent and the ability to have won all of the games that we have played, and mistakes have doomed us. For us it is a confidence issue. I actually think we have the better team that USC this year, and hopefully our confidence is getting better.
News is that Nate is looking good, that he practiced fine for two full days this week. Hopefully that translates into better confidence for the rest of the team. He is the leader of the squad, whether you like to admit it or not. If he plays well, the team plays well.
If our defense can play like we did against Washington State, and our offense can play like we did against Oregon and Tennessee, we win this game easily. Also, I was pleased with the special teams (particularly Kickoff coverage) at Washington State.
All we need to do is throw the ball into the end zone once or twice inside the 10 and I think we have it made...
Well see.
Go Bears!!!
Tuesday, November 6, 2007
BCS Stuff
Ok - here is the deal. There is still a slim possibility for the Bears to get to the Rose Bowl, or some other BCS game. That being said, much of the luster has worn off of the Bears as a media darling (which they were three short weeks ago). So the odds of that are getting slimmer each day. But if we beat SC, we may get back in the media love-fest and some good things could happen in this the most unpredictable of college football years.
But there are also a host of other BCS issues which are rearing their ugly heads.
First, Oregon is going to have a hard time getting to the Championship game. There are really three teams that have an easier time at this point. Ohio State, which all it has to do is win out and it is a slam dunk. They currently are number 1 in 4 computer polls, and both voter polls. That makes them 1 in the computers overall and 1 in the polls, and 1 therefore in the BCS. LSU is 2 in the computers, although they play Louisiana Tech this week, so that may drop them a bit. However, if LSU wins out, they play in the SEC championship game, which is a big positive boost to computer rankings. First, they play a good team, which is good for the computer rankings. And second, they play a 13th game, which also is good for the computer rankings, because most of them are checking your winning percentage. And that goes up substantially each game you win. So having 13 games is a big plus on the computer side.
The same factor applies for Kansas. If they go to 13-0, they have a huge computer upside.
Right now, Oregon is 3rd in the computers. However, if LSU and Kansas win out, they may move up in the computer rankings, and Oregon may move behind Kansas. So what that means is that Oregon needs to impress the humans in order to move up in the rankings. They have three games left to do that with, but they have already played the toughest tests of the season. In fact, in these games, they can only really hurt themselves.
Meanwhile, Kansas plays Missouri and Oklahoma, which are good teams and will impress people.
LSU plays a Mississippi, Arkansas, and Louisiana Tech, which are teams they should beat easily. The only hope for the Ducks is frankly if LSU loses in the SEC championship game. That could easily happen. LSU is, I think, the most over-hyped one loss team. I think there are a bunch of better teams in the SEC, in fact. Like Kentucky and Georgia, and probably Florida and maybe even Tennessee.
That being said. if they win out, Oregon has a hell of a time getting into the BCS championship game.
But say LSU loses in the SEC Championship game. In fact, it is very possible that Tennessee gets to the SEC championship game and wins it. Then Tennessee would get the BCS game, and LSU would be scrambling for the second BCS berth (which they would probably get).
Even if that were the case, then Kansas would have a great shot at moving ahead of Oregon. If LSU lost, they would drop in the computers down to 6th or something. Assuming that Kansas wins out, they would most likely move ahead of Oregon in the computers, and have a very good chance of moving so close to the Ducks in the polls that they could get the bid. Remember, the Big 12 Championship game is a week after the Civil war. That gives the voters a reason to move an undefeated 13 win Kansas ahead of the Ducks.
Now, assuming that both LSU and Kansas lose, the Ducks probably go to the National Championship game.
But if they do not, who will they play in the Rose Bowl? I think there are three possibilities. The first is that Ohio State wins out, beats Michigan, and they play in the National Championship game. Michigan is out of the picture for the Rose Bowl, with three loses, one of them being a beat-down by the very same Ducks that they would be playing. If LSU is available, they get the nod. That would be a huge game - Oregon against LSU in neutral territory (because if LSU is available they would not be going to the Sugarbowl where they would be playing for the NCG). Pac 10 vs SEC. HUGE.
But, say LSU and Ohio State play in the NCG, then I think Oregon plays the loser of the Big 12 championship game, either a one loss Kansas, or a two loss Oklahoma.
If Michigan wins the Big 10, there is no doubt that it will be Oregon and Michigan in the Rose Bowl. Boring and repetitive. Poor Rose Bowl.
But what if Kansas and LSU lose out? Then Oregon plays Ohio State in the NCG. The Rose Bowl folks are pissed, but they signed on for this BCS thing. So, who would play in the Rose Bowl then?
Now, this is where it gets interesting for Bear fans:
If Oregon does go the the NCG, and Cal wins out, Cal will be third in the Pac 10, ahead of USC based on head to head competition. If Arizona State loses twice, Cal will be second in the Pac 10 based on the Pac 10 tiebreaker. There would be three teams in a tie for second place, all of whom have beaten one of the other (assuming that USC beats Arizona State). Because Cal beat Oregon, which is the highest placed team any of the three have beaten, Cal would win the tiebreaker and get the Rose Bowl nod.
OK - I know, stop smoking the crazy stuff. But it could happen.
Here is the deal - Cal can make the Rose Bowl, but does not hold our destiny in our hands. We are relying on the Trojans to win out, except get beat by us.
The other thing that could happen is that Oregon goes on a two game skid (QB with injured leg, anyone? Sound familiar? Just like last year with them and this year with us). We could win out and be tied for first or second. However, here is where it weird. If there is a 4 way tie with Cal, USC, Arizona State and Oregon for first place, here is how it would work. The team that beat the most of the other three would get the first tie breaker. That would be Cal and Oregon. Because we both would have beaten two of the other two, and only lost to one of the other two.
Then, they would look at our loses other than to each other. And depending on the position of those loses, we would win or lose the battle. It is possible in this scenario that our other loses would be to the same teams: Oregon State and UCLA (Oregon has yet to play them). If that were the case, then the final tie breaker would be who had the higher BCS rating. I can tell you now that Oregon would not have it if we were on a 4 game winning streak and they just lost to UCLA and Oregon State.
So we would have the unmitigated right to go to the Rose Bowl in that scenario.
Oregon, USC and Arizona State have their fates in their hands. If USC wins out, they will almost certainly go to a BCS game. If Arizona State wins out, they will almost certainly go to a BCS game. In fact either of those teams will probably go to the Fiesta Bowl if they win out.
If the Bears win out, we need help. It could happen. And this season is crazy.
So, there really is a reason to beat the Trojans, besides just hating their vile guts.
GO BEARS!!
But there are also a host of other BCS issues which are rearing their ugly heads.
First, Oregon is going to have a hard time getting to the Championship game. There are really three teams that have an easier time at this point. Ohio State, which all it has to do is win out and it is a slam dunk. They currently are number 1 in 4 computer polls, and both voter polls. That makes them 1 in the computers overall and 1 in the polls, and 1 therefore in the BCS. LSU is 2 in the computers, although they play Louisiana Tech this week, so that may drop them a bit. However, if LSU wins out, they play in the SEC championship game, which is a big positive boost to computer rankings. First, they play a good team, which is good for the computer rankings. And second, they play a 13th game, which also is good for the computer rankings, because most of them are checking your winning percentage. And that goes up substantially each game you win. So having 13 games is a big plus on the computer side.
The same factor applies for Kansas. If they go to 13-0, they have a huge computer upside.
Right now, Oregon is 3rd in the computers. However, if LSU and Kansas win out, they may move up in the computer rankings, and Oregon may move behind Kansas. So what that means is that Oregon needs to impress the humans in order to move up in the rankings. They have three games left to do that with, but they have already played the toughest tests of the season. In fact, in these games, they can only really hurt themselves.
Meanwhile, Kansas plays Missouri and Oklahoma, which are good teams and will impress people.
LSU plays a Mississippi, Arkansas, and Louisiana Tech, which are teams they should beat easily. The only hope for the Ducks is frankly if LSU loses in the SEC championship game. That could easily happen. LSU is, I think, the most over-hyped one loss team. I think there are a bunch of better teams in the SEC, in fact. Like Kentucky and Georgia, and probably Florida and maybe even Tennessee.
That being said. if they win out, Oregon has a hell of a time getting into the BCS championship game.
But say LSU loses in the SEC Championship game. In fact, it is very possible that Tennessee gets to the SEC championship game and wins it. Then Tennessee would get the BCS game, and LSU would be scrambling for the second BCS berth (which they would probably get).
Even if that were the case, then Kansas would have a great shot at moving ahead of Oregon. If LSU lost, they would drop in the computers down to 6th or something. Assuming that Kansas wins out, they would most likely move ahead of Oregon in the computers, and have a very good chance of moving so close to the Ducks in the polls that they could get the bid. Remember, the Big 12 Championship game is a week after the Civil war. That gives the voters a reason to move an undefeated 13 win Kansas ahead of the Ducks.
Now, assuming that both LSU and Kansas lose, the Ducks probably go to the National Championship game.
But if they do not, who will they play in the Rose Bowl? I think there are three possibilities. The first is that Ohio State wins out, beats Michigan, and they play in the National Championship game. Michigan is out of the picture for the Rose Bowl, with three loses, one of them being a beat-down by the very same Ducks that they would be playing. If LSU is available, they get the nod. That would be a huge game - Oregon against LSU in neutral territory (because if LSU is available they would not be going to the Sugarbowl where they would be playing for the NCG). Pac 10 vs SEC. HUGE.
But, say LSU and Ohio State play in the NCG, then I think Oregon plays the loser of the Big 12 championship game, either a one loss Kansas, or a two loss Oklahoma.
If Michigan wins the Big 10, there is no doubt that it will be Oregon and Michigan in the Rose Bowl. Boring and repetitive. Poor Rose Bowl.
But what if Kansas and LSU lose out? Then Oregon plays Ohio State in the NCG. The Rose Bowl folks are pissed, but they signed on for this BCS thing. So, who would play in the Rose Bowl then?
Now, this is where it gets interesting for Bear fans:
If Oregon does go the the NCG, and Cal wins out, Cal will be third in the Pac 10, ahead of USC based on head to head competition. If Arizona State loses twice, Cal will be second in the Pac 10 based on the Pac 10 tiebreaker. There would be three teams in a tie for second place, all of whom have beaten one of the other (assuming that USC beats Arizona State). Because Cal beat Oregon, which is the highest placed team any of the three have beaten, Cal would win the tiebreaker and get the Rose Bowl nod.
OK - I know, stop smoking the crazy stuff. But it could happen.
Here is the deal - Cal can make the Rose Bowl, but does not hold our destiny in our hands. We are relying on the Trojans to win out, except get beat by us.
The other thing that could happen is that Oregon goes on a two game skid (QB with injured leg, anyone? Sound familiar? Just like last year with them and this year with us). We could win out and be tied for first or second. However, here is where it weird. If there is a 4 way tie with Cal, USC, Arizona State and Oregon for first place, here is how it would work. The team that beat the most of the other three would get the first tie breaker. That would be Cal and Oregon. Because we both would have beaten two of the other two, and only lost to one of the other two.
Then, they would look at our loses other than to each other. And depending on the position of those loses, we would win or lose the battle. It is possible in this scenario that our other loses would be to the same teams: Oregon State and UCLA (Oregon has yet to play them). If that were the case, then the final tie breaker would be who had the higher BCS rating. I can tell you now that Oregon would not have it if we were on a 4 game winning streak and they just lost to UCLA and Oregon State.
So we would have the unmitigated right to go to the Rose Bowl in that scenario.
Oregon, USC and Arizona State have their fates in their hands. If USC wins out, they will almost certainly go to a BCS game. If Arizona State wins out, they will almost certainly go to a BCS game. In fact either of those teams will probably go to the Fiesta Bowl if they win out.
If the Bears win out, we need help. It could happen. And this season is crazy.
So, there really is a reason to beat the Trojans, besides just hating their vile guts.
GO BEARS!!
Monday, November 5, 2007
Number 1 Cal vs USC
Yes, I am talking about Water Polo.
The Golden Bears water polo team (previously ranked number 2) moved up last week to number 1 when previously ranked #1 USC lost to 3rd ranked UCLA. The Bears have won 22 and lost only two this year - but one was to USC.
This week is not only the Cal - USC football game, but also the Cal - USC water polo match. The game is at 1:30 at Spieker Aquatics Complex on Saturday. It is a great thing to watch the water polo match (last year the Bears won on the last second), have a few beers, and them come watch the football game.
This is most likely a preview of the national championship tournament match, which will be held in one month at Stanford on the 1st and 2nd of December. Actually, you may be able to catch a Cal match at the National Championship tournament depending on the schedule during the big game festivities. Last year, the Bears beat USC in the championship game.
GO BEARS!!
The Golden Bears water polo team (previously ranked number 2) moved up last week to number 1 when previously ranked #1 USC lost to 3rd ranked UCLA. The Bears have won 22 and lost only two this year - but one was to USC.
This week is not only the Cal - USC football game, but also the Cal - USC water polo match. The game is at 1:30 at Spieker Aquatics Complex on Saturday. It is a great thing to watch the water polo match (last year the Bears won on the last second), have a few beers, and them come watch the football game.
This is most likely a preview of the national championship tournament match, which will be held in one month at Stanford on the 1st and 2nd of December. Actually, you may be able to catch a Cal match at the National Championship tournament depending on the schedule during the big game festivities. Last year, the Bears beat USC in the championship game.
GO BEARS!!
Washington State Recap
While I still have not had time to re-watch the game, I want to say that it is good to get a win, and finally become bowl eligible.
In my comments before the game, I said I though that Longshore would start and Tedford would try to run the ball and have long, time consuming drives. Well, he proved me correct, with two almost ten minute drives. The issue was, we also turned the ball over again three times, and therefore we failed to score a few times when we should have. This is a game that we should have dominated, and instead we squeek out a win.
That being said, it is nice to get a win again. Forsett gained over 100 yards, and over 1000 for the year, which is great considering this is the 9th game.
Longhore was shaky, but at least did not throw a game losing INT.
I was hoping that the score would have been a bit more compelling for Tedford to put in Riley. But that being said, it appeared that Nate seemed more healthy.
Once again, it is the offense that is killing this team, not the defense. The defense proved it again Saturday with a great performance, although letting two long passes in the 4th quarter almost bring a losing team back brought back memories of Colorado State (who still only has one win!). But they did what they had to. Half of the passing yardage for the Cougars was in the 4th quarter (mostly on those two plays), and we held their anemic running game to less than three yards per carry. The Bears shut them out in the first half.
Our offense, though, was pretty bad. We were also held to less than 3 yards per carry until Justin's 44 yard run in the 4th quarter to give the winning TD. We held the ball for over 37 minutes, and had over 81 plays to their 68. Yet they had more yardage than us. We were held to less than 5 yards per play for what I think is the first time this season.
The offensive line is a testament to quality pass protection. They excel at that, giving up no sacks for I think the 5th game this year. We also completed 67% of our passes. The problem is, the percentage of pass completions that went for success was very low (success meaning first down or score). We only had 13 passing first downs in 39 attempts - one of three attempts, for a 5.5 yard per attempt average. We are lame thowing the long ball.
They used to be good at run blocking as well. We only had success running on 9 of 42 carries. That is, a first down 21 percent of the time we ran the ball. If you want to be able to run the ball successfully, that needs to be at least 33 percent.
The shining bright spot in this game is that we only had three penalties for 35 yards. And our turnovers did not turn into points for the other team - they just took away our scoring opportunities. I guess that is what happens when you turn the ball over on their side of the field.
The other thing I think that happened is that after Nate threw the long ball on first down, and was picked off, we stopped going down the field on first down. That is your coach losing confidence in you. We did actually pass quite a bit on first down in the first half (9 runs on first down, 9 passes on first down in the first half). But in the second half, we slowed that down a bit, running for twice as many on first down (10) as passing (5) on first down. So we took our foot off the gas.
We also did not pass in the opponents 10 yards or less territory. In fact, we ran on 10 of 10 plays in ten yards or less. How hard is that to defend? I do not think it is Forsett (who actually scored on one of those 10 plays), but the total lack of imagination by the coaching staff when under 10 yards to goal. Just wait until the USC game - do you really think Jeff Tedford is going to throw 4 times from the 10 yard line like in 2004? Look for power running up the middle.
Over the last 4 games, our offense has averaged 20.5 points per game. Once again, it is easy to see where we could have improved, and played better. But we are becoming way to easy to defend. We have good / great players, but our scheme is getting old. The coach needs to become more creative with our play calling and become more aggressive. That being said, this was a game plan that you could see coming a mile away, and it worked. So let's take the win, and hope that JT knows this will not win next week and he changes up a bit.
GO BEARS!!!
In my comments before the game, I said I though that Longshore would start and Tedford would try to run the ball and have long, time consuming drives. Well, he proved me correct, with two almost ten minute drives. The issue was, we also turned the ball over again three times, and therefore we failed to score a few times when we should have. This is a game that we should have dominated, and instead we squeek out a win.
That being said, it is nice to get a win again. Forsett gained over 100 yards, and over 1000 for the year, which is great considering this is the 9th game.
Longhore was shaky, but at least did not throw a game losing INT.
I was hoping that the score would have been a bit more compelling for Tedford to put in Riley. But that being said, it appeared that Nate seemed more healthy.
Once again, it is the offense that is killing this team, not the defense. The defense proved it again Saturday with a great performance, although letting two long passes in the 4th quarter almost bring a losing team back brought back memories of Colorado State (who still only has one win!). But they did what they had to. Half of the passing yardage for the Cougars was in the 4th quarter (mostly on those two plays), and we held their anemic running game to less than three yards per carry. The Bears shut them out in the first half.
Our offense, though, was pretty bad. We were also held to less than 3 yards per carry until Justin's 44 yard run in the 4th quarter to give the winning TD. We held the ball for over 37 minutes, and had over 81 plays to their 68. Yet they had more yardage than us. We were held to less than 5 yards per play for what I think is the first time this season.
The offensive line is a testament to quality pass protection. They excel at that, giving up no sacks for I think the 5th game this year. We also completed 67% of our passes. The problem is, the percentage of pass completions that went for success was very low (success meaning first down or score). We only had 13 passing first downs in 39 attempts - one of three attempts, for a 5.5 yard per attempt average. We are lame thowing the long ball.
They used to be good at run blocking as well. We only had success running on 9 of 42 carries. That is, a first down 21 percent of the time we ran the ball. If you want to be able to run the ball successfully, that needs to be at least 33 percent.
The shining bright spot in this game is that we only had three penalties for 35 yards. And our turnovers did not turn into points for the other team - they just took away our scoring opportunities. I guess that is what happens when you turn the ball over on their side of the field.
The other thing I think that happened is that after Nate threw the long ball on first down, and was picked off, we stopped going down the field on first down. That is your coach losing confidence in you. We did actually pass quite a bit on first down in the first half (9 runs on first down, 9 passes on first down in the first half). But in the second half, we slowed that down a bit, running for twice as many on first down (10) as passing (5) on first down. So we took our foot off the gas.
We also did not pass in the opponents 10 yards or less territory. In fact, we ran on 10 of 10 plays in ten yards or less. How hard is that to defend? I do not think it is Forsett (who actually scored on one of those 10 plays), but the total lack of imagination by the coaching staff when under 10 yards to goal. Just wait until the USC game - do you really think Jeff Tedford is going to throw 4 times from the 10 yard line like in 2004? Look for power running up the middle.
Over the last 4 games, our offense has averaged 20.5 points per game. Once again, it is easy to see where we could have improved, and played better. But we are becoming way to easy to defend. We have good / great players, but our scheme is getting old. The coach needs to become more creative with our play calling and become more aggressive. That being said, this was a game plan that you could see coming a mile away, and it worked. So let's take the win, and hope that JT knows this will not win next week and he changes up a bit.
GO BEARS!!!
Saturday, November 3, 2007
Nate's Blog
Just want to say, not a lot going on with Nate's Blog. I wonder if he just has no time (probably the care), or if he was told not to do it, or if maybe he just has nothing to say. Or maybe he thought better of it.
I thought it was a pretty interesting idea that a starting QB of a top 10 team would be putting out a blog that probably would be much better and more insightful than anything else out there if he actually did it. But it would have been too controversial. Can you imagine the posts these past few weeks? "yeah - I really think Kevin should start...not!!"
Maybe after the season.
I thought it was a pretty interesting idea that a starting QB of a top 10 team would be putting out a blog that probably would be much better and more insightful than anything else out there if he actually did it. But it would have been too controversial. Can you imagine the posts these past few weeks? "yeah - I really think Kevin should start...not!!"
Maybe after the season.
Cal vs Washington State
Let us hope that we never have another October like that. 0 for the 10th month is no way to go. It is very discouraging.
Here's hopeing that our November is a little better.
As the post-Halloween Christmas Decorations go up at the Malls, and the season starts it's last third, it is time to go out swinging. I think Washington State is just what the Doctor ordered. This is a team that can not play defense to save it's life (last week vs UCLA an aberation based on the fact that they did not have a QB who could walk properly). This is a team that has lost it's top two running backs.
They have a good passing game, and Alex Brink is a senior. However, he has nothing else to work with.
If the Bears have any hope of getting something out of this season, they need to win and big.
So, what are the issues:
1) Who will start for us? I think the answer is Longshore. I think Tedford will take him out and start Riley in the second half, no matter what. For example, if we are ahead, why not start Riley? If we are behind, why not start Riley. If we are in a shootout at the OK Corral, why not start Riley? I do not think that Tedford will embarass Nate by benching him. But I sure think he needs to be benched a bit to see how Kevin Riley does. And taking him out at the start of the second half, partularly if we are ahead is a good way to get KR out there.
2) How will our running game do? No matter who starts for us, if we do not rush over 200 yards I would consider this game a failure. Here is why: the game plan against this team needs to be about rushing the ball. We need to keep our defense off the field. They have an atrocious rushing defense - 9th in the Pac 10 and 99th in the country. Our offensive line needs to get some confidence in blowing people off the line. They have moved to a 3-4 set, which is actually good for us in terms of Justin Forsett in hitting the hole quickly and getting to the backers, for about 4 or 5 per carry. And if you can break one into the secondary you move that to 6 or 7 per carry. That is what we need. And we need to keep Brink off the field. So they will run tomorrow. But here is where I also think it makes more sense to put Riley in: he is a much more mobile threat than Nate, and putting him in the second half where we can run the option, sprint outs, etc will put a bunch more pressure on the defense, and will enable us to run the game out. Just like JT likes.
3) What will our defense look like? They have no running game. They have a very good quarterback, and some good receivers. Will we blitz all day long? If it were me, there would be no doubt about it. This is a game where I would give up the run to protect against the pass. If they want to run and shorten the game, that hurts them more than us. If I were them, I would want this to be a 5 hour affair with 90 plays per side. That is how they can win this. I would be rushing 5 or 6 per play. We really need to get Brink out of synch. That being said, we probably will not do so. I hope I am wrong. But Gregory's one comment was that thier third string running back is a "really good football player". That is a load of crap. If Slocum was starting tomorrow for Cal, I can pretty much be sure that Washington State would be bringing the heat on Nate. And that is what we should be doing.
********************
All that being said, and all of the horrors of the last three games running through my mind, we are still a very good football team. I know I am a homer, but let's face the facts: we won when we won the turnover battle, and we lost when we lost the turnover battle. If not for INTs and Fumbles, we are the number 1 team in the land. And, barring a major catastrophe, we will win tomorrow.
I do not think anyone is looking ahead to USC at this point (by the way, is College GameDay coming?) Or the slim mathematical hope of a Rose Bowl berth. This game will be the focus tomorrow.
Last week, I actually thought we played well, but Nate crumbled and you just can not have that against a top 10 team. So we lost to a very good ASU team. This week, I think JT has a short hook, and we will dominate anyway. ASU has lost by an average of 32 points on the road. Here is hoping we can move that to 35 by the end of the day: Cal 52, WSU 7.
GO BEARS!!!
Here's hopeing that our November is a little better.
As the post-Halloween Christmas Decorations go up at the Malls, and the season starts it's last third, it is time to go out swinging. I think Washington State is just what the Doctor ordered. This is a team that can not play defense to save it's life (last week vs UCLA an aberation based on the fact that they did not have a QB who could walk properly). This is a team that has lost it's top two running backs.
They have a good passing game, and Alex Brink is a senior. However, he has nothing else to work with.
If the Bears have any hope of getting something out of this season, they need to win and big.
So, what are the issues:
1) Who will start for us? I think the answer is Longshore. I think Tedford will take him out and start Riley in the second half, no matter what. For example, if we are ahead, why not start Riley? If we are behind, why not start Riley. If we are in a shootout at the OK Corral, why not start Riley? I do not think that Tedford will embarass Nate by benching him. But I sure think he needs to be benched a bit to see how Kevin Riley does. And taking him out at the start of the second half, partularly if we are ahead is a good way to get KR out there.
2) How will our running game do? No matter who starts for us, if we do not rush over 200 yards I would consider this game a failure. Here is why: the game plan against this team needs to be about rushing the ball. We need to keep our defense off the field. They have an atrocious rushing defense - 9th in the Pac 10 and 99th in the country. Our offensive line needs to get some confidence in blowing people off the line. They have moved to a 3-4 set, which is actually good for us in terms of Justin Forsett in hitting the hole quickly and getting to the backers, for about 4 or 5 per carry. And if you can break one into the secondary you move that to 6 or 7 per carry. That is what we need. And we need to keep Brink off the field. So they will run tomorrow. But here is where I also think it makes more sense to put Riley in: he is a much more mobile threat than Nate, and putting him in the second half where we can run the option, sprint outs, etc will put a bunch more pressure on the defense, and will enable us to run the game out. Just like JT likes.
3) What will our defense look like? They have no running game. They have a very good quarterback, and some good receivers. Will we blitz all day long? If it were me, there would be no doubt about it. This is a game where I would give up the run to protect against the pass. If they want to run and shorten the game, that hurts them more than us. If I were them, I would want this to be a 5 hour affair with 90 plays per side. That is how they can win this. I would be rushing 5 or 6 per play. We really need to get Brink out of synch. That being said, we probably will not do so. I hope I am wrong. But Gregory's one comment was that thier third string running back is a "really good football player". That is a load of crap. If Slocum was starting tomorrow for Cal, I can pretty much be sure that Washington State would be bringing the heat on Nate. And that is what we should be doing.
********************
All that being said, and all of the horrors of the last three games running through my mind, we are still a very good football team. I know I am a homer, but let's face the facts: we won when we won the turnover battle, and we lost when we lost the turnover battle. If not for INTs and Fumbles, we are the number 1 team in the land. And, barring a major catastrophe, we will win tomorrow.
I do not think anyone is looking ahead to USC at this point (by the way, is College GameDay coming?) Or the slim mathematical hope of a Rose Bowl berth. This game will be the focus tomorrow.
Last week, I actually thought we played well, but Nate crumbled and you just can not have that against a top 10 team. So we lost to a very good ASU team. This week, I think JT has a short hook, and we will dominate anyway. ASU has lost by an average of 32 points on the road. Here is hoping we can move that to 35 by the end of the day: Cal 52, WSU 7.
GO BEARS!!!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
