California Golden Blogs: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
New Blog: Anonymous Eagle covering Marquette!

Cal vs. Arizona Post-Game Thoughts

(1) Cal won.  Yay.  I'll admit, I wasn't optimistic going into the game.  I figured the safe bet was a Cal loss - a big loss.  So when the game stayed close, and the fourth quarter came around, I felt like me and the entire stadium started believing - believing that we really could win the game.  I mean, not in the theoretical sense that every game is winnable.  But the sense that yeah, if we really stuck it out, got loud, played tough, that we would will a win.  I can't remembered the stadium being that into the game in a long time.  Memorial does get loud in key situations during your typical game but last Saturday there was energy in the air, and not just noise. 

(2) Cal won thanks to its defense but Gregory still needs to go.  Frankly, I don't give a rat's ass that Cal won because of the defense.  Gregory needs to go.  The dude was still only rushing four pass rushers most downs.  Doesn't he understand that you have to pressure the QB?  Let's not forget that we only sacked their QB three times.   That is unacceptable.  I'd be willing to have anyone, even TwistNHook as our defensive coordinator.  Anybody but Gregory, please.

Star-divide

(3) I was kidding about #2.  Did I fool anyone?

(4) Cal having deep coverage issues?  I want to talk about that play where the Arizona was driving north and the Arizona QB rolled out right and threw a floater into the endzone towards an undefended WR.  The play was broken up by Mohamed but still... something didn't go right that play.  I think it's safe to assume that something didn't go right on that play when there is an undefended receiver 40 yards down the field... and the closest defender to that receiver is a.... linebacker. This play was in the first quarter with 6:25 remaining (for those of you who want to look at it).

I watched over that play a few times and in reminded me of something.  Oh yeah, it reminded me of that play against Arizona State where the ASU QB threw an 80 yard touchdown on the defense because we lost our backside safety on the deep half coverage.   There are a few differences between the plays.  ASU's intended WR was located in the slot formation to the opposite side of the field prior to the snap, and against Arizona the intended WR was located in nearside slot lined up directly on Cal's left safety (defense's left).  But on both plays, the offense's right most WR, the one to the side of Cal's left safety (defense's left), ran curl routes.  On both plays it appears as if Cal's left safety (against Arizona that was Johnson) jumped down on that outside curl route vacating his deep coverage (assuming Cal's defense was in a two-deep, which I think it was). 

I think opposing offensive coordinators are onto something.  They must be seeing that Johnson is quick to bite on  underneath routes.  In fact, I think Arizona specifically designed this play to attack Cal's left deep safety.  From the very start of the snap, Foles is looking at the intended WR straight down the field.  Arizona's decoy WR, the one running the curl, was very lazy in his route running.  He didn't put forth the effort which a WR would when he knows the ball might be coming to him.  In other words, that WR knew the ball wasn't coming to him. 

Attacking Johnson makes sense.  Of him and Cattouse, he seems to be the more aggressive of the two when it comes to reacting on the ball.  Furthermore, his range (ability to cover ground) is less than that of Cattouse.  The lesser range makes it harder for him to compensate for a blown coverage - like the one Arizona was hoping he'd blow. 

Anyways, it's hard to tell exactly what happened on that play because Versus was zooming in their cameras too much, but I'll just recap what I think happened one last time.  Cal defense in two-deep zone with underneath zones too.  Arizona wants to attack Cal's left safety.  Arizona right-most WR runs curl hoping to get Cal left safety to bite.  Cal left safety bites vacating his deep 1/2 of the field.  Arizona slow WR runs right up into the vacated zone for an easy touchdown pass.  Praise be to Gregory (Gregory is an idiot and needs to be fired) any idol except for Gregory that Mohamed got enough depth on his original coverage to make a play on the ball, and did not vacate his zone to assist in QB pursuit. 

(5) What did Gregory do?!?!  So Cal's defense goes from le suck to dope like a click of the switch.  Why?  Was I completely wrong in saying that I think Cal's defense just isn't that talented?  No, I don't think so.  I still think the defense as a whole, isn't that great, but last Saturday they just played really really well.  Players were timely to the ball - something we really haven't seen a lot.  Our pass rush was getting through on frequently enough occasion - even with just four pass rushers!!!  Oh noes!  Hell hath frozen over! 

I wish I could give more of a detailed answer, but I'm not entirely sure what Gregory did differently this week if anything at all.  I just pulled an all-nighter practicing a new mango chicken mole recipe and I'm like half asleep and drooling on my keyboard right now, and I haven't had much time to go through the defense game film to see what's up.  So I can't really say what he did differently. 

And actually, I don't think that Gregory actually did much differently.  We played our usual zones, or so it seemed to my amateur eye seated on the 50 yard line.  We pass rushed four pass rushers.  They would twist (stunt) occasionally.  The defense seemed focus on bringing the pressure right up into Foles' face rather than from the edges.  Two-deeps.  Cover 3 with Syd in center field - nothing new there.  But other than that, the gameplan seemed pretty normal.  I didn't happen to notice any corner or safety blitzes.  And for the record, we still use these blitzes.  We just don't notice them because our blitz is getting picked up instead of resulting in sacks. 

A good friend of mine, whom I brainstorm Cal Football with, did have the time to give the defensive film more of a look.  He noted that Gregory was bringing a linebacker pass rushers through the A-gaps quite frequently.  My friend noted that the linebacker would line up behind the Cal NT prior to the snap so the offense's two guards and center wouldn't know which gaps the two defenders would hit, thus causing confusion and hesitation along the Arizona OL.  I went back and looked at the film for a little bit while my chicken mole was cooking, and indeed, that seemed to be one of the strategies.

 

(6) Vereen is the better trash and poor-blocking running back of our two RBs.  By trash, I mean strewn and downed defenders, as well as the offense's own blockers.  When there is a lot of trash in the runningback's way or vicinity, or there is poor blocking, I think Vereen is a little more adept at getting the yards than Best.  Vereen has a subtle elusiveness to him that makes guys miss.  Not in the Sportscenter type of huge stutter step or juke stick (for you NCAA College Football kids) kind of way, but he just gives a little stop, shimmy, or shake to make a guy miss just enough so he can push forward for another few yards.  Best on the other hand, he's more of a big play guy that needs space.  He's more prone to pause to wait and see how the trash sorts itself out in an attempt to get that huge gain, rather than pushing forward for those few yards.  And when he does push forward, he just barrels through.

(7) Riley had his typical try-too-hard game.  Like I've said in previous posts, the kid means well and is a competitor and blah blah blah and he's trying to win.  But he's got to learn that in some situations he just has to get control over his overwhelming desire to make a play, and just be safe with the ball so the offense can try again on the next down.  I'm talking about that cross field bomb to Boateng that was INTed.  Just run with.  He could have run for a few yards of gain.  And his second INT, I get he was trying to throw it away, but sometimes you just have to take the sack too.  On the positive side, Riley did have a few good throws here and there. 

(8) I liked the opening drive playcalling. 

1st play - 21 personnel, crackback toss.  We haven't seen these crackback tosses in a while.  We used them a ton against Miami in the Emerald Bowl with a large amount of success. Although our OL doesn't seem to be the most athletic OL in past years, I like this play because it moves the point of attack away from the center of the field which is where we've been concentrating our attack for the past few games.

2nd play - 21 personnel, zone run to the weakside.  Haven't really ran weakside too much all year.  Ludwig is letting the defense know that he'll run weakside so they shouldn't be too aggressive to the strong side. 

3rd play - empty set, seam pass.  Seam passes are one of Riley's best passes.  Seam routes and four verticals should be staple plays in the Cal playbook.  We have seen these plays a fair amount this season, but perhaps maybe not enough. 

4th play - 12 personnel, playaction QB boot.  Nice way to move the QB, and get the ball to Marvin Jones for an easy completion. 

5th play - 12 personnel, masked inside zone using a TE in the slot, motion the TE back to center to cut the backside defender.  We added this play a few weeks ago. 

Anyways, I like these plays because these plays are all staple plays that Cal has used frequently in the past.  The team is familiar with them and can probably execute them very well.

(9) A little old and a little new.  Ludwig brought back a little bit of old stuff by using the crackback toss run play that we saw so much in 2008 and especially during the Emerald Bowl.  We also utilized a backside tackle pull on another play.  We haven't seen those types of blocking schemes since Dunbar was our offensive coordinator in 2006.  I liked seeing these plays getting dusted off and used because it adds some diversity to the offense.

As for the new, Cal is now using 5 WRs in its empty set.  In previous years, Cal has used primarily 11 personnel out of empty (3 WRs, 1 TE, 1 RB).  Why has there been this change?  Perhaps Ludwig feels that the receiving threat posed by the fourth and fifth WRs is greater than that of the TE and RB that would normally be in with 11 personnel.  Such reasoning seems very plausible considering that Alex Lagemann comes in as one of the 4th and 5th WRs, and is often targeted on those plays too.

(10) Ludwig seems to be attacking the middle of the field a bit more.  In the past, Cal has frequently shied away from passes over the middle of the field.  If you imagine the 3 by 3 grid of a phone dialing pad, Cal has shied away from the number 5 and number 8 - those numbers representing the short middle and mid-range middle of the field. But it seems like in Cal has been a bit more willing to make some passes over the center.  We've seen a few slants this year in an attempt to get the ball over the short middle.  Alex Lagemann, as one of the 5 WRs in our empty sets has frequently made short and medium catches over the middle.  I like this development.  Ideally, you'd really like to be able to attack all over the field (all over the 3 x 3 grid) and not regulate yourselves, or let the defense regulate you to passes only in certain sectors.

-----

Sorry for the tardiness of this post and any weirdness in it.  It's been a long day.

3 recs  |  Comment 38 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

what are your feelings on more PA QB boot (pass to FB, TE, or WR)?… it just seems this is always a gainer for us, and Riley could put his head down for a few yards as well.

Ludwig’s option call (coming out of a timeout) seems like one of the most suspect calls of the season (I think he’s done a good job overal)… I mean, maybe it would’ve gone better if Riley just pitched it (which I would’ve advocated 99 times out of 100). But I don’t think we need to get tricky at all down there. I’d prefer a roll out looking for one of our big TEs or just your basic slam run up the middle.

WHAT'S YOUR DEAL?

by Thoroughbred on Nov 19, 2009 2:27 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

The goalline option play has always been a popular call throughout all of the Tedford era. Sometimes it works. Sometimes it doesn’t. I think one of the biggest problems is that the pre-snap motion gives it away. As soon as I saw that pre-snap motion, I knew it was going to be an option. If the defense has watched film on the team from previous years, they probably knew this too. Although, if they only had watched film from the team from this year, then perhaps they didn’t know it was coming because I don’t think we’ve run that play this year yet. Anyways, I don’t like that play because Riley is careless with protecting the ball when running. He’s shown it time and time again that he has little awareness of ball security. A playaction boot looking for the TE or FB would have been nice. Or a cross-motion pass to a WR would be easy (like what Oregon State used on us to score). Or yeah, just another “run up the middle” would have been fine with me. I’m not a huge option-hater, but I just really dislike it because that means Riley is going to be holding onto the ball which is not good.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by HydroTech on Nov 19, 2009 3:19 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I mean, maybe it would’ve gone better if Riley just pitched it (which I would’ve advocated 99 times out of 100).

It would have went better if our RG could have finished his block.

by Cali49a on Nov 19, 2009 6:25 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Vereen's near-coup de grâce

I was trying to find out what it was that enabled Vereen’s TD run to work so spectacularly. I read that Vereen said “We’d been running (to the) strong side all game,” he said. “They finally flowed (in that direction) and the backside was wide open.”

Was that run something that Ludwig had been working to get all night, i.e. saving it for the right opportunity?

I would be interested to see a breakdown on why that play worked in a way I’ve seen done here in the past…

by Auricursine on Nov 19, 2009 3:06 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

Yes, I read Vereen’s quote too. While Vereen does say that the defense has been flowing to the strong side pretty heavily all night, and that he ran to the backside, that does mean the play was actually meant to go weakside (the backside). In fact, the play was actually just another strongside run. There was great blocking, and defenders were out of position because they flowed strongside too quickly, which allowed Vereen to cut back to the backside. So, in other words, the ball was supposed to strong side, but Vereen brought it back weakside (backside).

Perhaps I will break down the play when I get more time.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by HydroTech on Nov 19, 2009 3:26 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

it was the basic strong side zone running play

and the offside lb/safety finally over pursued to leave the cut back open for a big gain.

Go Bears Go

by Rocksanddirt on Nov 19, 2009 4:25 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Yes, thank you for reminding me, it was a zone running play.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by HydroTech on Nov 19, 2009 4:26 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Inside zone, specifically.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by HydroTech on Nov 19, 2009 4:28 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

In conjunction with the strongside pursuit, the block that broke this play open was by Curran, the tight end. The safety on the weakside sees the D-end cut inside the blocker (Curran), and so he bites strongly to the outside to provide containment. But when the D-end gets taken down, resulting in a giant hole for Vereen to run through with no safety downfield.

When I looked this play over, I first convinced myself that Curran got away with a giant hold, essentially tackling his man and enabling Vereen to break cleanly through the line. But as I watched it more, it seemed more lucky than anything — the AZ D-end trips on Curran’s legs and goes down… or at least that’s how I’d like to see it.

by I hate $C on Nov 19, 2009 5:17 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I noticed (imagined?) a lot of the runs were slow developing draws. Was that to pull in the speedy AZ defense and see if that opened some holes?

by turkey on Nov 19, 2009 3:13 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

Off the top of my head, I don’t remember too many draws, although we probably did run some (I’m just not remembering them). The whole point of draws are to keep the defense from just tee-ing off on the offense and getting into a really aggressive pass rush. So in other words, the defense has to play a bit more conservatively and respect the run which slows down the defense. As you suggest, if the defense is too aggressive and speedy around the edges, then yes, it can open up holes for easy runs inside. Since Cal only really draws out of shotgun, this helps slow down the pass rush when the QB is in shotgun.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by HydroTech on Nov 19, 2009 3:30 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

So how did your chicken mole turn out?

by BerkeleyChris on Nov 19, 2009 3:22 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

No matter what I do, everything tastes like chicken.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by HydroTech on Nov 19, 2009 3:27 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Something I noticed during the game was the the defense was showing some no-down linemen looks—same personnel, I would imagine, just nobody’s putting their hands in the dirt. Is that a regular part of Cal’s repertoire that I’ve just never picked up on before or is it something new to the defensive gameplan?

"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 Nov 19, 2009 3:46 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

We’ve been doing that for years. I think we started that in 2006. The purpose is that it allows the DL to get a bit more of a running start at the snap, and they can move around pre-snap to confuse the OL as to what gaps the defenders might be attacking.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by HydroTech on Nov 19, 2009 3:58 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I recall as far back as 2003 during the Insight Bowl that the DL has this type of movement pre-snap.

by Cali49a on Nov 19, 2009 6:35 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah, that sounds right. Just something I had never noticed before.

"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 Nov 19, 2009 6:52 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

regarding number 4

it was a broken play, but foles is a strong thrower.

foles was flushed from his quick read of an out that was covered, Mohammed stayed with his man (the TE).

Go Bears Go

by Rocksanddirt on Nov 19, 2009 4:20 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

I’m not so sure about your interpretation of the play. I didn’t see an out on the video.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by HydroTech on Nov 19, 2009 4:27 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I just looked over the play again, there is no out.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by HydroTech on Nov 19, 2009 4:32 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

I’m not sure why everyone keeps saying the intended receiver was a TE. It was #84, Terrell Turner, a WR. There was no TE on the field on that play. The offense had 4 WRs, and 1 Rb on the field. Perhaps we’re talking about different plays?

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by HydroTech on Nov 19, 2009 4:46 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

he ran like a TE. I didn't look closely at the players.

I think it’s only me disagreeing with you….

The one where Mohamed broke up a pass in the end zone? fairly early in the game?

Go Bears Go

by Rocksanddirt on Nov 19, 2009 5:02 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

That was not a TE

by Cali49a on Nov 19, 2009 6:43 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

maybe that's not where the quick pass was going, but he set his feet

and someone was right on him, and he scrambled to his right.

Go Bears Go

by Rocksanddirt on Nov 19, 2009 4:29 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

Foles didn’t even really have time to set his feet. It wasn’t even a quick pass play. Foles took a five step drop. This play was meant to go deep.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by HydroTech on Nov 19, 2009 4:32 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

five step drop is not going deep.

though it is compared to what they usually do, which is three or snap throw from the gun.

Go Bears Go

by Rocksanddirt on Nov 19, 2009 5:03 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Judging from the fact that Foles was in shotgun, and took a five step drop from gun, he was definitely getting depth to buy time to go deep.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by HydroTech on Nov 19, 2009 5:36 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Re: (7)

Riley’s 2nd INT I don’t think he should have taken the sack, I think he made the right choice in throwing it away, the problem was he Longshore’d the ball (i.e. threw it off his back foot while falling backwards). He should have tried to go out of bounds with it if possible, or go towards the feet of one of his WRs…

You can tell he panics prior to the snap and was going to throw it away regardless, because their three LBs show blitz and he starts moving backwards before the snap even got to him…

Maybe stay in and take the hit, but the attempt to throw it away was a good one, just don’t do it falling off your back foot

Undefeated in Southern California since Oct. 2009...

by CruzinBears on Nov 19, 2009 5:13 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

Well, I agree, somewhat.

Ideally, if the QB can’t make a pass, he should (in order of preference): (1) throw the ball away; (2) take the sack. In the the play that we’re talking about, it seems to me like #1 wasn’t even an option as since the blitz got to him so quickly. QBs have to make that quick decision between #1 and #2. Sometimes it is too risky to throw the ball away because (a) the QB might not be in a position to get the ball out of bounds; (b) the QB might be in a position where if he attempts to do anything else but protect the ball he’s going to fumble; © he might be between the tackles with no receiver around to ground the ball at. Riley was confronted with situation (a). Gotta just take the sack. I understand he was trying to get the better outcome… but that outcome just seemed so unachievable for a guy in his position.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by HydroTech on Nov 20, 2009 12:25 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Re: (10)
(10) Ludwig seems to be attacking the middle of the field a bit more.

I’ve noticed this as well. I think this is directly related to having personnel more adapted to making catches over the middle (i.e. Lagemann). Lagemann has a thicker build than our other receivers and can take the hits from the linebackers playing the shallow zones. This will definitely help the offense in the future – these are the easiest throws to make for a quarterback.

I remember a quote by Tedford following the ‘07 season where he basically said Cal didn’t throw over the middle to its wideouts (Jackson, Jordan, and Hawkins) because they were concerned about injuries to/health of the players. Of those three, I can only remember Hawkins ever making catches over the middle.

by I hate $C on Nov 19, 2009 5:25 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

Understandable… Standing on a scale together, Jackson and Jordan could barely tip 200!

WHAT'S YOUR DEAL?

by Thoroughbred on Nov 19, 2009 6:37 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Wanting to catch the ball and willing to get hit while catching a ball going over the middle is a mentality. Lagemann has it. I recall him being quoted as saying he likes going over the middle to make the tough catches.

by Cali49a on Nov 19, 2009 6:51 PM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Yeah, I remember him saying that too.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by HydroTech on Nov 20, 2009 12:21 AM PST up reply actions   0 recs

Ur friend is correct. Chris Little #4 lined up behind Tipoti/Alualu & either busted through the A gap or dropped back into coverage. Little’s presence was especially pronounced in 3rd & long situations along w/ Jarred Price from the outside.

by solarise on Nov 19, 2009 11:59 PM PST reply actions   0 recs

I think opposing offensive coordinators are onto something. They must be seeing that Johnson is quick to bite on underneath routes.

I don’t know which one of our safeties it was, but this comment reminded me a lot of one of the TD’s WSU scored. I analzyed it in one of the blogs – we were in a cover 3 with 5 guys in the intermediate zone (so only 3 pass rushers), which allows the intermediate guys to play kind of like a tampa 2…anyways our middle deep safety came up too short to guard a guy running a post, when our middle linebacker had that responsibility and had it covered. If the guy got deper it would have been the safety’s responsibility, but basically our safety moved up way too early on him. It didn’t ultimately matter in the play – the play attacked one of our deep outside zones and the safety wouldn’t have gotten there either way, but it was just a side issue I noticed that was bad.

by Missing Barry on Nov 20, 2009 7:48 AM PST 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
P1_marshawn_small
DBD 3.18.10 Time To Vote For Daily Cal's Best Of Berkeley
Boosmall_small
Cal Baseball Runs Out of Runs, Houston Wins 12-9
Cms_small
"Study" Claims Cal has Zero Graduation Rate in Basketball
Calflag_small
DBD 3.17.10 CGB Market Research--Fill Out A Form!
Small
Will Cal beat Duke?
Small
RemorsefulBruinBabe Enters The Ring.  Again.
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!

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

SPONSORS

SBNation.com Recent Stories

Kansas State forward Jamar Samuels, right, is congratulated by teammate Curtis Kelly, left, during the second half of an NCAA college basketball game at the Big 12 tournament Thursday, March 11, 2010, in Kansas City, Mo. Kansas State defeated Oklahoma State 83-64.(AP Photo/Charlie Neibergall)

Kansas State Dominates From Beginning To End, Gets BYU In Second Round

Saint Mary's center Omar Samhan (50) grabs a rebound as Hawaii center Paul Campbell looks on in the second half of an NCAA college basketball game Friday, Dec. 25, 2009, at the Diamond Head Classic in Honolulu. Saint Mary's defeated Hawaii 84-75. (AP Photo/Eugene Tanner)

Samhan's 29 Points Leads St. Mary's In First Round Win Over Richmond, 80-71

Baylor coach Scott Drew celebrates a basket late in the second half of an NCAA college basketball game against Texas at the Big 12 tournament Thursday, March 11, 2010, in Kansas City, Mo. Baylor defeated Texas 86-67. (AP Photo/Reed Hoffmann)

Baylor Pulls Away From Sam Houston State Late For 68-59 Win

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