Michigan State Post Game Thoughts
This is second (hopefully) in a 13 part series, this is my not so quicky summary of a few keys to the game.
via imgs.sfgate.com
So my day started off great. Before the game even started, as I was walking up the metal stairs in the student section, my shoes (with no traction) slipped on the metal seats and my right shin smashed against the metal seat of the higher row as I slipped forward. Within minutes, the whole shin was a bloody mess from a puncture and three inch laceration but the game was about to start so I figured I'd wait until I got home 6 hours later to clean myself up. Like any good Cal fan, my health is secondary to being at Memorial and supporting the team.
Anyways, here are my thoughts from the game. But be sure to check out the wonderful thoughts of CBKWit and Danzig. (Note, these are my thoughts post-game without rewatching the game on my tivo).
(1) First play of the game. Remember the last time Tedford tried a play like the first play of the game? That last time was against Baylor in 2002 for Tedford's first play as a head coach. By calling a halfback pass today, I think Tedford wanted to start the 2008 season with a similar bang and let Cal fans know that this was a new team compared to last year's team. Unfortunately, the pass was wobbly and underthrown and led to an incompletion when it possibly could have been a touchdown or at least a big gain.
(2) Javon Ringer is dead Ringer. I think CBKWit said that he doubted Ringer broke 100 yards. Well, he didn't. Ringer ran for only 81 yards. Of course, the yards per attempt is a much better indicator of a runningback's performance than total yardage. So what was Ringer's average? 3.0 yards per carry which is pretty sad by college football standards. I mean, that's talking like triple bogey in golf terminology. It's pretty ugly for a player of his caliber let alone any player in college football.
(3) No sacks on Hoyer. Correct me if I'm wrong, but I think we didn't sack Hoyer once. I guess some credit is due to MSU's OL but it also makes me wonder if we're ever going to see some sacks from anyone on defense.
(4) Riley. Kid looked good out there. As Danzig said, he only made one "hero" throw and it was complete. He made a bunch of good throws, some great ones, and a few slightly off-target passes too. He did complete 17/24 of his passes, one of which was a purposeful throw-away so I suppose we can say he was 17/23 which is about a 74% completion percentage - that's VERY good. And as Danzig noted, if you adjust Riley's completion percentage for drops he would have been around the 85% completion rate. Overall, I'd say Riley did darn good. He wasn't perfect - a few passes were slightly off the mark (but still catchable). Nevertheless, I think this was pretty much an A- performance.
via imgs.sfgate.com
(5) Longshore. The first thing I noticed when Longshore took the field, was he seemed to have a sort of swagger. Like a "I'm a 5th year senior, I know what I'm doing, and I've got something to prove." Perhaps I'm making something out of nothing and perhaps I'm drawing upon my personal experiences watching Longshore for a year in in-season practices, but that's the way I felt he carried himself. I say he seemed like that because of the way he walked up under center and because he was very quick to get under center his entire first drive. Overall, I say again, it just seemed like he had something to prove. Indeed, I'm sure he thinks he does. And I think because of that, that's why he threw those two INTs. I haven't reviewed those plays on the tivo, but I just remember thinking, "wow, he really tried to thread the needle on those passes." And of course, if you have to thread the needle that much for a throw, you perhaps maybe shouldn't be quite throwing to that receiver - perhaps somebody else was open. I'm not going to second guess Longshore's decisions now because I haven't seen the replay yet, but upon first impression, I felt like Longshore was forcing things, and was playing like he had something to prove. In the end, I feel that Longshore definitely left a "reckless" impression both on Tedford and the fans.
(6) Booing. Okay, I know not everyone likes Longshore as a QB but I don't think we need to boo the guy. I'm not saying you have to applaud him or even cheer him, but at least not boo him.
via imgs.sfgate.com
(7) Cal's offensive playcalling. Perhaps it's just me, and perhaps I need to review the game film first, but it seemed like the playcalling with Riley was fairly conservative. Lots of easy swing passes, screens, and few straight dropbacks with downfield passing. In contrast, I felt like the playcalling changed with Longshore. I felt like the 6 plays when Longshore was in attacked deep. Was this only me? I'll need to see the tapes again but this is just my initial perception. Of course, the logic behind such playcalling is obvious; Longshore has more experience and Riley doesn't. Perhaps Cignetti was trying to ease Riley into the season with easier (but not necessarily easy themselves) playcalls.
(8) Best. Need I say much? He has good vision. He hits the hole fast. He's fast. He's shifty. We saw him more around the field and decoy a little bit. On kickoffs he was GREAT. I think I need not say much more.
(9) Boateng. First he doesn't make the starting lineup, then in his opening debut he drops two catchable passes. In his defense though, both of those passes could have been better. As the cliche goes though, if you get both your hands on the ball you have to catch it. In the end, the passes could have been better and the catch should have been a catch.
(10) Sean Young. It's hard not to like a guy who is a hard worker and is a 6th year senior seeing his first significant playing time EVER. All I have to say here, is that I'm rooting for Young. I remember working with him on scout team back in my heyday. He was always such a hard worker and gave 100% even though he was on scout. I was always very impressed with his effort. I'm sooo glad he's finally seeing all his hard work pay off into real playing time.
via imgs.sfgate.com
(11) New Cignetti offense. Frankly, I don't think I can say much until I see the game tape but I didn't see much of the "new" stuff that I saw in spring camp. We only saw some slightly new shotgun formations and a few plays of single-movement shifting. Perhaps Cignetti is keeping the fancy stuff for later in the season? I think so.
(12) Cal's 3-4 defense and defense in general. Well, aside from not sacking Hoyer, I'm pleased with how it performed against the run. As I already stated, Ringer was held to 3.0 yards per carry which is fairly poor by college standards. Hoyer only completed 41.6% of his passes which is craptacular. MSU did pick on Hagan instead of going towards Syd's side of the field, and that was to be expected. Nevertheless, Hagan did very well for his first career start.
(13) MSU offense. So MSU's offense was pretty different than from what I scouted in their game against Penn State last year. They didn't use the Maryland-I formation, they used different blocking schemes up front to counter our 3-4 defense. Nevertheless, I think we saw the fairly typical MSU style offense: run a lot then playaction.
(14) Hagan. I really thought Hagan was going to win the starting job over Conte last year. Of course, he didn't but now this year Hagan beat out Conte. Frankly, what I saw from Hagan today didn't surprise me. Even when Hagan was on scout team a few years ago, I was always impressed with his gaminess. Today, aside from giving up outside passes 3-4 times, which I must say is understandable considering our CBs were mostly playing inside leverage (they are playing inside of the WRs forcing the WRs to towards the sidelines), he played very well and better than Conte ever did last year (yes, I truly do think so). This isn't a knock against Conte and saying that Conte is bad, but what I saw from Hagan today was much better than anything I've seen from Conte last year. Hagan has two years under his belt and it showed today with his resilience despite giving up completions and being picked on, his tackling (again, superior than Conte) and having INTs overturned. I think by the end of the game, we were all rooting for Hagan to FINALLY nab that elusive INT. I mean, he had 2 taken away (more or less). He had like 4 deflected balls land within fingertip reach of him. He had an INT go right off his hands in the 4th quarter. It's amazing how many times he almost intercepted Hoyer's balls (Ed Note: HydroTech was totes obsessed with Hoyer's balls throughout the game).
via imgs.sfgate.com
(15) Syd. Well, isn't it ironic that the red-shirt freshman CB who got picked on by Tennessee in 2006 is now the feared CB on the Cal defense? MSU went towards Hagan all day long. I think they threw towards Syd only 4-5 times and perhaps only completed two pass on Syd. Syd also had a handful of GREAT pass breakups. If Hagan and Syd keep getting better, we could have a great pair of corners next year.
(16) Anger. Dude got some kicks. CBKWit has a huge man-crush on him... and I do too now. 48 yard per punt average!!!
(17) Morrah. Prior to this game, most of us here at the CGB were thinking he was going to have a huge year. After this game, I think all of us here at the CGB are still thinking he's going to have a huge year. Morrah had 5 catches for 93 yards and has proved to be a great option in the center of the field. I think things will only get better.
(18) Final thoughts. MSU fans should be concerned. Frankly, Cal kept MSU in the game. Cal had a bunch of crappy plays (roughing the punter, bobbled punt-snap) and turnovers (2 INTs) which kept MSU in the game. If Cal had not committed those errors, this game would have been over in the 3rd quarter with a score along the lines of 35ish to 7 or so. Cal was only a few mistakes, and a few bad calls (PI on Mohammed & perhaps a reverse of a Hagan INT) away from TOTAL domination of MSU.
Cal fans, I think we can be happy with today's game. Yes, it was a bit too close for comfort but we saw positive answers to our two biggest questions:
(a) How is our 3-4 defense going to fair? Answer: pretty good
(b) Is Riley going to continue to play like an all-star? Answer: yes.
0 recs |
82 comments
|
Comments
For the record, I added the HydroTech option to the poll.
"Save The Oaks: Overthrow Capitalism" said Dumpster Muffin sanguinely
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
by TwistNHook on Aug 31, 2008 8:19 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
That’s a HydroTech option? I thought voting for ‘me’ was a vote for myself. I think I contributed more than anyone else to the game.
I kissed Dumpster Muffin and I liked it. The taste of her hippie chapped lips.
by Maharg on Sep 1, 2008 10:04 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
MSU fans should not be concerned
They do not play in the Pac-10. They play in the land of Tresselball, where there is Ohio State and everyone else. Their next six opponents: Eastern Michigan, Florida Atlantic, Notre Dame, at Indiana, Iowa, at Northwestern. Seven of their next ten games are at home.
by BearsNecessity on Aug 31, 2008 8:55 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
If only Morrah could block
We can’t complain with the numbers Best and Vereen put up, nor with Morrah’s indispensable role as a receiver. But the Bears really miss Craig Stevens in the run game. That, and the failure of any wideout besides Sean Young to step up—at least not yet—are my two biggest concerns on offense.
Defense looked great, although its third-down efficiency could be better. Perhaps as Gregory develops more confidence in the corners, we’ll see more linebackers blitzing on third down passing situations.
Finally, the Bears are in great shape in the backfield. Tailback, check. Fullback, check. Quarterback, check. Indeed, despite yesterday’s debacle, I remain very confident with having Longshore as a backup. He looked confident and threw the ball with zip; I agree with Hydro that he was simply trying to force things too much. Should Riley get injured—and like the rest of you, I really, really hope that doesn’t happen—I still think Longshore could come in, do the job, and redeem himself.
Go Bears!
by California Pete on Aug 31, 2008 9:32 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Is Tad Smith considered more of a passing threat or a blocking TE? I heard a lot about his conversion but not much about his intended usage.
by dchu on Aug 31, 2008 11:39 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Why do you think we miss Craig Stevens so much? We absolutely dominated at the line. I will take Morrah please.
by Tedfordisgod on Sep 1, 2008 10:30 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Morrah is probably the worst blocker out of all of the TEs
but he’s fast and has great hands
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
by CBKWit on Sep 1, 2008 12:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Pass Rush
I thought our pass rush looked pretty good most of the game. No sacks, but a lot of that seemed like Hoyer did a good job of getting rid of the ball when he was pressured, hence the low completion percentage.
by Missing Barry on Aug 31, 2008 9:41 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Hoyer did have a lot of time on a lot of important conversions though. It seemed like they were concentrating on Rulon a bit, considering he had a quiet night. I think the closest thing we had to a sack was Follett getting in the backfield to tackle Ringer for a loss.
Also, I think Hydro means triple BOGEY.
by WilltheBear on Aug 31, 2008 10:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh yeah, you’re right about the triple BOGEY thing. Damn. I play golf and I don’t know I even wrote BIRDIE.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
by HydroTech on Aug 31, 2008 11:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You’re right, MissingBarry. I rewatched some of the game last night after I wrote this, and our DL had tons of great pressure even though they couldn’t nab a sack.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
by HydroTech on Aug 31, 2008 11:31 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Definitely agree here. Lack of sacks was a bummer, but misleading because: A.) we were so focused on the run and B.) lots of QB hurries and pressures. It did seem to wane in the 4th quarter, but on the whole I think we put together a much better pass rush than the stats indicate, especially since we were up against a big, experienced O-line.
What I was more concerned about was our own pass-protection seemed to break down a bit in the second half. There was a series in the 3rd quarter where Riley had white jerseys in his face for a few consecutive plays, and then the one in the 4th where Riley nearly got sacked but floated that beautiful pass to Morrah. I go as far as to say that they played poorly, but protection definitely seemed to drop off in the second half. Hopefully once Tepper’s back there’s a bit more consistency.
by dchu on Aug 31, 2008 12:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
And let's not forget, let's NOT forget
that the DL pressure on Hoyer (I believe it was true frosh Kendrick Payne) caused Syd’s pick at the end of the half.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
by CBKWit on Aug 31, 2008 2:35 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think it was Worrell on a delayed blitz getting to Hoyer… but I’m not that sure. Drunk-recall isn’t all that reliable.
by danzig on Aug 31, 2008 2:37 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Who gives a shit about the fucking marmot?
I kissed Dumpster Muffin and I liked it. The taste of her hippie chapped lips.
by Maharg on Sep 1, 2008 10:06 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
we are SYMpathizing with you DLine
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
by CBKWit on Sep 1, 2008 12:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
The Bryan Anger fan club starts here, starts now. Can someone rock the Fight Club quote?
And part two, of a thirteen part series? That’s positively Dostoevskyian; I’m expecting incorporation of morality plays and long Russian winters into analyses of why we didn’t get any sacks.
by sec119 on Aug 31, 2008 10:39 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Thirteen posts for one game? When I first saw that I thought it was for thirteen games and the “hopefully” meant that it would include a bowl game. I guess they really did mean thirteen for one game.
by Berkelium97 on Aug 31, 2008 11:17 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think Hydro was just making a joke about CBKWit’s comment.
"Save The Oaks: Overthrow Capitalism" said Dumpster Muffin sanguinely
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
by TwistNHook on Aug 31, 2008 11:21 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Exactly
I was just saying that I’ll be posting quick reactions immediately following every game, and I hope that I’ll be able to call all of them “reveling in victory.” That would mean that we won the game. Which is good. Because I like Cal and want them to win.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
by CBKWit on Aug 31, 2008 2:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
uh, the Bryan Anger fan club
started here
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
by CBKWit on Aug 31, 2008 2:39 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
We definitely could have blown MSU out. But they also made a lot of mistakes too. Lots of penalties, including at least one that erased a TD. I think if both teams play error-free ball you end up with a similar score.
by OskiMonsta on Aug 31, 2008 10:59 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I think I did see the Maryland I at least once in a goal line situation.
by OskiMonsta on Aug 31, 2008 11:00 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Yes, upon review of the game film, they did use the Maryland I once.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
by HydroTech on Aug 31, 2008 11:33 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Oh, and a couple of more thoughts:
Riley, at his best, reminds me of a Brett Favre-Steve Young Hydra with his decision-making and mobility. But I remember thinking in the stands: when he made that completion while getting dragged down, was that a good idea? Does the ends justify the means, or should the process trump outcome? I think this also distills the original arguments of the Riley-ites and Longshore-men.
Also, when Vereen broke his 80 yard run, he almost got caught at the end by someone from MSU. Whoever that guy is, he looked like he could really fly.
by sec119 on Aug 31, 2008 11:13 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I approve of Riley making those passes when he is being dragged down. I have not seen him have any of them intercepted yet and many of the ones I do remember created plays during crucial moments (especially the TD against OSU last year). I think he is surprisingly accurate and effective while under heavy pressure from the defense.
by Berkelium97 on Aug 31, 2008 11:20 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i approve of that particular throw because of the situation. if you’ll remember, it was 3rd and long, we were out of field goal range, and he made a long throw downfield. even if the worst happens (interception), it’s basically no worse than a punt. in a situation like that, there was basically nothing to lose.
So, basically, you gotta Go Bears!
by ragnarok on Aug 31, 2008 3:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I hope he thought about all that
but I think he’s just winging it. And he’s probably gotten an invincibility complex by now, given the 50,000 fans on their knees in front of him.
by ohmangoAs on Aug 31, 2008 8:03 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It’s PRileytariat vs the Longshoremen, btw.
Although I think the Longshoremen are not going to be saying much for a while.
by Spazzy Mcgee on Aug 31, 2008 7:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Outcome trumps process
It’s kind of like the announcers saying that NL shouldn’t have been picked off (1st one) because he was going through his progressions and didn’t lock on to his receiver. Well great, but it was still a Jahvid from being a 100-yard pick six.
That said, I’m sure at some point Riley will make a couple of stupid throws. But he also changes games with his ability to create.
And that dude barely touched Vereen’s shoelaces. Shane looked like the one who was flying to me!!
by OskiMonsta on Aug 31, 2008 11:21 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
In response to Hydro and Avi: Our secondary was awful... they weren't "just fine"
MSU passed for 321 yards last night, on the road. Now consider the following:
Worst game our secondary has had in over 21 games: In the 2007 season, nobody passed for over 321yards against us… this is the worst secondary performance in over 21 games back to 2006 when UCLA passed for 329 against us… Basically, this was the worst we played in almost two years. Plus in 2007, our secondary was basically the same….Syd/Conte/Hicks/Ezeff … what was the difference last night?… Hagan.
When opposing receivers achieve ‘career bests’ and get into the record books, we’re not playing well: We knew their best WR was Dell… we game-planned for him…but he still had a career day… 202 with 1 TD… Dell had 220yards ALL LAST SEASON (as a slot receiver). 202 yrds in a single game is the 5th highest total in MSU history!!. We made history last night. Playing against our secondary was the best thing that’s ever happened to Dell. Oh yeah, it was 2 yards shy of Hoyer’s ‘personal best’.
MSU passing is 68% better when playing Cal: Last year when they had Thomas and Love, their best WRs… they passed for 218yrds per game… against us they passed for 321 yards… a 68% increase… 321 vs an avg of 218???…As far as trends go, they were having a field day with us.
What about the assertion they were pass-happy just because they were behind the entire game?: In games that were tight or when they were losing in 2007, they did pass a much more than when winning, but still not as much as they did against us:
Wisconsin 2007 (L34-37) – 323 passing (Team record over past 3 years)
Northwestern 2007 (L41-48) – 194 passing
Ohio State 2007 (L17-24) – 126 passing
Iowa 2007 (L27-34) – 308 passing
Michigan 2007 (L24-28) – 161 passing
Boston College 2007 (L21-24) – 131 passing
The facts are clear, when MSU was ‘compelled’ to pass often because they were tight or behind, they averaged 194.5 yards… with our secondary however, MSU was 2 yards short of a TEAM RECORD over the past three years (prob more, but I don’t have data further than 3yrs)…..this means we were the second easiest secondary they’ve seen in three whole years!!… even when ‘compelled to throw it often.’
Hagan doesn’t get credit for just being near the ball and almost intercepting it: Hoyer was playing awful not because of our secondary… but because of the pass rush in his face. He was throwing ducks off of his back foot all night. That was a night our secondary should have come up with several picks. Our pass rush gift wrapped 4 picks for Hagan and he couldn’t close the deal on any of them. And, Hagan is not a rookie, he’s been in our system a while. I would’ve been thrilled with just one. Everyone seems to be against me on this one, but this is just the way I saw it.
What the hell am I talking about?
Dell had a career best day… Hoyer was 2 yards shy of his career record. We are the second easiest secondary MSU has seen in three full years (only by 2 yards)! How can anyone say that our secondary played fine when the opposing team, primary receiver and QB… ALL had career-type days? And I know Hoyer’s comp% was low, but that’s besides the point… we gave up 321 yards… and we should never be doing that.
Am I really being overly critical?… Since when do we feel fine or satisfied when we give up 321yards passing?…something we haven’t done in over 21 games. Is that the type of team we are? If so our standards are out of whack.
by danzig on Aug 31, 2008 1:22 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
Well, now we know who voted for “Disappointed.”
"Save The Oaks: Overthrow Capitalism" said Dumpster Muffin sanguinely
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
by TwistNHook on Aug 31, 2008 2:07 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You kidding? I was so happy last night that I went out and bought a puppy, a shwin bicycle and drunk dialed an ex-girlfriend.
I was just disappointed with the secondary and Hagan.
by danzig on Aug 31, 2008 2:34 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think CaliSeth covered you on the drunk dialing his ex.
Stanfurd Delendum Est.
by Olsonist on Aug 31, 2008 2:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Twist’s never received more phone calls in a single night.
I kissed Dumpster Muffin and I liked it. The taste of her hippie chapped lips.
by Maharg on Sep 1, 2008 10:08 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Did you ge ta pug?
"Save The Oaks: Overthrow Capitalism" said Dumpster Muffin sanguinely
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
by TwistNHook on Aug 31, 2008 3:18 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Should got a pug. Pug5alive!
"Save The Oaks: Overthrow Capitalism" said Dumpster Muffin sanguinely
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
by TwistNHook on Aug 31, 2008 7:41 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think you are being a little over critical. You need to factor in a couple of overruled INTs, etc. Cal’s mistakes and misfortunes kept MSU in the game. It never felt like they established anything. Couple of lucky passes and a couple of lucky calls.
Stanfurd Delendum Est.
by Olsonist on Aug 31, 2008 2:36 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I still stand by my statement. You can’t just look at overall yards given up through the air – namely the 321 yards? Why? Because 321 yards is misleading. Was it 321 yards on 10 attempts? Or 50 attempts? If it’s the former, it’s good. If it’s the latter, it’s bad. That’s why yards per attempt and yards per completion are much better measuring sticks of a team’s performance.
Hoyer had 320 yards or so on 48 attempts for about a 6 yard average which a good yards per completion but just okay yards per attempt. And considering that the Spartans were behind and took more shots downfield it isn’t that bad. Plus, Hoyer had a horrible completion percentage.
Who cares if Dell had as many receiving yards last night than he did last season? So if he had 50 yards receiving last year and got 50 last night we’d be complaining too? Comparing how much a player got in one game to how much he got all last year is a flawed comparison.
I do think you’re being overly critical. We shouldn’t be satisfied giving up 321 yards on 48 attempts, but it wasn’t THAT bad. And, our standards are not out of whack, especially on 48 pass attempts.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
by HydroTech on Aug 31, 2008 3:51 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Couldn't agree with ya' more!!!
HydroTech, I think you’re absolutely right about Syd and Hagan. They look really, really good, and should be a stellar tandem by midseason. Hagan looks so much better than Conte. (Is it me, or does it seem like Conte can’t tackle AT ALL!!!) I agree that Conte is probably okay, but Hagan has the potential to be All-Conference this year. I’m hoping he has officially pushed Conte to the bench (except for nickel situations) for the rest of the year.
What’s up with Danzig hatin’ on the secondary??? This was game 1 vs. a very solid senior quarterback who didn’t face any pressure the whole game. It was Hagan’s first start EVER. The secondary did about as well as could possibly be expected.
by RickySanchez on Aug 31, 2008 4:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Sorry if my comments seem inflammatory.
I love all our players and was overwhelmingly pleased with our win last night. However, while watching the game there were only two things that truly made me angry… I don’t usually talk to myself, but I was cussing out my TV during Nate’s INTs and Hagan’s missed INT opportunities.
Hydro – I’ll admit that my statistical arguments are reaching somewhat… it’s just how I think. I was just trying to point out that our secondary shouldn’t be proud of themselves. The comments on our boards were generally defensive of Hagan’s play and the play of our secondary so I felt I needed to provide counter-point. I’m not making any personal attacks on Hagan… I’m trying to show his flaws and make the case for Johnson or Catthouse and esp Anthony (I’m really high on him).
by danzig on Aug 31, 2008 5:43 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
So I only have one more question.
Do you only have issue with Hagan dropping INTs? Or the fact that Hagan’s coverage wasn’t good? While Hagan did have a few instances of not so great coverage he did have a few instances of some great coverage. And while we might cite Hoyer’s 300+ passing yards and the fact that the only change in the secondary this year is the addition of Hagan as reasons for why Hagan is to blame for the 300+ passing yards yesterday, if you watch the game, Hoyer makes plenty of completions against our zone defense (often not even in Hagan’s zone) which cannot be faulted to Hagan.
I haven’t seen Johnson or Cattouse or Anthony play so I can’t comment on their abilities. But I liked what I saw from Hagan even though he wasn’t great. He was solid for his first start as a red-shirt sophomore and definitely can correct the flaws.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
by HydroTech on Aug 31, 2008 10:11 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I just rewatch the game - I was wrong about Hagan missing 4 INTs
… after seeing the film, I counted 5 INTs, not 4. Two of them were hard to get, but he should have walked away with at least 3 INTs that night.
I’d be a fool to continue debating this with someone like you Hydro… so instead pls just review these plays and lets consider this matter closed and move on.
11.55 1st - Ezeff plays excessively deep in the zone, allows dell to cut to middle underneath.
11.17 1st - Hagan releases Cunningham to Ezeff on when MSU was showing an empty set.. Hagan realizes there’s no RB so he recovers back to Cunningham but is too late. Ezeff gets interfered so TD gets reversed.
08.53 2nd – Hagan burned by Dell on a post for the 1st down.
07.52 2nd – Hagan pegged with 15yrd facemask penalty in our own redzone when there were multiple tacklers already there.
07.30 2nd - Hicks gets jooked by Ringer for 1st and goal.
06.24 2nd - Hagan gets burned by Dell for 22yrd TD, tried to press him at LOS but got jooked (gets overturned in replay).
03.56 2nd - Conte holding penalty on a PR to pin us within our own 10yrd line.
05.03 3rd - Syd with a pass interference on a 3rd&3… first down.
00.12 3rd – Conte biting on the play action when we had them pinned in the endzone. Gives up the post.
12.07 4th - Missed INT Hagan. (missed INT #1)
11.12 4th - Conte burned playing man on post.
10:50 4th - Ezeff mis-reads Ringer and misses tackle for TD.
05.32 4th - Hagan tries to INT with his body so it was a tie… he should catch with hands, but he did a good job. (missed INT #2)
04.09 4th - Hagan missed INT. (missed INT #3)
04.04 4th – Hagan doesn’t break with Dell to the inside fast enough
03.16 4th - Hagan INT overturned, hit the ground – that was a tough catch tho. (missed INT #4)
03.16 4th - Hicks misses tackle on Dell (tries to bump him instead of using his arms) for easy score, Syd allows himself to get crossed up when Dell was his man.
00.34 4th – Hagan missed easy INT. (missed INT #5)
00.22 4th - Ezeff missed hard INT.
by danzig on Sep 1, 2008 9:12 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I always thought it was spelled “Juked.”
Yknow add a bit more analysis to your post right there and that could definitely be a great FanPost. As long as you are not being rude or unreasonable to Hagan, of course.
Also, check your live email.
"Save The Oaks: Overthrow Capitalism" said Dumpster Muffin sanguinely
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
by TwistNHook on Sep 1, 2008 9:13 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Juked.... hm
I like that better… i always speed it jooked, but now that I look at it, it looks wrong.
by danzig on Sep 1, 2008 9:38 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It feels vaguely racist, although I can’t figure out why.
"Save The Oaks: Overthrow Capitalism" said Dumpster Muffin sanguinely
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
by TwistNHook on Sep 1, 2008 9:42 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Huh? because it’s a cross between jew and gook? That’s some kind of scrambled logic.
by danzig on Sep 1, 2008 10:03 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I don’t knw. I said I cant figur eout why!
"Save The Oaks: Overthrow Capitalism" said Dumpster Muffin sanguinely
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
by TwistNHook on Sep 1, 2008 10:40 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I think Hagan only missed 3 INTs. One clearly was off his hands, and he had the two INTs that were close calls. But the 2 other tipped passes that landed near him… I don’t expect him to intercept those because it required him to change directions instantly and dive for the ball which was just outside of his reach. Anyways, I think we should trust the coaches on Hagan’s capabilities. He’s starting over everyone else so he must be the better option.
I disagree that Hagan got burned on the overturned TD fade pass. It was “alright” coverage. It wasn’t “burned” nor “great” but alright coverage.
Had Hagan caught even one INT, would your opinion change of him?
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
by HydroTech on Sep 1, 2008 12:28 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
What I love about Syd (Part 4,000) is his open field tackling. I have a photo which I’ll post in a future photo essay, but in 1 play he took down this FB with like 20-40 pounds on him. Syd is not a huge guy, but he can make open field tackles with the best of them. When you put a guy on an island like that, open field tackling is key. You guys can have your man crushes on Anger, but I’m sticking with Syd!
"Save The Oaks: Overthrow Capitalism" said Dumpster Muffin sanguinely
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
by TwistNHook on Aug 31, 2008 5:59 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I remember him taking down someone big…I thought it was a TE, though.
by Spazzy Mcgee on Aug 31, 2008 7:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I thought Hagan didn't do a very good job on the long TD pass
he never looked back once at the QB, and so, despite decent positioning, got beat.
by ohmangoAs on Aug 31, 2008 8:48 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Looking back for the ball isn’t always required….
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
by HydroTech on Aug 31, 2008 9:54 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
New (highly regarded) DB coach Simmons
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
by CBKWit on Aug 31, 2008 11:13 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Without ball awareness, can't break up the pass
it was a great throw, but if Hagan had known it was coming, he’d have had it.
by ohmangoAs on Sep 1, 2008 1:29 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Having read the new link,
I see the point. Still think it’s an issue of balance. A minimum amount of awareness would help. I don’t have tape of the play, so I won’t harp on it.
by ohmangoAs on Sep 1, 2008 1:32 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You can have ball awareness without looking at the ball. You look at the WR’s eyes. When he looks up for the ball and his eyes get big, if you’re not going to look back for the ball, you face guard (without making contact because then it’s pass interference) or you time a swat at his hands right as the ball arrives.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
by HydroTech on Sep 1, 2008 12:29 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
After watching the recording of the game, I wanted to pay attention to the secondary because I noticed last night at the game that they were giving up a lot of yardage. I do agree that Hagan was not that good. I can forgive that he couldn’t deliver on one interception that was in his hands, but he had three that were in his hands and he couldn’t bring the ball in. One was ruled simultaneous catch, but I think he should have caught at least one of the others. Unlike Syd, though, I didn’t see him breaking up many passes. Syd was able to break up a few of what would have been huge passes. Hagan seemed hesitant to look back and see where the ball was and that really hindered his ability to break up some passes.
I don’t necessarily think 321 passing yards is terrible for our defense. You said that we last did that against UCLA in 2006, but we won that 38-24. The numbers looked bad, but the results clearly override that. You also mentioned that although MSU was losing and “compelled” to pass, their passing game produced more yards against us than it did compared to any similar losing situation last year. But their rushing numbers help explain why they were so reliant on passing yards. Except for the OSU game, in each of those close losses they had at least twice as many rushing yards as they did against us (up to 350% more). In yesterday’s game they had the fewest rushing yards (by far) since 2006 and since their new coach came in last season. All of this makes the 321 passing yards not seem as abysmal.
I do agree that our secondary gave up too many yards, but given MSU’s failures in the rushing game, I think they had no choice but to rely on passing yards if they wanted to stay in the game.
by Berkelium97 on Aug 31, 2008 5:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
what was the difference last night?… Hagan.
Also a new DB coach. Is he to blame?
Unlike Syd, though, I didn’t see him breaking up many passes.
Hagan was credited with 6 tackles and 3 breakups (presumably those are the coulda’, shoulda’ been INTs). Still that’s a decent line for your first start.
I agree we can’t be satisfied with giving up all those yards. I also agree that Hagan had some bad moments, but I thought he looked fast and athletic and very capable with some more experience. What I found worse than any of Hagan’s gaffes was Hicks making a lame no-wrap tackle that led to the last TD and made things far more interesting than I wanted. You can’t have that in the 4Q from a senior returning starter. You could also reasonably fault SydGod on the same play who went for ball and came up empty.
by OskiMonsta on Sep 1, 2008 5:40 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Hagan basically blew two coverages that resulted in TDs… one was when he released Cunningham to run-support but he didn’t realize it was an empty set (no RB), he had good recovery speed to get back to Cunningham but was too late. The only thing that saved it was that Ezeff was there and he was pushed so the TD was overturned.
The second TD he just got juked at the LOS and Dell had a TD, but didn’t secure the ball. Hagan got lucky there, but in the coach’s book, that’s still scored a TD on Hagan.
Plus he dropped 5 INTs… 3 of which were catch-able. I’m not picking on him, but based on my analysis, he made enough mistakes to change the complexion of the game… and the opportunity cost on his missed INTs was huge.
Plus he played during ColSt07 and was burned for a late TD… He’s not a green rookie… now he plays poorly again and makes even more mistakes… I’m not thrilled with Conte or Hicks either, but I’d have to say that some other players behind Hagan and Conte should get a shot.
by danzig on Sep 1, 2008 9:54 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
What part of "Pass Yardage Does Not Correlate To Victory"
Do you not understand?! Yards are just that…yards. Not points.
by Spazzy Mcgee on Aug 31, 2008 7:19 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
It’s never a good game for the secondary when giving up over 320 yards passing regardless of how many times Hoyer was throwing the ball. It’s especially bad if the secondary hadn’t given up that much yardage in almost two years… it was just a bad game for them all around.
Btw, this is besides the point, but for Pac10 teams, pass yardage has a .667 correlation coefficient with win percentage, going back five years. But I get what you meant though… you can give up yardage and still win. I agree.
by danzig on Sep 1, 2008 9:46 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I wish I had been prepared for the hail of cardboard at the end of the card stunts at halftime. Paper cuts! Oh my!
by Itchy25 on Aug 31, 2008 2:23 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
HAHAHHA, did nobody tell you? That shit is VICIOUS. And they are always like “Please calmly pass the cards to the ends of the aisles” as NOBODY does it.
"Save The Oaks: Overthrow Capitalism" said Dumpster Muffin sanguinely
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
by TwistNHook on Aug 31, 2008 6:01 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I gather them up and create a mini-fort to protect myself from those hard edges. At yesterday’s game four of my friends and I held together a solid, multilayered mass of cards to block the assault from above.
by Berkelium97 on Aug 31, 2008 6:08 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I love how Rally Comm
always comes to each row and is like “Stop throwing them you guys!!! You guyyyys!!! STOPP!!!!” EVERY single game. And every time people just ignore them…
by Spazzy Mcgee on Aug 31, 2008 7:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Well, to be fair, they are RallyComm.
"Save The Oaks: Overthrow Capitalism" said Dumpster Muffin sanguinely
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
by TwistNHook on Aug 31, 2008 7:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
You really think you can give 5000 college students a bunch of potential projectiles and not end up with the things flying through the air? Always a little bit of fun, then ducking for cover.
http://mymindgrapes.wordpress.com
by 408 on Aug 31, 2008 7:17 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I love the frat jock student who gets pegged in the head with a card and then turns around and is like “ALRIGHT WHO THREW THAT MOTHERFUCKERS…I’M GONNA KICK YOUR MOTHERFUCKING AAAAARRRUGHH” because 50 more come flying at him from all directions.
by Spazzy Mcgee on Aug 31, 2008 7:27 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m definitely the type of person who chucks more cards at anyone who seems to get indignant at the crowd.
http://mymindgrapes.wordpress.com
by 408 on Aug 31, 2008 9:22 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I’m a fan of the cone you can make with the cards, thereby inviting people to try to throw inside the cone.
by sec119 on Sep 1, 2008 8:48 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
i enjoyed how somebody made a paper airplane at halftime, threw it, and had a good part of the student section cheering it on as it almost made it to the field. hilarious.
by giantfan5 on Sep 1, 2008 10:44 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
MSU Game torrent
Thanks elbarto for finding this
http://thepiratebay.org/torrent/4372018
by danzig on Aug 31, 2008 2:32 PM PDT reply actions 0 recs
I’ve been downloading this file for close to 15 hours now. 88% complete! Wooo!
by CaliforniaBone on Sep 1, 2008 12:20 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
Couple of general impressions on offense and Longshore
I actually liked the offense because it was purposeful…none of Tedford’s lining up Jahvid, faking a pitch, and running the ball up the middle bullcrap. In fact, he didn’t even use Best and Vereen at the same time, which certainly is conservative, but not a bad choice early in the year.
The underneath pass to Sean Young for the first down was a very nice design. But I really don’t think the point of Cignetti is that he is different than Tedford, in fact, the point is that he will call the type of game Tedford would call if he didn’t have his head coaching duties.
On Longshore…
And I think because of that, that’s why he threw those two INTs.
Well, like I (and many others) have said all off-season, he throws the INTs because he throws the ball without regard to how the play is developing on the field. No QB that properly read the defense would have thrown either of those passes. It isn’t neccessary to break down his mental state … the problem is that he just isn’t a good QB. He was OK in the past, but he isn’t anymore, and he isn’t going to regain his 2006 form.
In a sense, this was the best case scenario. Riley is the No. 1, Longshore is a far back No. 2. The question I have is whether there is now a neccessary competition between Longshore and Mansion in case of injury to Riley. The Longshore that played Saturday cannot be considered a reliable back-up.
by Tedfordisgod on Sep 1, 2008 10:42 AM PDT reply actions 0 recs
If anything, Longshore should be tried for treason and have a bullet put in his scholarship.
by bears'R'us on Sep 1, 2008 1:30 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
That’s a little extreme. I’ve long since gotten off the Longshore apologist bandwagon, but let’s not forget that he saved us from the Ayoob debacle. All considered, I’d take the unclutch veteran with a 3000+ yard passing year on his resume over the unclutch dyslexic juco transfer.
by dchu on Sep 1, 2008 2:02 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
They should charge the Longshore family for that bullet, too.
"Save The Oaks: Overthrow Capitalism" said Dumpster Muffin sanguinely
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
by TwistNHook on Sep 1, 2008 4:42 PM PDT up reply actions 0 recs
I did see Best and Vereen out on the field at the same time for some plays. Right now, that usually screams screen pass to one of them, but who knows where they’ll go with it in the future.
by turkey on Sep 3, 2008 9:05 AM PDT up reply actions 0 recs

by 





























