Spring Ball depth Chart
We had a question lately about our receivers, since we return all of 10 catches for 153 yards (thanks to LayReylle Cunningham, who provides all of those numbers. Yes, he is the only wide receiver on the roster with a catch in a game.). We figured that other people might be curious about our actual players in the midst of a month's coverage on DumpyMuffs and Long Bos, so I've attached the depth chart I wrote up on our old site following spring ball. Please don't take this as anything more than a snapshot in time and moderately accurate predictor of things to come: a lot will change in fall camp, and I promise that the two deep will be different when MSU rolls in on August 31st.
As for the receivers, the clear top three are (in no particular order) Michael Calvin, Nyan Boateng, and Jeremy Ross. And at wr more than at any position on the team, new recruits will be given ample opportunities to crack the two deep and contribute during games.

Here's a look at the depth chart at the end of spring ball. This needs to be taken with a large grain of salt because of the number of notable players (Best and Nasty Nate, for starters) out with injuries. There is also room for some fall arrivals to make the two deep, particularly at wideout. That said, here's where things stand now:
Defensive Backs
| CB | Free Safety | Rover | CB |
| (5) Syd'Quan Thompson | (2) Bernard Hicks | (20) Jesse Brooks* | (17) Chris Conte |
| (26) Darian Hagan | (25) Brett Johnson | (29) Marcus Ezeff | (27) Charles Amadi |
*Jesse Brooks rotated with Brett Johnson for first team reps. In general, these four safeties split first and second team reps fairly evenly, so it's tough to call one group the first team and another the second. My guess is that all 4 four will get playing time this fall. Jesse Brooks has looked very strong.
Linebackers
| Strong OLB | Strong ILB | Weak ILB | Weak OLB |
| (9) Eddie Young | (1) Worrell Williams | (7) Anthony Felder | (56) Zack Follett |
| (10) Devin Bishop | (18) Mike Mohamed | (3) D.J. Holt | (43) Charles Johnson |
Look for a lot of these guys to play. Worrell, Felder, and Follett have their starting positions nailed down, but their backups will get on the field. Mike Mohamed was hurt for much of spring ball, and he could challenge for a starting spot in the fall. #42 Shea McIntyre performed well during his reps.
Defensive Line
| Strong DE | Nose Tackle | Weak DE |
| (44) Tyson Alualu | (98) Mika Kane | (95) Rulon Davis |
| (95) Ernest Owusu | (76) Derrick Hill | (97) Cameron Jordan |
Owusu and Jordan were two of the most impressive guys on the entire team this spring. They will definitely play notable minutes.
Offensive Line
| Tight End | Left Tackle | Left Guard | Center | Right Guard | Right Tackle |
| (5) Cameron Morrah* | (79) Mike Tepper | (70) Mark Boskovich* | (51) Alex Mack | (55) Noris Malele | (58) Chet Teofilo |
| (83) Skylar Curran* | (71) Sam DeMartinis | (75) Matt Summers-Gavin | (57) Todd Huber | (74) T.J. Emery | (78) Justin Prueitt |
The offensive line, particularly the second string, is pretty muddled right now. I couldn't find #54 Chris Guarnero, but it's safe to assume he'll be somewhere in the two deep. Tedford and Offensive Line Coach Michalczik have always emphasized that they're looking for the top 8 guys, so looking at the second string as a whole is almost irrelevant. We'll have to wait until fall to see who becomes the 7th and 8th guys.
*Cameron Morrah was sick for the last week for practice so Skylar Curran and Tad Smith shared first team reps in his place.
*Mark Boskovich and #73 Richard Fisher Split first team reps at Left Guard, so it's unfair to call either of them second string. Matt Summers-Gavin ran with the second team at this position.
Skill Positions
| Wide Receiver | Fullback | Quarterback | Tailback | Wide Receiver | Wide Receiver |
| (8) Nyan Boateng | (23) Will Ta'ufo'ou | (13) Kevin Riley* | (22) Tracy Slocum* | (3) Jeremy Ross | (84) Mike Calvin |
| (85) LaReylle Cunningham | (31) John Tyndall* | (10) Brock Mansion | (28) Covaughn DeBoskie | (88) Drew Glover | (40) Ian Albrecht |
*First, the elephant in the room: the starting quarterback has not been determined. Nate missed most of spring practice with an injury, but he was taking first team reps before he went down. This battle will (hopefully) be decided in the fall, and Mansion will be third string.
*Likewise, the starting (and backup) tailbacks have not been determined due to injury. Best participated in practice wearing the red (no contact jersey) and # 34 Shane Vereen missed a lot of time with a hamstring injury. Slocum had a strong spring, but with Best and Vereen healthy in the fall, it will be a tough competition. I would expect all three of them to get carries, and DeBoskie might see the field as well.
*The second string fullback appears to be up for grabs as well. Your guess is as good as mine.
Calvin, Boateng, and Ross are clearly the top 3 receivers, but it is wide open after them and I would expect some of the new recruits to make the two deep this fall. Drew Glover stepped in as the third receiver for Ross after Ross went down with an injury late in the spring.
Go Bears!
The opinions expressed in a FanPost are not necessarily those of the California Golden Blogs or any of its authors. However, they are just as important as the opinions of any of the authors. And doubly so as compared to TwistNHook!
1 recs |
38
comments
| Add your comment
Read Related
Comments
Can you add the experience level for each player? Follet, 3V. It would show where we’ve got more and less experience.
Also, the punter Bryan Anger, is really good. Worth crowing about.
Brock Mansion looks really shaky for now, or so it looked at the Spring Game. Things would have to be really bad if he plays. Is Cory Smits in the backup picture at all? He’s been almost permanently injured. Allan Bridgford, will he redshirt? It would make sense.
It will be interesting to see how fast the new receiver corps comes up to speed. I’m looking forward to the bigger receivers.
Stanfurd Delendum Est.
by Olsonist on
Jul 5, 2008 10:37 PM PDT
reply
0 recs
Agree about Anger
http://goldenblogs.blogsome.com/2008/04/14/757/
I tried not to write about him after every practice, but it was hard. He’s inconsistent (he shanks about every 5th ball), but when he gets a hold of one…it is impressive. The hang time and height on his biggest punts are remarkable.
Mansion was consistently getting reps ahead of Smits. He was shaky at the spring game, but he looked better at other practices. To me, he looked like a redshirt freshman digesting the entire playbook for the first time after leading the scout team in the fall…which is exactly what he is. When he doesn’t think too much and just throws the ball, his natural ability is clear.
Bridgford is a recruit in the class of 2009. He’ll be here next fall. The 2008 qb (the one arriving this fall) is Beau Sweeney, and if Tedford history is any guide, he’ll redshirt.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
by CBKWit on
Jul 6, 2008 12:53 AM PDT
up
reply
0 recs
Hmm...
Surprisingly, I am a little concerned about the tailback position. Why in the world did Montgomery have to transfer? What in the world was so bad that he decided to transfer? As far as WR goes, I have supreme confidence in Boateng. This guy was such a stud that Florida gave him a scholarship. Who cares if he kicked in his ex girlfriends door. Who hasn’t wanted to do that? I know I have. Kudos to him for having the balls to do it. (-: Of course, the biggest concern is at QB. I look forward to many heated arguments with Hydro on this one… See you soon Hydro…..............................................
by CaliSeth on
Jul 5, 2008 10:53 PM PDT
reply
0 recs
The facts on Monty told to me by a lil bird
Monty wanted guarantees, and Tedford wisely didn’t give them. So, Monty took his show to BFE (Wassu). Serves him right.
I don’t have confidance in Boateng until he makes that first TD by catch or return or reverse run. That goes for everyone of them, since afterall, we are fans of the Cal Bears…
by Jan K Oski on
Jul 5, 2008 11:18 PM PDT
up
reply
0 recs
I think Montgomery said Berkeley just wasn’t the best fit for him along with something like he felt like nobody was pushing him to get better. There were conflicting reports as to what he really said and what was taken out of context or something by some Washington media person or something. I say “or something” a lot, or something.
It’s not that I don’t like you, Seth, but I’m really not looking forward to heated arguments with anyone over Longshore vs. Riley… and for the record, I’m not endorsing anyone. I want Tedford to play whomever he thinks is best. I merely want people to look past Longshore’s failures, try and understand that there are other factors for Longshore’s failures, and that he’s really not that bad of a QB.
I <3 Longshore
by HydroTech on
Jul 6, 2008 1:02 AM PDT
up
reply
0 recs
This is my final thoughts on Monty.
Honestly, I don’t think we will ever know what happened to Monty, but there is one fact that no one can deny. He and his mother met with Tedford. Who here (over 18 years of age) ever meets their boss or met a professor with their mother? That’s just plan weird in my opinion. It reads like a sympathy plea or using all of your cards, when you’ve got nothing. If anyone brought their mother to their interview to get a job in my lab, my first question would be, “why is your mom here?” Based upon this, I’m not sure if anyone who received a degree from Cal should waste time on a drop-out. Might be harsh, but Monty will be competing against our Bears. I’m only loyal to Bears who only leave via the NFL or graduation. It ain’t personal, but I chose not to have any man love for Monty.
However, I do have some man love for even Nate. I might not think he is the best QB on the roster, but I’m positive that he has given 100% for the program. That’s all we can expect from him.
Go Bears!
by Jan K Oski on
Jul 6, 2008 4:22 PM PDT
up
reply
0 recs
Whoa...
I gotta put Ezeff ahead of this Brooks guy. Before his injury he was kicking ass and taking names. Remember the Oregon game? No way Brooks starts over him, and if he does something isn’t right…
by CaliSeth on
Jul 5, 2008 10:58 PM PDT
reply
0 recs
The story on Ezeff
Supposedly, Ezeff misreads assignments, so I’ve read elsewhere and he acknowledged after the Oregon game. According to him, his heroic tackle against Oregon would have not be needed, if he didn’t blow the coverage. It’s actually right that he has to show development in order to earn the 1st team honor.
by Jan K Oski on
Jul 5, 2008 11:23 PM PDT
up
reply
0 recs
Notes on the above
First of all, I am not editorializing in any way with the depth chart. The listing are based on what I witnessed in practice (which players ran with which team) and not at all on my opinions of the players’ abilities. I attempt to shed some light on why certain players are playing ahead of others with the comments, but I’m not trying to promote anyone or play armchair coach. I’m just reporting on who was practicing ahead of whom at the end of spring ball.
I really liked Ezeff before he was injured, even aside from the oregon hit (by the way, I believe the outside receiver ran a pick on him, which is why he was out of position before the hit), but Brooks looked better during the spring and was getting more first team reps. This does not mean that Brooks will start or that Ezeff won’t, but at the end of spring ball, Brooks was getting more reps.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
by CBKWit on
Jul 6, 2008 12:26 AM PDT
up
reply
0 recs
Re: Ezeff's heroic tackle against Oregon
Well, I’m not sure what Ezeff’s assignment was. I can only assume it was man coverage based on what we saw from the telecast. But if you watch that play closely, Ezeff was sort of picked on that play. So, I’m not sure if it’s quite 100% accurate to say he blew his coverage. It’s very possible Ezeff was in correct coverage but appeared out of position due to the pick.
I <3 Longshore
by HydroTech on
Jul 6, 2008 1:05 AM PDT
up
reply
0 recs
One more thing...
What’s the deal with Hagan? I remember coming out of HS he was supposedly the shit, yet we saw him get supplanted by a freshmen (Conte) last year? I guess he hasn’t adapted well to college ball. I sure hope he steps it up this year…
by CaliSeth on
Jul 5, 2008 11:01 PM PDT
reply
0 recs
The Hagan mystery
Do you recall how he was burned in the CSU game last year? Painful! The man has been a huge disappointment, and the competition is going to heat-up in fall with the 2 JUCO transfers. A late ‘08 commit Bryant Nnabuife (Blinn College transfer, 6’2”, 192, 4.4) and Kameron Yancy, the Man with Real Class, will be pressing the other CB this fall, and one might even supplant Conte. Afterall, every position is open, and Coach Simmons has to be an upgrade. Back to Hagan, he should be thrilled to play on special teams. It certainly needs a gunner like Best, but does Hagan even have that elusive 4.4 speed?
by Jan K Oski on
Jul 5, 2008 11:44 PM PDT
up
reply
0 recs
Let's wait a bit before we declare Hagan a bust
He was only a redshirt frosh last year, and cornerback is a position that can make even great players look really bad. It’s true that Conte played (pretty well, I might add) as a true frosh, but I think everyone was surprised at how mature he was. Syd was a redshirt frosh when he was burned at Tennessee, and he’s turned out alright (not to mention Daymeion Hughes and virtually every young corner). Hagan was running with the second team this spring, which is a step up from where he was last fall. Let’s see where he goes from there.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
by CBKWit on
Jul 6, 2008 12:38 AM PDT
up
reply
0 recs
on another subject
Have you seen the crap that Rivals is flinging on its “Preseason countdown”. Cincy and now Pitt are better teams than Cal? Don’t both of those teams play in the Big Easy? Cincy has a big question at QB? Oh, that’s a minor role! What are they smoking over at Rivals? Crapola? Yeah, I know about the east coast bias, but we need a wise gnostic like you, CBK, to deliver a west coast biased top-25. Please?
Go Bears!
by Jan K Oski on
Jul 7, 2008 9:45 AM PDT
up
reply
0 recs
Oh yeah, Free Premium content is everyone's at Scout.com this weekend!
Happy Fourth!
by Jan K Oski on
Jul 5, 2008 11:56 PM PDT
reply
0 recs
Interesting...
Well, I take it you guys know better than me, so thanks for setting me straight. Hey Jan, I haven’t seen you vote here yet so I hope you do soon. We need this impartial guy to tell us what’s up…
by CaliSeth on
Jul 6, 2008 12:39 AM PDT
reply
0 recs
but did you notice presidential hopeful Barack Obama is supporting a SMQ Cal preview? :)
by Itchy25 on
Jul 6, 2008 12:57 PM PDT
up
reply
0 recs
Good Lord. Did all of you get an edict to show up there?
by BearsNecessity on
Jul 6, 2008 2:09 PM PDT
up
reply
0 recs
Whatever Hydro tells us, we do. Period!
"Save The Oaks: Overthrow Capitalism" said Dumpster Muffin sanguinely
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
by TwistNHook on
Jul 6, 2008 5:12 PM PDT
up
reply
0 recs
Dear Friends,
As a candidate for President of the United States of America, I would like you all to know that I have followed the California Golden Bears for some time now. What I see in them inspires and encourages me that the future of college football in America is sound. Nowhere else do I see such passion in a fan base, dedication from players and coaches, and unending support from the alumni. All this despite the irrational meddling of the troubled young people in the trees, people who have lost sight of where America, and indeed Cal, needs to go. Their motives are confused, selfish, and indeed illogical. Their partisan ideology has no place in an America that desperately needs to come together.
As your President I will work tirelessly to resolve the Oak Grove dispute in a fashion that is favorable to Cal, and indeed all of America. All I ask for is your support. Change is not always easy, but it is necessary. Much like our country, the Cal Bears have veered off course. Plagued by Quarterback controversies and a host of other personal and coaching issues, the Bears faltered last year. Yet this does not mean that the Bears cannot be great again. This does not mean that they are not great now! There is a solution. I believe it is time for change in Strawberry Canyon, and that change begins with Kevin Riley. No Strawberry Canyon insider can fix the mess we now find ourselves in, that is why I support Kevin Riley for QB 08!
YES WE CAN, AMERICA, AND CAL!
by BarackObama on
Jul 6, 2008 4:46 PM PDT
reply
0 recs
Okay, you guys suck if this blog becomes political!
jee whiz!
by Jan K Oski on
Jul 6, 2008 11:20 PM PDT
up
reply
0 recs
Yeah, agreed. And I was guilty below.
Stanfurd Delendum Est.
by Olsonist on
Jul 7, 2008 6:50 AM PDT
up
reply
0 recs
agreed
i think BarackObama’s comment was not political per se, but rather using politics as a backdrop to make a point about the quarterback debate. still, i would agree that politics have no place on this site, and the moderators here will do our best to make sure that remains the case.
however, long-dead political figures that are no longer controversial, like Eugene V. Debs or William Jennings Bryan, are totally fair game. everyone enjoys a good Silverite joke nowadays!
So, basically, you gotta Go Bears!
by ragnarok on
Jul 7, 2008 9:47 AM PDT
up
reply
0 recs
William Jennings Bryan, no longer controversial?
Silverites are coming back, in a big way. And unless I’m mistaken the Scopes Monkey Trial is still in play as precedent for some states. Bring the Butler Act back! Keep the faith!
I kissed Dumpster Muffin and I liked it. The taste of her hippie chapped lips.
by Maharg on
Jul 7, 2008 9:56 AM PDT
up
reply
0 recs
If we get somebody posting here as John Jay, it might just be the greatest thing ever.
"Save The Oaks: Overthrow Capitalism" said Dumpster Muffin sanguinely
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
by TwistNHook on
Jul 7, 2008 9:58 AM PDT
up
reply
0 recs
thanks ragnarok!
I did get that, but who signed up as Leon Powe and Barack to increase the number of votes for Cal on the Sunday QB competition? Talk about voter fraud! That could disenfranchise our votes! That’s just not cool. I’ve got a paddle for the violator.
by Jan K Oski on
Jul 7, 2008 12:55 PM PDT
up
reply
0 recs
If a paddle is involved, we know it was Twist.
I kissed Dumpster Muffin and I liked it. The taste of her hippie chapped lips.
by Maharg on
Jul 7, 2008 1:01 PM PDT
up
reply
0 recs
Longshore
Barry
have you noticed that Longshore’s poll numbers are about the same as W’s? Their terms will end at about the same time. I know that correlation is not causation but the guy comes from heavily conservative San Diego. Not saying, just wondering, is Longshore a Republican?
Stanfurd Delendum Est.
by Olsonist on
Jul 6, 2008 5:35 PM PDT
reply
0 recs
Pass Rush
Am I wrong in continuing to fear that the pass rush will be frighteningly weak again this year? Haven’t gotten to see anything yet this year.
by 408 on
Jul 9, 2008 11:27 AM PDT
reply
0 recs
Re: Pass Rush
Surprisingly, the pass rush was a strength of the team in spring ball. Often a linebacker or two would blitz along with the three down linemen, but even when only rushing three, the defense was generally able to pressure the qb. This was consistent throughout spring ball, so it wasn’t just a few guys having the occasional spectacular practice; it appears that we (finally!) have the talent to mount a consistent pass rush. Watch out for Ernest Owusu (RS frosh) and Cameron Jordan (true soph) – I thought they had stronger springs than starters Rulon Davis and Mika Kane. Jordan in particular looks like he’s learned a lot from playing as a true frosh while retaining his incredible speed and athleticism.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
by CBKWit on
Jul 11, 2008 8:49 AM PDT
up
reply
0 recs
Is this because the pass rush is actually good or is it because our QBs are not avoiding the pressure?
In other words, Go Bears!
by royrules22 on
Jul 11, 2008 9:49 AM PDT
up
reply
0 recs
Because the pass rush is good
Remember, Nasty Nate missed almost all of spring ball with a torn pectoral, so Riley (not slow) and Mansion (legitimately fast) were the guys taking snaps. This was all about the defense beating the pass protection and actually impacting the play. I may not be HydroTech, but I know the difference between an immobile QB holding the ball too long and an active pass rush.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
by CBKWit on
Jul 11, 2008 10:22 AM PDT
up
reply
0 recs
“I may not be HydroTech”
Great, well, now that secret is out of the bag!
"Save The Oaks: Overthrow Capitalism" said Dumpster Muffin sanguinely
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
by TwistNHook on
Jul 11, 2008 10:32 AM PDT
up
reply
0 recs
Definitely good to hear. Hopefully they can compete with the big nasties of USC and the like. Haven’t been out to spring ball, and won’t be back in Berkeley till a couple of days before classes so this site’s been my primary source. Thanks, guys!
by 408 on
Jul 11, 2008 11:53 AM PDT
up
reply
0 recs
QB's not good at avoiding pressure?
Our line has given up a combined 24 sacks over the past two seasons, mostly with the immobile Longshore at QB1. Seems to me that either he gets rid of the ball with ease and/or the line rarely lets the opposing defense get to the quarterback. probably a bit of both. And, the fact that our defense could pressure our very talented offensive line is in my mind a very good sign.
http://sportingcontrarian.wordpress.com/
by BeastMode on
Jul 11, 2008 1:05 PM PDT
up
reply
0 recs
I completely agree
One of Longshore’s greatest strengths is avoiding sacks. I was not at all trying to insinuate that he struggles in this area. Rather, I wanted to clarify that the increased pass rush was due to the defense and not a QB deficiency. It’s impossible to look at the low sack total and claim that Nasty Nate holds the ball too long, but many people have a pretty negative view of his mobility right now (not without merit, of course) and might assume the qb pressure this spring is his fault. I wanted to point out that it was the strong play of the defense, and remind readers that he wasn’t even playing.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
by CBKWit on
Jul 11, 2008 3:55 PM PDT
up
reply
0 recs















