I think we got some arrogant thoughts in our head after the first 3 games. There were many questions marks going into the season that seemed to turn into exclamation points by the time Minnesota rolled around. But, unfortunately, it appears that success at the early part of the season had less to do with Cal’s questions being answered and more to do with low quality opponents. So, I think that led to a thought of over achievement.

I agree with T-bred re: facilities and Cal’s ability to take it to the next level. When these are done, the high profile recruits should come rolling in so long as Cal’s not known as the #12 preseason team that ends up 8-4. Additionally, and I think norcalnick pointed this out in my fanpost, $ for better assitants/retaining assistants will be freed up with the completion of said facilities. Thus, we’ll have better players and better coaches. The difference in salary between Cal’s HC and all assistant coaches is one of the highest in the nation. 3-5 loss seasons should be expected until this happens.

I wholeheartedly agree with BwF observations of the defense and the play not to lose mentality. This is football, and I want the crazy sumsabitches on my team even if that means they get beat for the 99 yard pass play once in awhile. Run the ball up the middle instead of centering it. Go for it on 4th and inches. Sure, you’ll get burned once in awhile…but I think you’ll end up with better results in the end. I should note that Vereen did try that crazy HB pass play out of the Wild Grizzly at the end of the ASU game – but I think that was borderline stupid. Too aggressive.

The Bay Area needs to care more. They love a winner. The A’s drew VERY well when they had winning teams. I say this because I believe this will lead to more money going into the program (sellouts, higher ticket prices), a general crazy college football atmosphere (helps recruiting and motivation/pride of the players), and accountability for the program. It would be helpful if there was a crystal clear plan on how the Jones’ (family of four) could go check out a Cal game on a particular Saturday in the fall (how to get there, where to park, where to buy tickets, etc). It shouldn’t be a treasure hunt. Bay Area folks have enough going on to make a weekend football game an adventure. On a related note, it feels as if the media coverage is “meh” regarding the Cal Bears with respect to the NFL. I’m not sure if it’s because the Bay Area is an NFL area, if YOkanes et al. are middle of the pack kind of reporters, or if the program restricts access. Does KGO have a Jeff Tedford show once a week during the morning commute? Could we have a an open scrimmage or two at PacBell Park to bring in more peninsula interest? I don’t know, but it feels like I shouldn’t be the one coming up with these ideas.

Lastly, I’d like to thank you, Avinash, for running a piece like this when it feels as if there are many Cal sympathizers out there. It’s not easy to write something against the grain, especially when it involves a high class person who’s done wonders for the program. He’s the University’s highest paid employee, the 8th highest paid coach in the nation, the #2 paid Pac10 coach so it’s OK to criticize him. It’s not like we’re picking on the underpaid Mike Riley here who has minimal resources. Personally, I hope Tedford stays forever but I worry less than desirable outputs in the years to come could prematurely lead to his ousting.

Despite the HUGE victories this year in Pasadena and Palo Alto, as well as some other nice moments along the way, this was a disappointing season to be sure. But it’s not one that changes my outlook on Cal football, which remains as satisfied and optimistic as ever. I firmly believe that in Jeff Tedford, we maybe don’t have the “quarterback guru” we once thought him to be, but we nonetheless do have the best head coach—the best chief executive of a major college football program both for its entertainment and educational value—in the Pac-10. I also can’t imagine a better fit for our beloved University; this guy was born to coach at Cal.

Taking a longer-term perspective, this program appears to have plateaued on the field—not necessarily permanently, but at least for now. This was perhaps inevitable after the meteoric rise in its first three years, which raised our expectations to the point where we can actually be disappointed at the prospect of yet another winning season to be capped off by yet another trip to a bowl game. I’m too lazy to do the math, but I’m pretty sure that Tedford has accumulated more wins in just bowl games and Big Games than Cal football amassed IN TOTAL during my four years as a student during the late-Kapp and early-Snyder eras. Those who suffered through Holmoe, Gilby, Theder, et al., no doubt can sympathize.

Our frustration at the current plateau is compounded by the fact the Bears never quite reached our coveted summit—the Rose Bowl—with that initial meteoric rise. Surely, one would think, teams featuring Rodgers, Lynch, Jackson, and/or Best—at least one of them—would win a trip to Pasadena. Unfortunately, an injury here, a misplaced toe there, and the really bad timing of sharing a conference with the juggernaut that has been USC, have all conspired to keep us just shy of the promised land.

But a plateau is not the same thing as a regression. Arizona under Dick Tomey and ASU under Bruce Snyder—and maybe USC under Pete Carroll? (only time will tell)—those are programs in recent years that have gone backwards, not just lost forward momentum. There are other examples around the country: Florida State under Bowden, Tennessee under Fullmer, and so on. College football is cyclical, and if this period (2007 to 2009) is a “down” cycle for Cal, I’ll take it.

I think one thing that hasn’t been mentioned here is the revolving door at offensive coordinator the past several years. Take a look at this:

2002 – George Cortez (7-5)
2003 – George Cortez (8-6)
2004 – George Cortez (10-2)
2005 – Mike Dunbar (8-4)
2006 – Mike Dunbar (10-3)
2007 – Jim Michalzik/Jeff Tedford (7-6)
2008 – Frank Cignetti (9-4)
2009 – Andy Ludwig (9-4 or 8-5)

While I know that a lot of people consider it “Tedford’s offense” I still think that football is a game of “systems.” And coordinators are the ones that implement a system. If you take a look at Cortez’s three teams, they each got progressively better; likewise in Dunbar’s second year.

Since then, we’ve had three mediocre years with three different offensive coordinators. I think that if we can keep Ludwig around for a couple more years, we might be looking at an 11 or 12 win season. The offense hasn’t had any consistency at the coordinator position for several years. I honestly think that this team would have been better had Cignetti stuck around for this year. I hope that we can keep Ludwig for the next couple years so that the youngsters on the O-line (Summers-Gavin, Siddoway, Brazinski, Crosthwaite) and the young talent we have at QB/RB (Sweeney, Hinder, Yarnway) can not only buy into the system, but own it from day one. This would be a huge win for the program.

Watching this team year after year, I’m starting to think that it’s possible to consistently win eight or nine games while having something systemically wrong with your program.

If consistently winning 8 or 9 games, consistently graduating players, and having a highly respectable NCAA APR score is “systematically wrong,” I don’t want to be right.

Am I disappointed that we didn’t live up to the hype? H, e, double hockey sticks yes. And I’m disgusted with the way we lost our 4 games, especially the UW game. But to say there is something “systematically wrong” with the program? That’s the sort of thing you say about programs that are hopeless on the field and/or even worse in the classroom.

I think we have two competing issues here:

#1: Was this a disappointing season? That of course depends on your expectations. I think Tedford and the players would say that this year is a disappointing season. And I anticipated more than a Poinsettia Bowl. So I think it’s fair to say the season was a disappointment, although not a massive one. And as others have pointed out, if we lost the same number of games, but in a non-blowout fashion, maybe it would be different

#2: Is there something systematically wrong with our program?

Statements like these is why I hate Wilner (or perhaps to be more fair, the state of sports journalism). Wilner doesn’t analyze, and he has the attention span of a fruit fly. When Cal beats three crappy teams to start the season: ROSE BOWL BABBY!!1. When they lose three games to teams that were better than them and one other game there’s “something systematically wrong.” There’s no nuance, no in between. Things are either great or broken. He doesn’t do any analysis. He just looks at W’s and L’s and comes up with the most rabble-rousing conclusion. His goal isn’t to be correct. His goal is to be controversial. Maybe I should just accept that he is what he is and move on, but I find it inherently dishonest and unprofessional.

Also, no. There isn’t anything systematically wrong with Cal football. In 7 years we’ve had one disappointing season, and 1 very mildly disappointing season. And we’re still recruiting very well.

I think you need three things to win the game: talent, heart, and a little luck. As much as X’s and O’s matter (sorry Hydro), if the team motivation just isn’t that high, the team will not win games. I feel like this team lost that heart in its losses once things started going poorly in each game. Remember practice reports at the beginning of the year when team leaders would yell “Pac 10 Champs!!” and the rest would respond “That’s us!” Can you imagine how demoralizing it is when that no longer is an option? I think that was a huge error on the part of the coaches. You focus on your next opponent and schoolwork, and that is it. What season? What Rose Bowl?

Anyway, once that initial self doubt creeps in, it can manifest itself in the physical game: that little rush of “I think I can” adrenaline is gone, and you’re a quarter of a second slower off the line, or just not ferocious enough rushing the QB or making a tackle. Whether the team will admit it or not, the lack of confidence in ones’ own ability will damage the chance to win more than any playcall. It’s like the genius student who really just doesn’t give a shit or is unmotivated in life because he’s never been with a girl. All that brains for nothing because “what’s the point?”

We didn’t lose to UW because UW was that good, we lost to UW because OREGON was that good, pounded the shit out of our “Pac 10 Champs!” so bad the team knew they weren’t good enough for the Rose Bowl. Sure, if we had total beasts at every position, maybe the talent is just enough to overcome a team like UW or OSU. But without heart, like those scrappy, untalented little 2002 and 2003 Tedford teams, we’ll never overcome that plateau.

In the end you get years like 2009: passable talent, not much heart, moderate luck. 8-4. San Diego.