California Golden Blogs: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
New Blog: The Nova Blog for Villanova Fans!

Cal @ UCLA Post-Game Thoughts

(1) Riley played well.  I can't really remember any bad passes off the top of my head.  He looked pretty sharp today.  His passes to Marvin Jones were right on the money.  His pass to Best was perfect.  There was even a quasi throw-away pass that Riley threw on the run which was perfectly placed where only the wide receiver could catch it (although the pass ended up being incomplete).  I was really impressed with Riley's ball placement today.  He wasn't just making the throws today, but also was placing the ball very well too. 

Riley showed pretty good pocket presence and would scramble when things started breaking down.  His gutsy play on his QB scrambles and QB draws was inspiring.  He just seemed calmer and more poised today than in previous games.  Perhaps it's mental, or perhaps it's because the offensive line wasn't sucking like it did against Oregon and the offense wasn't facing USC's defense.  Riley's completion percentage today was 60.1% - which is fair, but I think Riley played better than his completion percentage suggests.

Star-divide

(2) Cal's inside zone runs tip off the defense to which side the offense is going to run to before the snap.  These are the plays where Cal motions a WR who stops on the backside (the side of the offense that Cal is running away from) to block the backside defender.  When Cal does this, it's obvious it's a run as since Cal doesn't playaction out of the inside zone (we have in previous years but we really haven't seen it this year).  It also tips off the defense as to which way the run is going. 

I guess Ludwig likes the inside zone as since it has become the blocking scheme that Cal has used the most this year.  Last year the outside zone was our most-used blocking scheme and it was pretty dominant.  I actually like the outside zone better because it doesn't tip off the defense as to which way the run is going and because it gives Best and Vereen more options on where they can run.  However, the fact that Cal isn't using the outside zone runs this year must mean Ludwig feels we're not quite suited for it.  If that's true, that must mean he's thinking our offensive line this year doesn't have the quickness and athleticism to get moving laterally very quickly - as is required with the outside zone.  Anyways, I wouldn't mind seeing more outside zone runs rather than these telegraphed inside zone runs.  But maybe I'm making too much out of this issue.  In previous years, Cal's power man blocking schemes always telegraphed which way the run was going because Cal ran its power scheme to the strong side of the offense like 98% of the time.  Even when Cal let the defense know which way it was running its power scheme, our run offense was still pretty dominant and we would average like 6.0 yards a rush anyways.

(3) Cal's running game was pretty inconsistent.  Case in point: Jahvid Best had 102 yards on 18 rushes, 93 yards of which came from one run.  That means Best gained a whopping 9 yards on the other 17 rush attempts.  Yeesh.  This isn't a diss on Best, but moreso a diss on our offensive line.  I know UCLA's stellar defensive tackle Brian Price was blowing things up left and right, but still.  If it wasn't for Best's and Vereen's big play potential, I don't think Cal's offensive line had enough in them to sustain a drive.  Thankfully, Cal's passing game showed up today and it didn't put too much of a burden on the Cal rushing attack.  Cal's blocking still has to get stronger at the point of attack.  Right now, it's pretty lacking no matter what scheme we use.  Power hasn't been that great, inside zones haven't been that great, outside zones have actually sucked this year, and the outside toss sweeps haven't been great.  Best's sick Reggie Bush-like touchdown run came on a toss sweep, and if it wasn't for Jahvid Best being so sick (in the "awesome" slang sense, not in the influenza sense), that play would have been stopped for a loss because UCLA was on that play like white on rice. I'm a little surprised we didn't see more outside zone runs today and toss sweeps to get the ball away from Price as since he was blowing everything up in the middle.

Overall, I think this year's offense is fairly mediocre despite our Heisman runningback.  The run blocking hasn't always been there (but Best's and Vereen's big play potential makes up for it sometimes), and Cal's passing game has been off and on.  When both the running and passing are working, Cal's offense has enough firepower to put games away.  But it's when one isn't working when things start turning south.  Cal's offense is going to have to turn things around this season to win out.

(4) Gregory continues to use more man coverage in pass defense.  In the first three games of the season, Cal used zone defenses perhaps on 90% of the plays it ran to defend against passing plays.  After Oregon destroyed our zones with pump fakes, Gregory switched to more gutsier man defenses against USC.  Gregory still used the man coverage pretty often against UCLA.  I think the amount of man and zone that Cal is using now is perhaps closer to 40/60 man to zone.  I suppose this will please most Cal fans as since it appears that many of us react very negatively to zone defenses - although nobody was complaining about the zone defenses last year and in 2006 when we were intercepting balls left and right.  I think it's good that Gregory is mixing up the man/zone coverages up more.  I think that by mixing it up more often that the opposing QB doesn't quite get in that rhythm of always knowing he's going to see zone and knowing what he has to do.  I mean, the opposing QB is almost always going to know what coverages Cal is playing before the snap.  So it's not so much that mixing up the coverages is confusing the QB - it's just keeping him out of that mental and dropback rhythm of timed passes. 

Also, the benefit of using zone coverages is that it allows the cornerbacks to get more involved in run defense.  When cornerbacks are playing man coverage, they're looking at the WRs they're covering instead of the QB and the ball, and are often "run off" the play by the WRs.  But with zone coverages, the cornerbacks are watching the QB and the ball, and can tell whether the play is run or pass, and therefore help in run support if it's a run.

So there's advantages and disadvantages of using man or zone.  The reason why Syd had so many great run stops early this season was because Gregory was playing zones a lot and it allowed Syd to peek at the QB and the ball to see the play.  If Gregory continues using man coverages, you're probably going to see the offenses get more easy runs to the outside where the WRs are running off the cornerbacks (because the cornerbacks don't know if the play is run or pass because in man coverage they're looking at the WRs).

(5) Cal's pass rush was pretty weak.  Outside of Tyson Alualu, our guys on the defensive line really aren't doing that great of a job getting pressure on the QB.  Jordan has had a very quiet year thus far and I think he's been a bit over-hyped by the Cal fanbase.  I mean, there were some people saying he was going to go pro early.  No.  Not gonna happen.  He's been largely disarmed from game to game by individual offensive linemen.  Cal really lacks a dominant pass rush on the whole from both the defensive line and the linebackers.  I think this problem will continue throughout the year and come back to bite us. 

Seeing who is good at pass rush is pretty easy.  The top two things I look for are (1) explosion off the line; and (2) penetration (a product of good technique, quickness and sheer power).  Alualu gets off the line very fast and gets penetration very quickly.  As for our other defensive linemen... eh, not so much.

(6) I would have liked to see Cal use the delayed blitz a little earlier, or perhaps twist the defensive ends in.  As I said in my previous point, Cal's pass rush was pretty weak.  UCLA was blocking for Prince very well on pass plays.  Prince was stepping up into the pocket to avoid the deep Cal defensive end pass rush.  Naturally, the next step to counter good pass blocking and a QB that steps up into the pocket is to delay blitz, and twist the defensive ends in.  Gregory finally got around to using the delayed blitz late in the game and it led to a nice Eddie Young sack which stopped a UCLA drive on a critical 3rd down.  But we never quite saw the defensive ends twisting in.  By that, I mean, the defensive ends would take a step up the field as if on their normal pass rush, then cut back inside behind the inside pass rushers.  Well, since Cal uses the 3-4, the twisting would probably be done by one of the DEs and an outside linebacker rather than both of the DEs.  By twisting, the outside pass rushers are relocated to the inside and right into the area where the opposing QB will be stepping up into the pocket.  Not quite sure why we didn't see this today.  But what do I know?  I'm just a couch potato.

(7) Vereen fumbling kickoff returns a bit too much.  Okay, so this has only happened twice.  Once against USC, and against UCLA, but it's a bit concerning.  Today against UCLA, Vereen wasn't even looking into the sun (the sun was behind Vereen).  But Vereen just fumbled the catch and destroyed any chance of a return.  Fumbling these kickoff returns is also dangerous because that's a live ball.  If the ball gets away from Vereen it can be recovered by the kickoff coverage defense for a score, or perhaps a safety if Vereen bobbles the ball, steps out of endzone, then has to go back into the endzone to recover the ball.  Clean catches is just one of those small things that can't go wrong because there is huge potential for losing the ball or getting backed up against your own goalline. 

(8) Kickoff coverage continues to suck.  I'm a pretty tolerant guy.  While most Cal fans have been calling for special teams coach Alamar's head on a silver platter for like the past 7 years, only now am I finally getting fed up.  I even had a dream on the Friday night before the game that he had been fired.  Anyways, here is where UCLA started their drives this game:

36, 48, 48, 39, 24, 27, 22, 38, 20, 20, 33, 23, 16, 32, and 47. 

That's an average of 31.5.  So UCLA was starting at their 31.5 yardline on average.  If you take out the touchbacks, then UCLA is starting at their own 33.3 yard line.  In other words, the opposing offense only needs to go about 30 yards to be within field goal range.  These starting field positions cannot be so advantageous.  I'm not quite sure what it is about or kick coverage, but it just doesn't cut it.

(9) Whether a punt returner decides to fair catch or return a punt depends on the quality of blocking by the punt return team, and the decision is up to the punt returner.  I'm not trying to pick on people here, but I think I have to talk about this - not because there was an argument about this in the live thread, but also because I've heard people at games saying really ridiculous comments regarding punt return.  I guess how punt return works is not common knowledge (just like it's apparently not common knowledge that liquid dish washing soap cannot be used in dish washers!).

Whether the punt returner decides to return the punt or not, is a choice purely up to him.  The coaches do not tell the punt returner prior to the play whether to fair catch or not.  This may seem obvious, but against USC two weeks ago, I heard someone in the stands say "why do the coaches always tell Syd to fair catch???  They should tell him to return it!!!"  I had an epic face-to-palm after hearing that comment.

So basically, as the punt is in the air, and as the punt returner is watching the ball in the air, the punt returner uses his peripheral vision to "see" whether the punt return coverage is good enough to allow him to catch the ball safely, and return the ball. 

That's it.  It merely comes down to how good the punt return blocking is, and whether the punt returner feels he can make the catch and return the ball upfield, or not.  Nothing is pre-determined.  The coaches aren't telling the punt returner prior to the play to fair catch or not.  The punt returner doesn't fair catch because that's what he likes to do. The coaches and the players want to return punts.  They do!  Believe it or not, they do!  The coaches are not going to pull a punt returner from the game because he fair catches too much. As I said, sometimes the punt return coverage sucks and the punt returner has to fair catch.  Sometimes the scheme dictates that the punt returner will have to fair catch.  For example, if the punt coverage team is trying to block the punt (as in a full-out block rather than the usual punt scheme which sends some defenders on punt block and punt return blocking), then the punt returner will more than likely have to fair catch because all of the punt return coverage men went for the block and didn't block the defenders.

It comes down to the punt return coverage, and the punt returner.  The quality of the punt coverage (and sometimes the scheme itself) that will essentially influence whether the punt is returned or fair caught, but nothing is predetermined.  The coaches prefer that all punts are returned if possible.

(10) Ludwig breaks out the split backs formation.  If you watch the team in pre-game warmups, the team uses this formation quite a bit.  We've never seen it in the games itself, but it finally got used today.  Cal passed out of this formation which is pretty normal as since split backs is a fairly weak run formation. 

(11) Ludwig pulls a guard on playaction for added deception.  On the touchdown pass to Best, and on another play action play, Ludwig showed off a new blocking scheme.  This scheme pulls a guard across the formation (on the TD pass to Best the left guard pulled to the edge of the right side of the offensive line) to set up on the edge for pass blocking.  The purpose of guard pull is to make the play look more like a run play to the defense.  Defenses often watch, or key in, on the movements of the offensive line (against Cal, defenses especially key in on the guards because Cal likes to pull its guards) to determine whether the play is a run or pass.  If a guard pulls, the play is usually a run.  For example, Cal's power man blocking run schemes pull guards.  So by pulling a guard on a playaction pass, it really makes the play look like a run.  Indeed, Cal had the UCLA defense fooled pretty bad.  UCLA's safeties bit HARD on the fake. 

Cal has hasn't really used pulling linemen on pass plays.  The only time I can really remember this happening was in 2007 against Oregon State.  On that play, Cal pulled center Alex Mack on a non-playaction passing play.

(12) Cal uses both the number/wristband system, and the hand signals system to send in plays.  There is apparently some confusion about this.  Perhaps I am also to blame for this confusion because I've talked about this a few times and I think my statements have varied (although I'll explain why below).  If so, I apologize.

The number/wristband system is what Cal used since (at least) 2006.  I'm not sure what system Cal used in 2005 and prior.  But in 2006, under former offensive coordinator Mike Dunbar, Cal would use the number/wristband system.  This system would have the sideline QB (only one QB sending signals) signal in a hand signal corresponding to a number to the QB on the field.  The QB on the field would read what number was sent into him, and look on his wristband for the corresponding play.

The hand signal system uses hand signals to signal in the entire play.  There are no numbers used.  The hand signals say EVERYTHING.  They say the formation.  They say what the play is going to be.  If you can figure out these hand signals, you can know what play Cal is going to run before they snap the ball (you also have to figure out which QB is live and which is the dummy). 

I know for a fact that Cal was using the number/wristband system from 2006 to 2008.  I know this because it was in 2006 that I learned the hand signals and began watching the sideline QBs.  This year (2009), Cal started off the year using mostly the hand signal system.  Actually, Cal used both the hand signals and the number/wristband system, but used the hand signals more often.  Perhaps 70% hand signals and 30% number/wristband system.  Now though, half way through the season, things have flipped, and it appears as if Cal is using 30% hand signals and 70% number/wristband system. 

Why has there been this change?  Well, I don't think it has to do with simplifying anything for Riley, as was suggested by a commenter.  Afterall, whether the team sends in plays via numbers or actual hand signals doesn't influence whether the play is any simpler for Riley or not.  The play is still the same.  It's merely the form that the play is transmitted to Riley which has changed.  Instead, I think this just goes to show that Ludwig is just calling more plays that he expected to call in the game.  You see, the plays that Ludwig expects to call, usually go on the wristband.  Plays which Ludwig perhaps doesn't expect to call, and that don't make it on the wristband, are signaled in via hand. 

So what's the point of using numbers/wristband versus hand signals?  The most obvious reason for using the number/wristband system is that the number/wristband system is near impossible to pick.  At the very best, if you astutely observe the numbers being sent in, at the very most you can say "they're going to run play number 23 again!"  If you remembered what play number 23 was when they ran it the first time, then you will be able to know what they're running again.  But the number/wristband system is impossible to pick unless you have the wristband to see what plays correspond with what number. 

But I think the real advantage of using the hand signal system over the number/wristband system, is that such a system allows the offensive coordinator to call the play that perfectly fits the situation at hand.  The wristbands only hold 150 plays (300 if you want to count the flipped version of each play).  Sometimes the play you want, isn't one of those 150 plays.  But with the hand signal system, it's not a problem.  The offensive coordinator just tells the sideline QBs to run XYZ play - the play that the offensive coordinator wants but isn't on the wristband, and the sideline QBs will signal in XYZ play.  Voila! 

(13) Cal's new 10 man defense is probably due to all the subbing and player injuries.  It was widely reported that Cal did a lot of subbing against UCLA because of the heat.  Not surprising, Cal did its first ten man defense this game too.  It happens.  It shouldn't.  But it does.  It gets even more confusing when you have injuries.  Once you have guys that are injured, as well as lots of subbing, it gets crazy confusing on who is in and out.  Yes, the coach in the box could have seen this problem.  But at the same time, I think it's almost understandable if he doesn't because he's dialing up the next play and also watching the offense to see what the offense is doing.  He doesn't really watch the defense because he knows what the defense is doing (or more correctly: he assume he knows what the defense is doing).  So the blame really comes down to the players themselves (those on the sidelines and in the game) for not adequately notifying their substitutes to go in, and the sideline coaches for not making sure they were getting one for one substitutions as oppose to one for none substitutions.

3 recs  |  Comment 73 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

Some newspaper article (SF Chronicle?) mentioned that Eddie Young went out with the cramps, but no one subbed in for him.

by LeonPowe on Oct 21, 2009 3:38 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Confirmed by Okanes.

Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com

by Avinash on Oct 21, 2009 6:02 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Is Gregory coaching from the box or the field this year?

As I recall, he decided last year to coach from the field. I don’t remember seeing where he’s coaching from this season. Regardless, it seems that being a player short would be easier to spot right away from the booth than the field.

Praise be to Tedford!

by Ohio Bear on Oct 21, 2009 7:47 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

He’s still on the field.

Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com

by Avinash on Oct 21, 2009 7:57 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

He should really leave, the game ended like 4 days ago!

President Emperor Warlord Of The Sun!

www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com

by TwistNHook on Oct 21, 2009 8:00 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

It will be interesting to see how Riley plays this week. He seems to have a good game one week and then a horrible game the next week.

FIRE BRUCE BOCHY NOW!!!!!!
AND TAKE BRIAN SABEAN WITH HIM!!!!!

by 49er16 on Oct 21, 2009 7:25 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Even a horrible game by Riley is enough to kill the Cougars. Let’s not forget that he completed fewer than 50% of his passes in last year’s Wazzu game, but it was glossed over because of the final score.

Proud to hold season tickets to the only NBA team soon to be owned by a Russian oligarch.

by yellow fever on Oct 21, 2009 7:38 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I’m not sure 49er16 meant it would affect the final score. More so, it would be nice to see Riley develop some consistency.

It'll be just you, me, and Peter Nincompoop.

by BeastMode on Oct 21, 2009 7:54 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

That’s probably true. I just wanted to bring up that 6/13 performance because I love living in the past.

Proud to hold season tickets to the only NBA team soon to be owned by a Russian oligarch.

by yellow fever on Oct 21, 2009 10:18 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

It would be really nice if Sweeny could get some significant playing time in the second half.

by CalBear81 on Oct 21, 2009 12:09 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Last year back ups played 30 minutes worth of games. I hope they at least get a quarter of work.

by CaliforniaCMB on Oct 22, 2009 1:32 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I liked seeing Riley scramble to pick up yards and first downs. In college football especially a mobile QB gives the defense one more thing they have to worry about and cover and makes it really tough for them to cover everyone, get a pass rush, AND stop the QB from running with his feet. It shouldn’t be relied on too heavily, but I think he should try to run at least enough to make sure the defense worries about it. That should improve the effectiveness of our passing game as a whole.

by Missing Barry on Oct 21, 2009 7:42 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

For the most part, I agree with your analysis Hydro. Great point on the predictability of the running game and it needs to be pointed out weekly. Every time the motion a WR it is painfully obvious what’s about to happen. Kind of like a few years ago when Marshawn would start the play split out wide then motion to the backfield. EVRY SINGLE TIME Marshawn would then take a handoff and run to the 2 or 3 hole. Infuriating.

Pass Rush: I don’t think the pass rush is generally weak. Cal is 4th in sacks. And, whether that comes from a 3-man rush or blitzes or coverage, it still is a decent measure of pressure. I think the weakness has definitely arisen over the past few weeks, though, some credit has to be given to the offensive line play of Oregon, USC, and UCLA. A big reason for the drop-off in pressure has been the lack of explosiveness from the weakside. Zack Follett isn’t walking out that door. And, yes, I think we were off on our Cameron Jordan evaluation. But so was a lot of the media and the Cal coaching staff.

KOR Coverage: The coverage has not been good, I agree. However, I think a big part of it is the short kickoffs and or coverage guys not getting enough time to get off of their blocks. The returners are getting upfield in a hurry on most occasions.

PR: I was under the impression that most fans were complaining that Syd, not the coaching staff, was fair catching too many balls. If you heard them blaming the coaches, then good for calling them out. That said, it is possible that the coaches instructed them to use caution this season for whatever reason. That said, it does seem that the PR’ers are making 1 or 2 poor decisions every game when deciding whether to return the ball or not. That perception could be wrong.

It'll be just you, me, and Peter Nincompoop.

by BeastMode on Oct 21, 2009 8:09 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

i think it cal’s lack of a decent pass rush becomes blatantly clear when we give credit to the OL play of ucla – a team which, by all accounts, should have one of the worst lines in the pac-10.

i'm here to clean your pool but i don't have a pool *bowchica bowow*

by ch0ster on Oct 21, 2009 9:00 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Oh, I agree, UCLA does no have a very good OL. All I was trying to say is sometimes it’s easier to criticize our guys when it was the play of the opponent that caused the lack of pressure, for example. I’m not saying that is the sole reason for our lack of pressure, but give credit where credit is due. All that said, if you rush 3 on 5 you’re not going to get a lot of pressure for the most part.

It'll be just you, me, and Peter Nincompoop.

by BeastMode on Oct 21, 2009 9:34 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Regarding kickoffs, I totally disagree. Our kickoffs were adequate (not great, but adequate), hitting the 11, 11, 4, 8, ~5 (rolled into the EZ), 3, 3, and then the last kickoff was short but that was after the 15 yard penalty.

Our kickoff coverage was excruciatingly bad, with decent kickoffs. Strangely our punt coverage was very good…

by abaddon on Oct 21, 2009 11:18 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

The kickoffs were longer than they’ve been , but they’re still mostly low line drives, meaning the returner has a lot of room to work with (and the coverage team has less time to get set up). One of those line drives went out of the back of the end zone, but the rest of them gave the return team a good chance to get set up.

Anger’s punts (when he really hits it well) not only have distance but hangtime, which allow the coverage unit more time to run down the field and give the returner no option but to call for a fair catch. The punt return by USC was on one of Anger’s worst kicks of the day, a low drive that got to the returner sooner without sailing over his head. He made some good moves, but the gunners were nowhere close to him when he caught the ball.

So, basically, you gotta Go Bears!

by ragnarok on Oct 21, 2009 11:24 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Regarding Punt Return, I actually think Syd is a bit of a gambler when it comes to punt return and he returns some kicks that he should probably fair catch. But actually, I hear quite a few people complaining about how Cal never seems to return kicks when Syd is the punt returner.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by HydroTech on Oct 21, 2009 1:54 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I believe BWNQ highlighted that Riley’s demeanor throughout the game was kick-ass. I agree with this and it’s refreshing to see. He was the confident leader, not the “Oh noes I just KO’d a flautist” guy. I would love to see more of this over the next year and a half. As a side note, I think I counted two poor Riley throws, one on the first pass of the game and the other when he almost hit a cheerleader in her oven region. Let’s say that cheerleader pass was a throw away, but if Riley completes that first air ball…his completion rate jumps to 65%.

I heard an interview with Allen Rossum, the former Pro Bowl returner who was recently s-canned but the 9ers. In this interview Rossum explained that returning punts is the craziest thing one does on the football field. He said you have to have a knack for it, know how to read the field (as Hydro was saying), and be able to make the first guy miss. He also said a lot of guys call for the fair catch because they get spooked too easily. I don’t think Syd’s neccessarily that guy, but I just thought I’d mention this since we’re on the subject. Also, can we get a run down of the starting PR, punt, kickoff, and KR teams? I’d love to know what kind of athletes we’re putting out there. A guy like Boateng who’s big, athletic, and from the Brooklyn, should be on all 4 of these units. It’s not like he’s a starting wideout who could get overused.

In regards to ALAMAR…Anger smash noted he spoke or worked out with his HS coach to get back on the ball again. It’s probably one of those things that doesn’t get noticed if the unit is playing well. However, with it currently sucking, one has to wonder. It would be neat if Cal could land the 9ers ST coach Al Everest (even though he’s older than Santa). His unit has been playing very well for several years. Perhaps they have an Asst ST coach who’d like a promotion?

Hydro – what do you think about Cal running the traditional under-center option a little more seriously. Riley’s option pitches have been way early. Yarnway, Best, Vereen, Sofele, and DeBo…woowee that’s a lot of horses in the stable that have unique running styles. I think Riley could run it fairly well. I’m not saying become Nebraska of the late 90’s, but running it a bit would add a new wrinkle and could be highly effective. If it’s not effective…well, at least we didn’t run a predictable screen pass or telegraph an inside zone run.

As a side question…with the success of Paul Johnson and the ramblin’ ‘reck, could we see the flexbone return to another major BCS team? Taking it a step further…if Cal’s OC or HC was a fan of the option, would Cal’s running game ever be stopped given that they have the talent? Best/Sofele as an A or wing backs and Vereen/Yarnway as B or fullbacks? Wow. Taking it another step further, could it be a “Moneyball” tactic where Cal can compete with the big boys by recruiting highly skilled players who are excited about leading the nation in rushing when everyone else is running either a traditional pro style or spread option offense?

"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark

by carp on Oct 21, 2009 9:41 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

No god no

Nothing against GT but I hate the wishbone/spread/option offense (Whatever you want to call it).

In other words, Go Bears!

by royrules22 on Oct 21, 2009 9:44 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

what if you saw Best get more 40+ yard TD runs than anyone to ever play the game of football? What if…it led to 11+ win seasons?

"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark

by carp on Oct 21, 2009 10:13 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

We could also switch to the Air Raid, the single wing, the wing-T, or the A-11 and get great hypothetical results. Not gonna, tho.

Think of it this way: Tedford’s current offense is something he’s been working on and trying to perfect for literally decades since he first started coaching, same as Paul Johnson’s flexbone. How could either of them just throw away what they have and start fresh with someone else’s schemes?

"Let me tell you a story. I was a political prisoner for two years. The instant I was released I ran to McDonald's. I had a Big Mac and a Coke.

It was fantastic."
-Toyama Koichi, US Presidential candidate from Japan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGZqOkeYbB0

by AERose on Oct 21, 2009 1:26 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Cal is not deviating from the pro-style offense

It’s not happening while Tedford is our coach. Sure we’ll incorporate other elements and use wrinkles like the option, shotgun spread and zone read, but don’t expect us to deviate from that.

And even if we used those unorthodox strategies…if we faced a defense like USC using that, we’d still need a dropback quarterback who could beat them with the pass. Strategies might change, but we’d still be facing the same problem. Georgia Tech runs a nice offense, they can spring an upset…and then get absolutely crushed when their QB or Oline isn’t functioning.

Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com

by Avinash on Oct 21, 2009 9:51 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

you used us

and I’m not necessarily saying “95% of the runs would be the flexbone option.”

Best with real estate getting the ball 2-3 yards after the LOS…wowzers.

There’s a chance a team like USC couldn’t stop the option. Remember, the offense has athletes, too. They’ve also shut down Cal’s running game the last 2 years. Passing the ball out of a formation that featured 2 WRs, Vereen/Yarnway in the backfield and either Miller/Sofele on one wing and Best on the other could be highly effective.

"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark

by carp on Oct 21, 2009 10:13 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Well, we’ll know when Oregon plays USC how good the Trojans are at stopping the option. Keep in mind Illinois ran the spread option too and got shredded in the Rose Bowl a few years back. Oregon 2007 is the only example of an option offense beating the Trojans…and it required Dixon to complete 64% of his passes at the same time.

Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com

by Avinash on Oct 21, 2009 10:22 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

that’s a different option. One that sucks, imo.

"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark

by carp on Oct 21, 2009 10:23 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

this one:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Flexbone

"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark

by carp on Oct 21, 2009 10:26 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Didn’t Texas use some spread option with VY in the NCG?

by Missing Barry on Oct 21, 2009 10:33 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

True, that was a zone read option…although I don’t recall a lot of it being run through the game since Texas was always falling behind. My mind’s hazy on that game though.

Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com

by Avinash on Oct 21, 2009 10:37 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I remember it being mostly PA run out of the zone-read option – so yeah they were mostly passing, but it was still out of that same look with some designed runs thrown in…

by Missing Barry on Oct 21, 2009 12:38 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'd also like your take

on the flexbone re-spreading through CFB.

GT beat Miami and Georgia last year, and FSU Va Tech this year. They did lose @ Miami but they put 17 points on the board. Their only real bad loss since Johnson took over was vs. LSU last year.

Perhaps the flexbone is an offense that works well during the week-week grind of the regular season. If you or your opponent is fresh off a bye (or the long postseason hiatus), more creative game plans could (and should) be designed.

"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark

by carp on Oct 21, 2009 10:22 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Georgia Tech’s flexbone didn’t put points up on the board vs. Miami. They got one TD via a very successful fake field goal, and most of the rest of their yardage with a few big pass plays. Miami totally shut down GT’s option offense.

So, basically, you gotta Go Bears!

by ragnarok on Oct 21, 2009 10:38 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

shh!

"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark

by carp on Oct 21, 2009 12:34 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Creative game plans can only take you so far. Give a better team time and opportunity to gameplan against it, and it’ll eventually find a way to shut it down. Plus, like any offensive scheme, you only go as far as your linemen can take and block for you. As Hydro as said, our linemen are having trouble with the simpler blocking techniques, so it’d be the same issue here.

Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com

by Avinash on Oct 21, 2009 10:45 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

that’s what I’m saying! Only use the option when you and/or your opponent don’t have time to come up with something creative.

And I’m not saying run it like Tommy Frazier and Lawrence Phillips are in the backfield.

If it fails for a drive or two, then go back to the predictable inside zone runs and screen passes. Or vice versa.

Think of it this way: Cal makes it through 3 games without running it very often, if at all. Then they play Oregon, and get the ball on Oregon’s 24 or whatever with 14:55 left in the first quarter. First play from scrimmage they run it and see how it does. Maybe it’s a TD. Maybe it’s not. Who knows. Tell me a TD on that drive wouldn’t have changed that game and, perhaps, Cal’s season.

"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark

by carp on Oct 21, 2009 12:37 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

If it fails for a drive or two, then go back to the predictable inside zone runs and screen passes. Or vice versa.

Sounds like the Ohio State offense. Try to do everything, end up doing nothing. In order to work, schemes take commitment. Why is the Dolphins direct snap package so successful? Because they’re methodical in their implementation and they practice the crap out of it. Try to hammer a square peg into a round hole and you’re in danger of detracting from the core principles of Tedford’s offense.

"Let me tell you a story. I was a political prisoner for two years. The instant I was released I ran to McDonald's. I had a Big Mac and a Coke.

It was fantastic."
-Toyama Koichi, US Presidential candidate from Japan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGZqOkeYbB0

by AERose on Oct 21, 2009 1:34 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

good points.

"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark

by carp on Oct 21, 2009 2:01 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

what about 2 formations with 5 plays each? 5 run plays and 5 pass plays. Perfect those like anything else and call it the “option package.” Heck 3 of the runs would be a) option left, b) option right, and c) some crazy WR reverse. At least one of those pass plays would feature the QB running as if he would run the option, but then pass quickly to a wideout (like Oregon did to Cal). I get the “run it perfect” thing, but I don’t think it has to be some unachievable # of plays.

"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark

by carp on Oct 21, 2009 2:07 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I agree with the Olineman. I don’t think Tepper’s got the legs for it.

"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark

by carp on Oct 21, 2009 12:39 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

and then get absolutely crushed when their QB or Oline isn’t functioning.

This describes every offense ever. The flexbone is a sound offense, there’s no need to be condescending because it’s not our offense.

(Full disclosure: I loooooove me some triple option.)

"Let me tell you a story. I was a political prisoner for two years. The instant I was released I ran to McDonald's. I had a Big Mac and a Coke.

It was fantastic."
-Toyama Koichi, US Presidential candidate from Japan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGZqOkeYbB0

by AERose on Oct 21, 2009 1:29 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I’m not being condescending. I have nothing against the flexbone or the option or the spread. What I’m saying is if Cal was running any of these offenses, the issues would still be the same (inexperienced O-line that blocks alright but not really well, plus erratic QB and WR play), and we’d still have the same problems. A new scheme won’t solve those things.

Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com

by Avinash on Oct 21, 2009 1:45 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I may have overreacted on account of my dislike for the “will never work in a BCS conference/will be exposed in year two/gimmick offense” crowd.

"Let me tell you a story. I was a political prisoner for two years. The instant I was released I ran to McDonald's. I had a Big Mac and a Coke.

It was fantastic."
-Toyama Koichi, US Presidential candidate from Japan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGZqOkeYbB0

by AERose on Oct 21, 2009 4:37 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Well, when Cal has had mobile QBs (all years except Longshore), the option has always seen its way into games. So I mean, I think it’s always been there, except for the past few years when we had Longshore. It’s a nice change up when it’s called to confuse the defensive ends. I’m not sure we need to see it more than once or twice a game. Riley does seem somewhat “pitchy” – as in he pitches and doesn’t take the option himself, but then again, it could be because of the way the defense is reacting too.

As for running the option out of flexbone and stuff with all our RBs. That sounds pretty sick in the mind. However, it can make us a bit one-dimensional. I think we’d need a guy back there that can throw too to truly make the defense be honest.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by HydroTech on Oct 21, 2009 1:59 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

sweet. thanks. how’s culinary school?

"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark

by carp on Oct 21, 2009 2:02 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Today I’m practicing desserts, so it’s pretty sweet.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by HydroTech on Oct 21, 2009 2:03 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah, although IIRC we pretty much only ran them with like 1-2 yards to go for a TD, so they just looked like QB sneaks.

by sycasey on Oct 22, 2009 12:08 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Also people need to keep in mind when it comes to returning punts, the #1, by far, most important thing is acquiring possession of the ball. 10-12 yard returns are not worth a muffed punt or fumble. The coaching staff knows this. A fair catch that gives Cal possession is a much better decision than a situation that risks giving the other team the ball back…

by Missing Barry on Oct 21, 2009 9:46 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

I don’t think anyone’s arguing that point either, but Hydro’s just saying that it’s not like the coaching staff is saying not to return anything unless there are 10 yards of daylight straight ahead and to fair catch otherwise. It’s being left to the individual returners.

Proud to hold season tickets to the only NBA team soon to be owned by a Russian oligarch.

by yellow fever on Oct 21, 2009 10:20 AM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah, possession is the most important thing. It just seems like I’m hearing more and more complaints about Syd returning punts. But people have to remember that whether a punt is returned or not pretty much depends on the quality of the punt return coverage, and sometimes the scheme. I don’t think Syd fair catches too much. In fact, I think he’s a bit risky with his punt returns and tries to return punts a bit too much when they should be fair caught.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by HydroTech on Oct 21, 2009 2:01 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

For (11), the pulling guard on a pass play – I noticed in Danzig’s highlights that this was used earlier than Best’s TD catch – at 1:20 for the second touchdown (Jones catch) it looks like the same scheme.

by tmoran3020 on Oct 21, 2009 10:38 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Wristbands

Thanks for the explanation Hydro. I had somehow got it in my head that the wristband and signaling/numbers options were mutually exclusive, but it makes perfect sense now.

by abaddon on Oct 21, 2009 11:23 AM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Glad i could clarify.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by HydroTech on Oct 21, 2009 1:59 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Interesting thought: what if the coaching staff caught that there were only 10 men on the field during the play where kendricks made the interception. UCLA was still well inside our territory and driving down pretty well.

What if they went on to score that drive, kicked off, we had a 3 and out, punted, and ucla went on for a final drive and beat us with no time remaining on the clock. The 100 or so ucla fans left at the Rose Bowl going crazy, Rick getting a gatorade bath instead of Tedford, and the Cal fans remaining in the stands are in utter shock.

And we’d be here this Wednesday afternoon still wondering what the hell happened to our season, talking about another implosion, the fire Tedford crowd out of the woods…. Pretty improbable scenario, but not with Cal football, where the improbable is made probable.

by nickle on Oct 21, 2009 1:59 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

EDIT: (10 men on the field during the play kendricks made the interception and called a timeout)

by nickle on Oct 21, 2009 2:01 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

…………………………………………..why?

What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas. What happens in California makes the world go round.

by Spazzy Mcgee on Oct 21, 2009 2:05 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

flagged for FORTHELOVEOFBAKBAKWHYPONDERSUCHTHINGS?!

Whose domicile? OUR DOMICILE!

by Berkelium97 on Oct 21, 2009 3:41 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Uh, Hydro...

Feds: Mass. man planned terror attacks on US malls

Authorities say the men’s plans — in which they used code words like “peanut butter and jelly” for fighting in Somalia and “culinary school” for terrorist camps — were thwarted in part when they could not find training and were unable to buy automatic weapons, authorities said.

What culinary school do you ACTUALLY attend?

What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas. What happens in California makes the world go round.

by Spazzy Mcgee on Oct 21, 2009 2:38 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Very clever code. They fooled everyone into thinking they were going to culinary school to learn how to make PBJ.

by CalBear81 on Oct 21, 2009 2:48 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

srsly, they should have used “poaching foie gras in a shallot and brandy reduction” as code for fighting in Somalia. those MORONS.

What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas. What happens in California makes the world go round.

by Spazzy Mcgee on Oct 21, 2009 3:53 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Peanut butter and jelly? How much of an innuendo filled conversation is even possible with that?

Terrorist 1: How is the PBJ today?
Terrorist 2: Extra nutty, and not enough jelly.
Terrorist 1: !!!

by sec119 on Oct 21, 2009 4:15 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

How is the PBJ today?

Large amounts of jelly.

RUNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNNN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

President Emperor Warlord Of The Sun!

www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com

by TwistNHook on Oct 21, 2009 4:22 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Carry on...

Hydro, I enjoy your comprehensive game reviews. Obviously you agree that the Oline holds the key to successful pass and run production. Your combined facts, stats and historical knowledge of the Bears provides perspective and a sense of impartiality – about as much as a Cal fan can muster anyway. Continue on……

by OsoDeOro on Oct 21, 2009 8:36 PM PDT reply actions   0 recs

Thanks

Yeah, I do think the OL is very important. How good the OL is can determine a RB’s production or a QB’s completion percentage. That is quite obvious but I Think that largely gets forgotten by a lot of people. For example, if a RB averages 2.0 yards a carry one game, people seem to think the RB had a bad day, but to me, that says the OL had a bad day. Anyways, thanks for the words.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by HydroTech on Oct 21, 2009 10:04 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Sorry to say, my thoughts are we're mediocre again

I’m super happy about the win at fUCLA. But we’ve been exposed as a mediocre team over the past 3 weeks, and the UCLA win didn’t erase all that..

I thought we were only slightly better than UCLA, and a lot luckier. And I don’t UCLA is more than a mediocre, inconsistent team. They also made coaching mistakes, and player mistakes more often than we did. I’m glad we took advantage of those mistakes. I’m glad we made some nice plays on offense (yay, we have an offense!), but to step back and look at us, I wasn’t impressed.

Javhid’s short carries are one of the key points. UCLA’s yardage totals are another. Kickoff/punt coverage return yards are the 3rd phase. The O and D line performance is foundational to much of this.

Don’t get me wrong, I’m still a huge Bears fan, I’m still going to be out Saturday cheering, but it’s clear my (and many others) expectations got out of hand after the Minnesota win. I drank the Kool-Aid of many fans on this site who were telling me to stop doubting and get on board with the fact we’re a Top 10, or Top 5 team, and we should be looking up the ranking, and assume a BCS spot – which one will it be?

Sorry, we were just plain wrong. Just being homers. Ignoring both the evidence that some phases were not so strong, or the lack of evidence that we’d improved over the last 2 years.

So I’m not going to be pretending “we’re #1!”, or picking us to sweep our remaining games – we have a lot to prove yet.

Now Washington State is lacking enough physical talent, that we should win, and handily, especially at home. If we don’t, some coaches jobs should be in jeopardy.

The rest of the games are totally winnable OR losable.

For the defense and special teams, I don’t have a magic answer. Hard work. Recruiting. Alomar…is responsible for many things and has room to improve.

For the offense, the number one most fixable thing we could do is be more unpredictable. Although there were some awesome promising signs in the first couple of games, the UCLA playcalling was much more predictable, and the looks much less innovative. What’s up with that? We’re never going to run the fly sweep again? Can we get some more Play Action, PLEASE?

There just has to be more plays run from a given identical starting formation or the defenses have it easy (like many team D’s have had against us the last few years, IMHO).

This is so obvious, the only reason I have for us not doing it is that the players have shown they haven’t mastered those plays in practice. So the coaches aren’t just going to ‘go for it’ and ask them to execute plays they don’t have down. More evidence we’re not there yet in terms of greatness.

So in the end, I think we actually had a pretty close game against UCLA. It wasn’t far from being a very different outcome. Of course, that cuts both ways – in many games we haven’t won, some tiny differences would have given us a W. So the teams that beat us close probably don’t have any serious bragging rights.

The games where one team dominates are a different story: like us @ Oregon. We got dominated in all 3 phases.

Against U$C, I think our defense was on par with theirs, if not better. But failure to execute on O (and letdowns on ST) resulted in a fairly lopsided score.

So for the remainder of the season – hold onto your seats, Cal fans. We could go anywhere from 1-4 to 5-0, and I’m leaning more towards 5-0 based on the skill level of our opponents, but I guarantee you it will come down to a few key moments and momentum swings in some of these games.

GO BEARS!

Stand the whole game, stay to the end, and start yelling while they're still in the huddle. GO BEARS

by JerrottWillard45 on Oct 22, 2009 1:09 PM PDT reply actions   1 recs

All reasonable thoughts. I tend to agree that all games (exception of WSU) are winnable or losable at this point. I’m happy we get OSU at home, I’d write that off as a loss if we didn’t. I sure wish Furd and UW were at home… ASU on the road hopefully we should handle, but far from a sure thing.

by tmoran3020 on Oct 22, 2009 2:08 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

On one hand, you say we are mediocre. On the other, you say we could go 5-0 down this stretch. That would put us at 9-2 in the regular season. Even though we got completely creamed by USC and Oregon, were we to end up 9-2 (and that’s a big were), I wouldn’t find that to be a mediocre season. Of course, we still have so many more games to go.

President Emperor Warlord Of The Sun!

www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com

by TwistNHook on Oct 22, 2009 4:08 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

9+2=11

"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark

by carp on Oct 22, 2009 4:40 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Look, math isn’t my strong suit, OK. So, what does that mean, we’d be 10-2? I’M EVEN BETTER!

President Emperor Warlord Of The Sun!

www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com

by TwistNHook on Oct 22, 2009 7:29 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I’m just gonna throw out for the record that I think you’re wrong and we’re better than “mediocre”. Will we win all the rest of our games? That’s probably not the most likely scenario, but I believe we’ll be favored in every game (implying we’re the better team).

I think some of the disagreement comes because you think all 3 phases of our team has to be playing well to make us a good team. I disagree. There are very, very few teams that get decent production out of all 3 phases – every team has weaknesses. I think our weaknesses are less weak than most teams and our strengths are stronger.

by Missing Barry on Oct 22, 2009 6:03 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I'm glad your optimistic

But I think lots of teams get ‘decent’ production from all 3 phases, and are out athleticized by an opponent and still lose.

Twist, if we go 9-2, that is better than mediocre, but sad to say that tells you the Pac-10 below USC and Oregon are mediocre. Which they probably are. Lots of weakness and parity across our conference. Actually, there’s a lot across the nation right now, too, but I’m not trying to rank us nationally (which is a relative ranking), I’m just speaking in absolute terms about our ability levels.

If we were 9-2 with close losses to USC and Oregon decided on a ball bounce or bad call, that’s actually quite different in my assessment of the team than 9-2 with total blowout losses. It tells you how far we are from being ‘great’.

And I wouldn’t bet anyone we’re going 5-0. I’m just saying that’s plausible (and so is 4-1).

You’re not going to get me to make hard predictions of a Cal loss, ever, because I’m a Cal fan! I know we COULD win every game! That’s what I want to happen!

But I’m not going to be homer enough to make hard predictions of Cal wins very often, either, without the strong evidence needed to do that. Regardless of whether others are drinking the Kool-Aid or not.

Stand the whole game, stay to the end, and start yelling while they're still in the huddle. GO BEARS

by JerrottWillard45 on Oct 23, 2009 2:53 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

I’m sure, sir, that you’ve been around during the Holmoe era and WELL before then. If you ask me in 2001 whether the team would go 9-2, I woulda jumped at the chance. 9-2 or 10-2 whatever the final record would be, to me, is not mediocre. No matter who our opponents are. Let’s not create a mythical reality that we are chasing. In every conference, there are going to be bad teams and good ones. If Cal goes 10-2, they are good. Few other teams would do that. This is, of course, a big if.

President Emperor Warlord Of The Sun!

www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com

by TwistNHook on Oct 23, 2009 3:43 PM PDT up reply actions   0 recs

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

The California Sports Website that's .....different from all the rest.

GoldenBlogs' FAQ
Start posting about the Golden Bears »

Join SB Nation and dive into communities focused on all your favorite teams.

Connect_with_facebook

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Cal_2_small
And You Thought Pac-10 Refs Couldn't Get Any Worse
Cms_small
Cal Pro Day
Jones_1_squared_small
Spring Practice Preview

Recent FanPosts

Calflag_small
Golden Recruiting Thread: March 2010
800px-ucmp_triceratops_right_small
DBD 3.16.10 You ever seen a grown man naked?
Small
Cal Basketball Tourney Viewing Parties
1262541127_small
Reminder: Join the CGB Tournament Pick'em Challenge and Fantasy Baseball League!
Boosmall_small
Cal Baseball Splits Series With #9 Rice
P1_marshawn_small
DBD 3.15.10 Don't Forget To Sign Up For the CGB March Madness Pool!
Small
Cal's Ruggers Skunk Chico State 97-12
P1_marshawn_small
DBD 3.12.10 The Newest Fantasy Sports Craze!
N1222878_43736576_541_small
DBD 3.11.10: BOW DOWN TO THE FACE OF MEDIOCRITY!!!

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

SPONSORS

SBNation.com Recent Stories

via blog.seattletimes.nwsource.com +1 updates

2010 NCAA Women's Tournament Bracket Is Set: UConn Begins Quest For Repeat

Duke students cheer prior to Duke's matchup with North Carolina in an NCAA college basketball game in Durham, N.C., Saturday, March 6, 2010. (AP Photo/Gerry Broome)

Bracketology FAIL: How The NCAA Tournament Selection Committee Botched The Field

Iowa coach Todd Lickliter calls to his team from the sidelines in the first half against Illinois in an NCAA college basketball game Tuesday, Jan. 5, 2010, in Champaign, Ill. (AP Photo/Heather Coit) +1 updates

Iowa Makes It Official: Fires Todd Lickliter As Basketball Coach

More from SBNation.com >


Marshawnthusiasts!

Bear_small ragnarok

Script_cal_small HydroTech

Cal_football_2005_09_16_roll_07_012_small CBKWit

P1_marshawn_small TwistNHook

1262541127_small yellow fever

Jahvidtician

Giorgiorope_small Berkelium97

Calflag_small Avinash

Member Of The Follettariat

Bear__small norcalnick

Official Partner of CBS Sports