Roll On: What Will Cal's Offense Look Like Without Jahvid Best?
I wish I could come up with something optimistic to write, but the fact is Cal's offense was pretty screwed up even with Jahvid Best back there. At this point it all boils down to blocking. The run blocking and pass protection stink. It's been stinking all year, it hasn't improved from week-to-week, and it's wishful thinking to expect anything to change during these last three weeks. Coming up? Arizona, 23rd in sacks, 11th in rushing defense, 37th in passing defense. Oh yeah, I'm totally hot for this. Dipping myself in cocoa butter right now.
If Cal's going to beat Arizona, the offensive line is going to have to play way better than they've been showing through conference play. Steve Marshall's going to have to coach these guys up, really make them play this game for Jahvid, and try to finally open holes for Shane Vereen and Covaughn Deboskie-Johnson. If these guys aren't talented enough to execute the sets they're given, adjust accordingly. What's been the most frustrating thing about this season has been the lack of adjustments on both the offensive and defensive side of the ball. I understand losing these games, but to get blown out in each game? It's just hard to sit there and take the same plays being called when they haven't been working not just for one game, but ONE MONTH.
Well, the Bears are going to have to adjust now; without Jahvid Best this is a drastically different team. Find out more about what Cal might look like after the jump, and why the Wildcat might be used quite a bit.
The rushing burden is on Shane Vereen. I doubt Tedford and Ludwig feel Deboskie is ready to handle anything more than 15% of the snaps at this point, so a lot of the burden will be put on Vereen to play a Forsett 2007-type role. Vereen did a manageable job against Arizona State last season, and the same thing will be needed (probably more) from him to pull off a victory against Arizona. Unfortunately, he's not going to have any more leverage getting through no holes as Best did.
Less inside zone please? Hey Coach Ludwig. Everytime you run inside zone between the tackles just so our poor running backs can get levelled for a one yard gain, you're taking days off my life. Arizona has a running defense that is very good, on the rise, confident in themselves, and is certainly going to play Cal the same way every defense has played Cal since the start of the season. Please try something somewhere.
The Bears can no longer run two running backs in a multitude of ways. That kind of eliminates the double threat of having one of either Best and Vereen line out as a receiver. So now Cal loses some of the unconventionality they were showing the previous three weeks (and who knows how the Oregon State game turns out if Best doesn't get injured) and they probably return to the conventional sets typical of a pro-style offense, since Deboskie or Sofele aren't going to be lining out wide or forcing defenses to stack the box.
Without the great receiving threats our running backs offered...
This will put more pressure on the receiving corps. Outside of Jones, no receiver has really played two good games in a row. Lagemann has shown promise, Tucker has vacillated between brilliant and bad, Ross can leap a lot, Calvin hasn't really been heard from, nor has Boateng. These guys are going to have to start playing well to help Kevin Riley out by getting separation from their defenders, not quitting on their routes, anything to adapt to the bad O-line play.
Anthony Miller is also sorely missed here--he'd become Riley's go to option in bad spots. With Jarrett Sparks or Skylar Curran you just don't know what you're getting.
More rollout options for Riley? Given how bad the pass protection has been, you'd have expected more of this even before Best's injury. But Kevin does seem to be more effective out of the pocket than in it--it might be worth considering just getting him going with play action fake bootlegs. Or something of the sort.
Best's absence doesn't diminish the Wildcat option. Many people think that the Wildcat is used primarily to put another blocker on the field, but in this case I feel that the Wildcat hasn't been used this season just because the blocking has been so porous, no matter how many guys you put out there to block. It's also to get the ball into the hands of the runner more quickly.
Why is that? When you direct snap to your running back and quarterback, that gives them an extra few seconds that would've been otherwise used to hand off the ball. This time allows your blockers to get in place and open up the holes for the running back to cut through. But the blocking has been so bad this season though that you're often seeing defenders penetrating the line of scrimmage at the time it takes the Bears to handoff the ball (the Bears have allowed 78 tackles for loss this season, and that number's probably greater if you add in 0-2 yard gains). Hence you put it in the running back's hands quicker to just let him take off before defenders can anticipate it coming.
(Notice that the quarterback draw has also been used in previous weeks to surprising success. It's a pretty damning indictment of your offensive line if your best running plays are quarterback keepers and direct running back snaps.)
Is it time to go back to the book of tricks? Around this time last year the Bears were totally flummoxed by the passing ineptitude that they had to resort to flea-flickers, hook-and-ladders, running back lateral/wide receiver passes. Although I've seen signs of unconventional plays, they've been for the most part snuffed out or failed due to execution errors. This next two weeks are the difference between a 6-6 disaster and an alright 8-4/9-3 season. Might as well try and throw everything out of the playbook.
In the end though, unless Riley has a monstrous game, this one's probably coming down to blocking again. The fact is the Bears still have to run the ball. Going straight to the pass and expecting the receivers to make good catches is a recipe of quick 3 and outs, and leaving one of the worst passing defenses in the country out there for Foles to pick apart. Sounds reallly enticing.
If no one blocks well, the offense is going to throw up another turd sandwich. And we could see something we've never seen at the end of a Tedford-era Cal football game--an empty Memorial in the 4th quarter.
(For those wondering why I didn't write anything about the defense...they are what they are this point. Smarter people than me said we'd miss our senior linebackers, and they're right. Plus I haven't watched enough defensive gametape this season to know how much of this is on Gregory for putting them in the wrong positions to make plays on the ball, so all I can do right now is hope they play better.)
35 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Marshawn Lynch is not walking through that door, fans. DeSean Jackson is not walking through that door, and Justin Forsett is not walking through that door. And if you expect them to walk through that door, they’re going to be NFL players. What we are is young, exciting, hard-working, and we’re going to improve. People don’t realize that, and as soon as they realize those three guys are not coming through that door, the better this town will be for all of us because there are young guys in that (locker) room playing their asses off. I wish we had an offensive line. I wish we could sack the quarterback. We can’t; the only thing we can do is work hard, and all the negativity that’s in this town sucks. I’ve been around when Nate Longshore was booed. I’ve been around when Ayoob was booed. And it stinks. It makes the greatest town, greatest city in the world, lousy. The only thing that will turn this around is being upbeat and positive like we are in that locker room… and if you think I’m going to succumb to negativity, you’re wrong. You’ve got the wrong guy leading this team.
by LeonPowe on Nov 13, 2009 3:30 AM PST reply actions 6 recs
Well-played my friend, well-played.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Nov 13, 2009 3:37 AM PST up reply actions

The Lack of Mack's Imposition Attacks My Disposition.
by Spazzy Mcgee on Nov 13, 2009 10:55 AM PST up reply actions
If we win, I say we tear down the goalposts

WHO’S WITH ME?*
*Actually, no…don’t tear down the goalposts. Our program can’t afford replacements. Just rush the field and hug a yellow coat.
"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark
Rinse. Lather. Repeat.
Arizona will win toss, defer, Cal goes three and out (while losing a few yards) and punt. 4+ minutes off the clock, 10 plays, and three 11 yard completions on 3rd and 7s later, a TD pass by Foles and …
We’re going to see BBDB at its finest. Foles might as well play buck-naked – we’re not going to get close enough for spittin’ distance, much less lay a fingernail on him. We’ll rush 3, drop 8, and he’s going to march them up the field with a series of quick screens and slants.
Then, they’ll stall in the red zone and settle for field goals. I must admit that I’m not a football genius or even an idiot savant. How this will transpire, I have no idea.
On offense, we’re going to go single back, 4 wide spread. Our TE and FB don’t contribute enough to blocking or receiving anyway. We’ll alternate between quick hitters up the seams with long-balls when they shorten their middle zones. Just for flavor, we’ll run Vereen up the middle for no gain from time to time just to give them a false sense of security.
Because their defense is coached to be fast and overly aggressive, we’ll take advantage with half rolls, mis-direction, and reverses to slow down their front 7. Unlike previous games, after being dynamic for the 1st quarter, we’ll keep the pedal to the metal and maintain offensive diversity throughout the entire game.
Tavecchio will get a special “cortisone” injection before the game for “tendonitis”…in his *ss. The needle will be a foot long. That mofo’ is gonna send kickoffs through the endzone.
Alamar will be taken behind the construction site and beaten. Repeatedly. He will be unavailable for the rest of the season.
Because it’s the last home game of the year, yellow-coated stadium security will ring the field when it becomes apparent that our upset victory is in hand.
Because Gregory was in charge of training the security staff, students and alumni alike will flood through the GAPING HOLES IN THE ZONE to rush the field and hang from the goal posts.
Mike Stoops’ head will explode.
Mike Stoops’ head will be immediately booked on Letterman, Conan, and Oprah. “I know some people see this as a tragedy, but I feel that it’s a blessing in disguise. It was miserable being attached to that a-hole.”
Buoyed by the sudden lapse in coaching brain-lock, our guys will play fast and with confidence as they pull off a stunning upset of the Weenies. Toby will be held under 100 yards and be heard muttering after the game, “I shoulda stuck with baseball.” Hairball will be left to wash off the most enthusiastic tears known to mankind with his overpriced bidet.
by Kodiak on Nov 13, 2009 8:55 AM PST reply actions 3 recs
Somehow… I like this post!
STAY THIRSTY, MY FRIENDS
by Thoroughbred on Nov 13, 2009 9:19 AM PST up reply actions
I like it, except that BBDB isn’t a real strategy!
by Missing Barry on Nov 13, 2009 10:06 AM PST up reply actions
Bob Gregory (er, Barry), we get it, the BBDB isn't a real strategy.
It’s a way to describe the shit that is our defensive strategy.
by 33SwisherSweet on Nov 13, 2009 10:27 AM PST up reply actions
Well, the defense does allow them to “pass easily.”
The Lack of Mack's Imposition Attacks My Disposition.
by Spazzy Mcgee on Nov 13, 2009 11:01 AM PST up reply actions
With a high degree of regularity…
The Lack of Mack's Imposition Attacks My Disposition.
by Spazzy Mcgee on Nov 13, 2009 12:47 PM PST up reply actions
See, this is the type of language I strongly object to. It might describe our play, sure (though we’ve probably had a little too much “break” in there as opposed to “not break”), but it’s not like it’s our objective. The strategy is to stop the offense…it just isn’t working.
by Missing Barry on Nov 13, 2009 1:10 PM PST up reply actions
I'm not sure I understand the poll question
See, here’s my take. I don’t think the offense will look one bit different without Jahvid in there. Going three and out while losing three yards is going to happen with or without him.
The current conundrum is bigger than one player. Bigger, I say! It’s like a rash, or maybe one of those little vermin who multiply rapidly and are transmittted by casual contact. Kind of like crabs. Yeah, that’s it. The Cal offense has crabs. Our guys are too busy trying to control their crotch fire to manage to block, catch, throw, run, or do any of those other things.
Go Crabs!
On ATQ I'm known as JSoCal Oski
It's spelled J-etc
Avi, baby, such a great write-up as usual.
One question for you though. Why the focus on the offense when the defense has got straight owned against any team with 1/2 an offense. Hell, even against teams with crap offenses (fUCLA) and dog-shit offenses (WSU) put forth their best offensive days against our squad.
After AZ hangs another 30 spot on our D can we get an in depth analysis as to why BBDB is no bueno (apologies in advance to Barry).
by 33SwisherSweet on Nov 13, 2009 10:29 AM PST reply actions
I think the problem is that people tend to characterize zone defenses as BBDB, when, really, it’s just zone. It’s not like they mean to give up yards underneath (well, I guess maybe they don’t mind as much), but calling our defense BBDB is like calling the Tampa 2 BBDB.
Proud to hold season tickets to the only NBA team soon to be owned by a Russian oligarch.
by yellow fever on Nov 13, 2009 10:31 AM PST up reply actions
So what’s your suggestion at “fixing” the defense in the short term (i.e. no FIRE GREGORY).
In other words, Go Bears!
Attempting to pressure the QB. Zero 3 man rush sets. Rush 4 at minimum.
It’s been proven time and again that the 3 man rush doesn’t work with this personel.
by 33SwisherSweet on Nov 13, 2009 11:58 AM PST up reply actions
For the past three weeks, we’ve been rushing 4, sometimes 5 on every passing down. We’ve put 4 down linemen on 2nd and long and 3rd down situations in an attempt to put more pressure on the quarterback. It hasn’t worked yet.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Nov 13, 2009 12:00 PM PST up reply actions
REWATCH THE GAME......
we rushed 3 over 50% of the time and completion percentage is significantly higher when we rush 3. In all your analysis you have yet to break down the % of times we rushed three as opposed to 4-5. You are basing all this “we rushed more than 3” stuff on your gameday observations.
by 33SwisherSweet on Nov 13, 2009 1:01 PM PST up reply actions
I agree here that the 3 man sets should be kept to a minimum (on 3rd and excessively long, it’s still cool in my book)
All this said, Minnesota and Maryland must’ve had the worst OLs in the country because our 3-3-5 personnel absolutely crushed those teams (with LOTS of sacks)
it’s disheartening that we haven’t been able to get those coverage sacks like last year. i feel your pain. i wonder if Pac-10 OLs really took a step up this year… hard to say
STAY THIRSTY, MY FRIENDS
by Thoroughbred on Nov 13, 2009 12:03 PM PST up reply actions
it could be that the OCs in the Pac-10 really adjusted over the offseason to the 3-4 and 3-3 schemes. I BLAME DANZIG’S GOLD RUSH POST!!!!!!
STAY THIRSTY, MY FRIENDS
by Thoroughbred on Nov 13, 2009 12:04 PM PST up reply actions
See, stuff like this I can get on board with. I do not like rushing 3, either. Though I’m not a huge fan of rushing 5+ too often, either, given that we struggle to get to the QB then, too…
by Missing Barry on Nov 13, 2009 1:11 PM PST up reply actions
Agree with you here Barry. I'm not a huge fan of sending 5 all that often,but occassionally you have to do it.
Rushing 3, on the other hand, should be limited to third and more than 10 yards to go situations. Unfortunately, our primary set is a 3 man rush.
by 33SwisherSweet on Nov 13, 2009 1:43 PM PST up reply actions
For any chance at winning, our best defense will be to keep the offense on the field. This will be accomplished by a level of trickeration unseen this season, where Ludwig revisits all those nifty schemes he tried out in the first few blowouts and combines them into a Voltron-like level of offensive domination.
by sec119 on Nov 13, 2009 12:42 PM PST reply actions 2 recs
Is anyone else...
…panicking about recruiting? Look, I don’t put tons of stock into stars, Top this or That…however, it seems like there are more than a few high school heroes who are eliminating the Bears from consideration. What do you guys think?
by BlackandOldGold on Nov 13, 2009 1:41 PM PST reply actions
I don’t panic about anything until signing day.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Nov 13, 2009 2:02 PM PST up reply actions
A lot changes between now and signing day. That said, until the facilities are complete, we’re still going to get negative recruiting on that front. The UCLAs and Furds have a lot of points to make when dissuading someone from Cal
STAY THIRSTY, MY FRIENDS
by Thoroughbred on Nov 13, 2009 3:13 PM PST up reply actions
Interesting Comments On Gregory From BWNQ
In answering a question to a fan who says our D always lacks tenacity:
“A recurring theme, with the exception of 2008 and certain times in 2006, is that Cal lacks the proper mindset defensively. They go into games expecting to shut down the run, and they do it, because they believe in it. But they go into games ready to concede certain pass plays, and it shows. Gregory’s mantra is stop the run and the big play and give up the dink and dunk. That is telling your players something remarkable: “Let certain plays succeed.” As a defense, that should be anathema.
This puts tremendous pressure on the offense (which as I said annually lacks the QB to deal with that pressure). Defensive thinking has to be religion, not talk. It has to be a core belief that everything will be contested. Stopping the pass has to be given equal dignity to stopping the run.
And if it is, two things will happen. (1) You will force yourself to recruit better athletes on defense who can execute that objective. (2) Your game plan, practice, and play will reflect it."
I have to agree.

by 



















































