California Golden Blogs: An SB Nation Community

Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: MLB Trade Deadline: Who is available around MLB?

Cal @ Minnesota Post-Game Thoughts (With Bonus EWU Thoughts)

Before I get to the Minnesota post-game thoughts, here are a few EWU post-game thoughts that came to mind after I wrote Cal vs. Eastern Washington University Post-Game Thoughts:

... (see link above for the earlier thoughts from Cal vs. EWU) ...

(11) Cal ran the ball using man blocking and a pulling backside guard to the weakside of the offense for the first time ... since at least 2006.  I've only really started to truly analyze and chart Cal's offensive plays since 2006.  Since I've been doing that, I've noticed that one of Cal's biggest tendencies is to run the ball towards the strength of the formation.  Thus, if the tight end is to the right, Cal runs to the right.  If the tight end is to the left, Cal runs to the left.  Cal broke this tendency a bit in 2008 under offensive coordinator Frank Cignetti.  In 2008, Cal began running weakside using its zone blocking scheme, but still would only run its man blocking scheme to the strong side.  However, against EWU, I noticed Cal ran the ball using its man blocking scheme to the weakside of the formation a few times.  This is significant because it breaks a tendency and gives the Cal offense more diversity.  This new addition to the Cal offense is probably an addition implemented by new offensive coordinator Andy Ludwig.

Star-divide

(12) Cal ran the ball from shotgun using the trap for the first time since 2006!   Note that this statement has a definitiveness to it, as compared to the statement of the previous point.  Under offensive coordinator Mike Dunbar in 2006, Cal implemented a shotgun trap running play which utilized a pulling backside tackle.  Cal used this play quite a bit as since Nate Longshore was the quarterback in 2006 and he did not have the speed to be an adequate zone read threat to run the zone read.  The fact that Ludwig is running this play now doesn't mean that Ludwig thinks Riley doesn't have enough speed, but is probably running this play to show more diversity.  Now, defenses who scout Cal will realize that they have to be aware of the zone read and trap plays - two different running schemes from shotgun and not just one.

(13) Riley's "QB keeper" was a zone read.  Much hooplah has been made of Riley's scamper.  A lot of people are calling it a "QB keeper."  The play was actually a zone read.  I think for accuracy purposes, people should call it a zone read.  By calling it a "QB keeper" it suggests that the play was meant to have Riley run the ball all along.  That is simply not true.  On that play, the QB has the option of handing the ball off, or keeping the ball and running himself.  He has an option.  It is not a predetermined decision.  A true "QB keeper" would be a QB draw, for example.  Cal ran a QB draw against Minnesota to gain a critical 1st down conversion on a 3rd down. 

(14) Ludwig's was probably using "new" plays against EWU to try them out against a live opponent.  I was surprised to see the shotgun trap and man blocking to the weakside of the formation against EWU.  I had figured that most of the wrinkles would have been unveiled against Maryland.  I was wrong.  Clearly, Ludwig is still tinkering with things.  I believe he chose to run those "new" plays against EWU because it represented an opportunity to try them out against a live (non-Cal defense) defense, and because the risk of trying those plays against EWU was much lower against a better opponent.  You don't want to try out new plays against a talented opponent defense when the game is on the line.  But EWU presented an opportunity to try out "new" plays against a somewhat talented opponent defense when the game is somewhat on the line.  That is better than trying the "new" plays against Cal's own 3-4 defense which would be less insightful for Ludwig since the 3-4 is not in use by many opponents that Cal will face.

 

Here are my Minnesota thoughts.  I apologize for the tardiness of my posts and the lack of analysis this season thus far.  School is keeping a lot busier than I expected this semester.

Now for some Minnesota thoughts:

(1) Minnesota's new stadium is pretty nice.  It's shiny.  It's new.  It is really easy to get in and out of the stadium.  Their replay screen is like the size of Dwinelle.  Their press box is the size of the entire west side of Memorial Stadium.  But the stadium only holds 50,000 people.   My biggest gripe about the stadium is that the fans at the open end of the stadium cannot see the big-ass replay screen.  In fact, Minnesota's stadium is much like U$C's Coliseum in that the visiting fans get shafted with seats where they can't see the replay screen because they're sitting behind the replay screen.

Dscn4552_medium

Cal's replay screen: about the size of the red "fan favorites" ad.

 

Dscn4578_medium

But Minnesota did have a small replay screen on the other end of the stadium for those unlucky fans who can't see the big-ass replay screen that they were sitting behind.

Dscn4550_medium

The Cal section was just to the right of the replay screen on the upper deck (and behind the replay screen).

Dscn4554_medium

Cal players warming up on the field before the game.

 

Dscn4583_medium

Minnesota players coming out of their tunnel with a fireworks display.  Note the pretty empty student section in the endzone (the people all wearing gold).

 

(2) Minnesota band sucks and let the terrorists win.  First of all, you couldn't hear them.  Apparently, their band plays with dynamics or something, meaning they play loud some times and soft at other times.  The problem is, when you play sort in an open-ended stadium that doesn't keep in the sound, you can't hear anything.  I could barely hear anything they were playing.  Even the Minnesota fans around me couldn't partake in singing their fight song and clapping because they couldn't hear the music.  Sad.  Second, the Minnesota band sucks because they let the American flag touch the ground.  I don't know a lot about flag bearing stuff, but the one thing I do know is that you're not supposed to let the American flag touch the ground AT ALL.  It's like one of the biggest disgraces you can ever commit.  You might as well kill yourself after such a terrorist-like act.  Minnesota's band let the terrorists win.


Dscn4580_medium

YOU'RE LETTING THE TERRORISTS WIN! 

(3) Cal fans were pretty quiet.  I get it.  You're outnumbered 1,000 to 50,000.  You don't feel like it's worth it to make noise when there are so few of you.  You don't want to be that loud dude who annoys the home crowd around him because he's making noise for his team's defense.  So, you don't yell on defense.  It was rather pathetic how Cal fans were very content with not making noise.  I was in the Cal section.  Aside from my group, only perhaps 10% of the other Cal fans around me were making noise on Cal defense.  Sad.

(4) Minnesota fans were pretty nice.  They kept to themselves.  Nobody went out of their way to trash talk, but they also didn't go out of their way to say hi either.  Only three Minnesota fans talked to me.  The first guy was the ticket scanner dude as you walked into the stadium.  He asked me how much I thought Cal was going to win by (how dare he assume that just because I'm a Cal fan that I think Cal is going to win!).  I said we'd win by 14.  He said that we'd win by 6.  The second Minnesota fan that talked to me was the middle-aged man sitting in front of me.  He remarked how Minnesota looked slow in the first quarter.  I told him the Pac-10 is just really fast.  Faster than the SEC fast.  He admitted that Jahvid Best is like nothing he's ever seen before.  The third Minnesota fan that talked to me was an older gentleman at a restaurant.  He saw me with my Cal shirt on and asked me if I had taken a bus to Minnesota.  Um, jet planes do exist nowadays....   I politely said that I flew into Minneapolis.  After the game, while my friends and I were waiting in a short line to get carded as we were entering a bar, a U$C fan walks by.  The U$C prick sees the Cal contingent, he takes off his U$C hat, and points to the logo on it and says as he walks by: "This is what it's all about!"  The bouncer checking our IDs said in response to his other bouncer buddy: "I bet you he has absolutely no affiliation with U$C whatsoever."  The bouncer was probably right.  Man, I go to Minnesota and I can't get away from your typical asshat arrogant U$C fan.

(5) It's still a mystery as to whether Cal is signaling in two plays one after another or if Riley is forgetting the signals.  In my Cal vs. EWU Post-Game Thoughts, I discussed whether or not Cal was sending in two plays one after another or if Riley was forgetting signals.  I'm embarrassed to say that I'm still not sure.  Being that I can pick some of our signs, you would think that I would be able to figure this out.  I guess im jus dum.  Well, in my defense, some new signals have been added that I'm still trying to figure out.  However, while at Minnesota, I did notice one instance where numbers were sent in to Riley, he stepped into the huddle for literally one second (not nearly enough time to read out the playcall), then stepped back out of the huddle, looked to the sideline and got more signals from the sidelines.  The thing is, that he got the same signals both times!  I am positive of this as since I was watching the signal QBs, I saw them both send in the same number the first time (for example, they both signaled in the number "34"), and they both sent in the same number the second time.  Jonathan Okanes seemed to disagree with my conclusion that Riley was forgetting the signals.  Tedhead94 on BearInsider reported that:

[Okanes] said he had heard nothing of the sort and had no idea where it came from. He found it implausible that this would be the case.

Well, it is plausible.  It happened against Minnesota.  And it has happened in the past.  In fact, it happens quite often.  When Longshore was the QB in 2006, he'd sometimes, although pretty rarely, would forget signals.  I don't really blame any of the QBs.  A lot goes on in the huddle between plays.  Guys are talking.  They're talking about what the defense is doing.  They're checking things with each other.  Sometimes they're talking to the QB.  The QB is getting signals from the sidelines, making sure the right personnel are in on the play, he's checking ball location (to decide whether the play needs to be flipped or not), he's looking at the playclock.  A lot goes through his mind in those 25 seconds and it's easy to forget the signals that were just sent in to you two seconds earlier. 

Interesting story time: In my Cal vs. Maryland Post-Game Thoughts, I talked about how the signal QB must make sure that his signals are crisp and clear to the QB on the field.  If the signals aren't clear, the QB on the field might ask for the signals again because he couldn't understand them which burns the playclock and runs the risk of a delay of game.  Or, if the signals aren't clear, the QB on the field can mis-read the signals and run the wrong play completely.  This happened on occasion in 2006 - perhaps as much as once or twice a game.  One day at a 2006 practice, I was working with the QBs.  During this particular period they were having a meeting with the offensive coordinator (in 2006 it was Mike Dunbar).  They would talk about signals, and plays, and practice sending signals to each other.  Dunbar explained to the QBs that sometimes they would run the completely wrong play because Longshore would mis-read the signals being sent into him from the sidelines.  Dunbar described how it was quite the what-the-heck? kind of a moment when he sees the offense line up in a completely different formation than what he called.  Naturally, Longshore would playfully tease the other QBs about being sloppy with their signals, and the other QBs would tease Longshore about not being able to read their signs.  The QBs understood their mistake and despite their playfulness with each other, they'd take the mistake seriously.  So for the rest of the period they'd practice quizzing each other on plays and rendering the appropriate signals to each other.

Bottom line, QBs do forget signals that they just saw two seconds earlier.  It happens.  It's plausible.  But it's also plausible that Riley is BOTH forgetting the signals and receiving two signals (one after the other).  It's also plausible that Cal does not signal in two signals one after the other (if they even do that) in away games because it is harder to implement against a hostile crowd.

(6) Cal uses the signal system to send in plays rather than the number/wristband system because it allows offensive coordinator Andy Ludwig to create the perfect play for the situation at hand.  Venerable commentator and movie-maker Danzig and I had a conversation about this in my Cal vs. Maryland Post-Game Thoughts.  It turns out, that there was actually discussion of this on the ESPN broadcast early in the game.  The ESPN talking heads were discussing how Minnesota now signals in the play, instead of using the number/wristband system that former Minnesota offensive coordinator, Mike Dunbar, preferred.  Their explanation was exactly the very conclusion that Danzig and I had theorized:

HydroTech: [Using the signal system instead of the number system] gives the offense coordinator freedom to truly make up a play on the fly that perfectly fits the situation on hand, that isn’t one of the 150 plays on the wristband.

The wristband that QBs use only holds 150 plays (at least, that's what they held back in 2006, perhaps the coaches have squeezed in more).  At first thought, 150 plays sounds like a lot.  But then once you consider that some proportion of those plays are goalline plays, some are short yardage plays, some are medium yardage plays, and some are long yardage plays... you can easily fill up that 150 play wristband and perhaps even two wristbands.  This is why the signal system is superior to the number/wristband system.  I like the signal system for this very reason, but am still concerned about other teams picking our signs.

(7) Decker had a great game against Cal's defense.  Not too surprising.  Cal countered Minnesota's passing attack with its usual zone defense.  Decker would slip behind linebackers and find the seams, and Webber would throw the ball high above the zones and let Decker jump and catch the ball.  Easy.  Not too much Cal can do there but get a faster pass rush and have the over-the-top defenders blow up the Decker.  I'll have to review the game but it looked like Cal put Hagan on Decker in goalline situations where Cal is more likely to play man defense.  That makes sense since Hagan is taller than Syd.

(8) Cal's kickoffs suck.  No explanation needed here.  Oh, there was a slight breeze in the stadium.  It wasn't constant, but it would gust to a modest 10 mph on occasion.  It was going from right to left, for those of you watching things on your TV screen.  Thus, Cal was kicking into the wind quite a bit.  But I still don't think this was the reason for the short kickoffs.

(9) Cal had only 10 players on the field for a punt return.  This error is on Alamar; the coach responsible for assembling players on the launch pad (the blue pad on the Cal sideline where players going in and out of the field congregate TO MAKE SURE THEY ARE ALL THERE), the player who wasn't on the field, and Syd'Quan Thompson for not counting the players in front of him.  I spotted this error from my nosebleed seats about 150 yards away from the action.  I mean, I spotted this error, but two coaches and multiple players didn't spot this error???  (Sigh................)

(10) Minnesota played piped in music on 3rd downs to alert the home crowd of the 3rd down and to get them to make more noise - and it worked great.  Maybe Cal should consider doing this.  Honestly, I think the whole hands clapping thing is kinda lame.  It doesn't really alert the home crowd (aside from the students) of an impending third down and it doesn't get the stadium loud enough fast enough.  Often, the noise of the Memorial will not peak before the other team gets the play off.  But when Minnesota played that adrenaline inducing rock music, as soon as the second down play ended short of a first down and it was third down, the crowd got loud VERY FAST.  I urge Cal to consider using this tactic as it is superior to what Cal does right now.  Also, the other beneficial thing about pumping in music on third downs while the opponent's offense is in the huddle, is that the piped in noise does the work for the crowd initially.  The crowd gets tired making noise for 20 straight seconds from when the opponent's offense is in the huddle to when the ball is snapped.  By playing piped in music for the first 10 seconds, not only alerts the fans to be loud, but does the work for the fans and keeps the fans less tired so that when the music does go off, the fans can maintain their loudness until the ball is snapped.

(11) Jahvid Best just might win the Heisman.  In my Cal vs. EWU Post-Game Thoughts post, I explained why I didn't think Best wasn't going to win the Heisman.  My reasons were that he just wasn't getting enough yardage.  Well, ignore that last post because everything has changed.  Against Minnesota, again, he didn't have a spectacular yardage day (131 yards is great by not spectacular), but he did have 5 touchdowns!  Those 5 touchdowns, in a close game, on national TV with the nation watching, really boosted Best's chances at winning the Heisman and made up for his lack of insane yardage gained.  So, yeah, Best is back in the race as a serious top 2 candidate.  If he can't get 2000 rush yards by the end of the regular season, if he has 20 TDs or more (preferably 25-30 TDs) , he'll still be right up there.  Cal needs to not lose more than 1 game too.

(12) Alualu massacred Minnesota's right tackle (#71).  At the game itself, it was hard to tell who was getting to Minnesota's QB so much.  But after seeing the highlight reel, it's plain as day that Alualu was pwning #71 and pwning him bad.  Alualu just had too much speed and quickness to be stopped by the gigantic and largely overweight 365 pound right tackle.  When will the Big-12, and Big-10 learn that just having big fat dudes doesn't always work?  The players need to be athletic too!

There was one play in the game where Alualu got chipped by the Minnesota RT, then got cutblocked by the Minnesota runningback but still made a sack.  That was a beautiful play!  Every single day, the defensive lineman practice shedding cut blocks from the runningbacks.  I can still hear former Cal Defensive Line Coach Delgado saying to the players "violent hands!  Push the back away from you!"  Current Defensive Line Coach Lupoi still says the same thing to the players nowadays.  "Violent hands!"  Alualu's form on shedding that cut block was perfect!  You want to get low, and use your hands and arms to push the RB away and/or into the ground, and keep the RB's cut block from your knees.  Most of the defensive lineman are afraid of getting cut blocked and having their knees hyper-extended backwards.  Even after being taught the technique to defend themselves, they still don't like getting cut blocked and many would rather just sort of give in to getting cut down and not truly defending themselves to get through the cut block and made a tackle.  It's nice to see Alualu shedding those cut blocks.  That was a truly textbook shedding.  Take a look at it again if you have the chance.

(13) 1st Quarter playcalling was incredibly diverse.  I really liked the first quarter playcalling because it featured a wide variety of plays.  As for the very first play of the game being a runningback pass?  Well, I'm okay with it.  I do not necessarily think that it is a "tell" that it was a trick play merely because Jahvid Best wasn't in on the play.  What really did make it a "tell," and I knew it was a halfback pass the moment Vereen went into motion, was because Vereen motioned and maintained his depth in the backfield so as to give himself more buffer room from the defense to throw the ball.  Furthermore, Riley's pass went backwards which is another "tell" of a double pass play because all QB passes are meant to purposely go forward so if they are dropped they are incompletions and not fumbles.  In other words, pretty much the only time a QB pass goes backwards is if the offense is setting up the double pass.  And finally, if you didn't know it was a double pass play from Vereen's motion, his incredible depth, and Riley's backwards pass, it should have been obvious because Vereen was not aggressive in moving the ball forward. 

(14) One of Cal's new goalline running scheme utilizes a pulling playside guard.  This is new.  I have NEVER seen Cal utilize a playside pulling guard since I've been closely studying the Cal Football offense since 2006.  Cal has always used a pulling backside guard.  In 2008, under offensive coordinator Frank Cignetti, Cal would sometimes use a playside pulling tackle on toss sweeps, however, Cal has never used any sort of pulling playside offensive lineman on non-toss plays since 2006.  So this is another new wrinkle installed by Ludwig.

(15) Sofele's hit was legal and Tepper's "hold" was legal.  Defenders must give the punt returner an opportunity to catch the ball.  Sofele gave the punt returner that opportunity - for about .1 seconds - then blew him up.  Perfectly legal.  I know that .1 seconds isn't a lot of time and that's why the refs probably threw the flag, but that was a legal hit.  .1 seconds is opportunity.  It's .1 seconds of opportunity.  Unless the NCAA rules committee wants to put in a definition for "opportunity," then any opportunity should qualify as opportunity.  And as for Tepper's "hold," there was definitely holding in the layman non-football sense, but no holding in the football sense.

(16) Syd'Quan Thompson anticipated some run plays very well and perhaps had figured out a tell.  When players scout their opponents, they look for team tendencies, playcalling tendencies, and player tendencies.  Player tendencies can be things such as tipping off whether the play is a run or pass.  Based on how Syd seemed to anticipate run plays a few times during the game, it's possible he had figured out a tell either prior to the game or during the game.

(17) Cal has diversified their running schemes.  In the past, Cal has utilized about 3 different basic running schemes (zone running, two different types of man blocking).  Cal rarely ran its man schemes weakside.  But now, after seeing three games under Ludwig we've seen new additions such as: (a) pulling playside guards to the strong side; (b) pulling playside tackles to the strong side; (c) pulling playside guards to the weak side; and (d) shotgun traps with a backside pulling tackle.  Not to mention that it looks like the zone read, and QB draw will be seeing more reps in Cal's playcalling.  Of course, Cal's zone running is seeing heavy use.  While off the top of my head I can't remember Cal running its zone weakside this year (and I've been so busy with school I haven't had much time to chart the games), this is something Cal did a lot last year, and I'm sure it still remains in the playbook and will be used.  Let's not forget these end arounds and fly sweeps too.  So in other words, in prior years Cal's running schemes were fairly few (although potent).  Now Cal has many more running schemes - and perhaps just as potent. 

Let's just list them out right now: (1) backside pulling guards pulling strongside; (2) playside pulling guards pulling strongside; (3) playside pulling tackles pulling strongside; (4) backside pulling guards pulling weakside; (5) outside/stretch zone strongside; (6) outside/stretch zone weakside; (7) shotgun zone read; (8) QB draw; (9) shotgun trap with backside pulling tackle; (10) end arounds; (11) fly sweeps; (12) under center draws; and (13) shotgun draws; and (14) toss sweeps.

I've never seen such a diverse Cal rushing attack before.  Not under Dunbar.  Not under Tedford.  And not under Cignetti.  Plain and simple, Ludwig has really diversified Cal's rushing attack.

(18) Riley played pretty well.  He made a number of great throws.  Off the top of my head I can only remember two really bad throws - both of which were almost INTed.  The most egregious was when the offense was driving from left to right (on the TV screen) at 0:24 in the 3rd quarter.  Riley faked playaction left, stumbled on the fake, then threw a late pass on a crossing route against zones.  I remember this play pretty well, and being that I was in the endzone behind the offense I had a great view of what was going on.  The intended receiver was very open over the middle right when Riley stumbled.  Had Riley not stumbled, and had been looking at the intended WR, Marvin Jones, he might have had the time to throw to Marvin Jones and that probably would have been a big gain.  But Riley stumbled, he was looking at the split end, Cal's Z wide receiver although for most teams that's the X, and threw a late ball that shouldn't have been thrown.  I remember seeing this play unfold, and I knew Riley was going to pass it to Jones and knew it was a high-interception type of pass that shouldn't have been thrown.  Riley probably should have thrown the ball away.  There were only two receivers on the play (Cal kept the RB, FB, and TE in on max protect playaction), so Riley did only have two options.  But still, either throw the ball away or start running.  The defense wasn't that fooled.  Minnesota players on the sideline are screaming "PASS!!!"  And Riley probably could have run to his left for a 10 yard gain. 

But aside from that play, Riley managed the game well.  There were no delay of games.  He made some great throws.  He's a very inspiring and competitive guy.  Also, I'm not seeing his ugly footwork from 2008.  He's definitely improved.

(19) Magic Numbers reviewed.  Remember my season outlook post?  Back in that post I made a prediction on Cal's season based on a few assumptions and Riley's completion percentage.  Right now, Riley has completed 64.8% of his passes.  In my post, that number was predicted to be a 10 win season (11 wins if you want to round 64.8% up to 65%).  But not so fast my friend!  One of the assumptions I based my model on was that Riley's yards per attempt would be less than 8 yards per pass attempt.  The number of 8 yards per pass attempt was a measuring stick because that was Longshore's yards per pass attempt in 2006 - a year whose team is comparable to this year's team.  I thought that Riley's yards per pass attempt would be less than Longshore's 8.0 yards per pass attempt because Cal lacked a true deep threat this year and I figured Riley would be completing a lot of short underneath passes.  But it turns out, my assumption was wrong.  Verran Tucker and Nyan Boateng have both proven to be good deep WRs and are functioning in a similar manner like Desean Jackson did for the 2006 team.  Right now, Riley's yards per pass attempt is a sick 9.8 yards per attempt!!!  Do you remember some of the other measuring sticks I gave in my season outlook post? 

In 2002, Kyle Boller threw for 6.68 yards per attempt.

In 2004, Aaron Rodgers threw for 8.2 yards per attempt (!!!)

In 2005, Joe Ayoob threw for 6.72 yards per attempt.

In 2006, Nate Longshore threw for 8.01 yards per attempt (thank you Desean "deep threat" Jackson!)

In 2007, from the start of the season through the Oregon game, Nate Longshore was throwing at 6.98 yards per attempt. 

In 2008, Oklahoma's Sam Bradford threw for 9.8 yards per attempt (!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

Right now, Riley's yards per pass attempt are superior to that of Longshore's in 2006, and verging on Sam Bradford type sickness. 

As for Riley's completion percentage of 64.5%, here are the other comparisons:

In 2002, Kyle Boller threw 53.6% (although perhaps a good 5% of those passes were drops by Ward). 

In 2004, Aaron Rodgers threw for 66.1% (!!!). 

In 2005, Joe Ayoob threw for 49.2%.

In 2006, Nate Longshore threw for 60.2%.

In 2007, from the start of the season through the Oregon game, Nate Longshore was throwing at 63.8%.

In 2008, Texas' Colt McCoy threw for 76.7% (!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

Right now, Riley is performing just about equal to Aaron Rodgers in 2004. 

As for Riley's interception percentage of 0.00%.... Well, no comparison needed here.  To be accurate, a few of Riley's passes could have been INTed, but the same can be said of all QBs. 

So, I'm not saying that Riley is going to be Cal's next Aaron Rodgers in terms of NFL talent.  But Riley's numbers are equivalent to Rodgers, and actually even better.  But it's only been three games.  Cal has yet to hit the meat of its schedule.  But if Cal's deep threat WRs continue to keep defenses somewhat honest and prevent defenses from focusing solely on Jahvid Best, Riley may only need a 60% completion percentage to get Cal BCS bowling.

(20) Linebackers in zone could use some work.  I think I talked about this after the EWU game.  The linebackers need to tighten up their coverages while in zone.  By that I mean guard the receivers more, as opposed to just dropping into coverage without any awareness of the receivers.  The linebackers should be getting up close to the receivers to defend the pass and not just standing around waiting until the pass is completed to the receiver to make the tackle.  In other words, guard the receivers in your zone, don't just stand in your zone. 

Dscn4602_medium

Victory!

 

Dscn4603_medium

Post-game greetings.

 

Dscn4605_medium

50,000 disappointed fans!

(21) Ludwig is still unveiling new wrinkles.  I want to end on a good note, instead of point #20.  I really want to emphasize the diversity that Ludwig has brought to our offense.  I'm not a football guru or genius by any means (seriously, I'm not), but I've noticed sooo many new things which Ludwig has added to the Cal offense.  I already touched upon them above in point #17, but there's more!   Ludiwg is also bringing back the half-rolls!  Those pretty much disappeared under Cignetti in 2008.  And all the pre-snap shifting and motion.  And putting two RBs on the field.  And passing to the RBs.  I really really like the diversity that Ludwig is showing us right now.  I cannot remember the Cal offense ever being so diverse.  I love it.  It's really a joy to watch.  I mean, just today I took 10 minutes to watch some of the game for a break, and Cal ran to the weakside with a trap block by the backside guard from a bunch formation with the QB under center.  The play didn't work because a defender got by Boateng, but the play itself was so nifty and new! I saw even more new stuff when Cal was using 22 personnel with TEs in a two point stance. It's like Christmas.  There's just new cool things everywhere.  With Dunbar and Cignetti, I felt like I had seen the entire Cal offense by game two.  I didn't really see anything incredibly new after the first two games.  But this is the third game and I'm seeing new stuff still - and not just a little bit, but a lot.  I don't think Ludwig is done either.  I think he might still have even more to add.  I'm truly amazed by the new wrinkles I'm seeing in the offense and am very impressed with Ludwig thus far.

6 recs  |  Comment 74 comments |

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Display:

How much of the offensive diversity do you think was due to the personnel that Dunbar and Cignitti had (a less than mobile Nate mainly – but also Forsett vs. Best) had to work with and how much is due to preferences from the OC?

How much flexibility do OCs have in trying to mold game plans to talent – I remember that under Tedford we used to run 2-3 option plays a game espeically when Reggie Robertson was in – but also under Aaron Rodgers, and obviously Nate was ill-suited to run the option.

by LeonPowe on Sep 24, 2009 1:27 AM PDT reply actions  

Yeah, some plays require speedy players, but all the pre-snap shifting, all these various run schemes, etc., those don’t require fast QBs. I don’t really think the offensive diversity is due to Cal having better personnel this year than in previous years, I think it’s just that Ludwig is installing more diversity.

Tedford’s philosophy is to mold the gameplan to your player’s strengths, and thus the OCs have that freedom. You can just tell by the way the player’s strengths dictate how they are used in games – especially on offense. DJ did end arounds. Stevens was usually blocking. Morrah was off the LOS so he can release for catches. Ayoob ran the zone read. Riley runs QB draws. Sofele runs the fly sweeps. Best runs in zone blocking. The Cal coaches have always done a great job utilizing players in the best way possible.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by HydroTech on Sep 24, 2009 2:04 AM PDT up reply actions  

New Coach M

Don’t forget, before the season we were told that our new Coach M was going to go away from our prior Coach M’s emphasis on keeping it simple. I would have to think what we are seeing here is a combination of Ludwig and Marshall as it requires a lot more from our OL.

by abaddon on Sep 24, 2009 7:49 AM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah, I do remember reading somewhere about Coach M’s philosophy about keeping things simple.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by HydroTech on Sep 24, 2009 10:32 AM PDT up reply actions  

Cal ran a QB draw against Minnesota to gain a critical 1st down conversion on a 3rd down.

Might you be referring to the 3rd down playcall in the 3rd quarter that failed to get a first down? I only remember two Riley runs from Minnesota, one was the zone read play from the first half and the failed quarterback draw from the 3rd quarter.

"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 Sep 24, 2009 1:31 AM PDT reply actions  

Nope. There was a QB draw early on in the game. I do know about that failed QB draw that you’re talking about though.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by HydroTech on Sep 24, 2009 1:59 AM PDT up reply actions  

fool me once, twice, etc

I am a horrible bruin-bear crossbreed.

by GBB4188 on Sep 24, 2009 2:07 AM PDT up reply actions  

About that: bad playcall or bad execution? Because I’m a contrarian by nature I say bad execution, but also because Minnesota had 7 in the box against Cal’s 7 blockers and one ball carrier and as far as I know in football arithmetic counts as much as anything else.

"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 Sep 24, 2009 2:19 AM PDT up reply actions  

The second QB draw, the failed first down conversion, the one you are talking about, seemed to be bad execution. It looked like Cheadle missed his block on the MLB and it was the MLB who pretty much stopped Riley’s forward momentum.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by HydroTech on Sep 24, 2009 2:22 AM PDT up reply actions  

Is it just me or does Cheadle look like the weak link on the OL thus far? Tepper has also shown some weakness on the outside rush. The prospect of losing MSG for Oregon makes me a bit nervous.

GOLD OUT MOZAMBIQUE!

by OskiMonsta on Sep 24, 2009 7:06 AM PDT up reply actions  

Hydro was talking about the zone read play from the EWU game above, where Riley bobbled the ball and still got good yardage. Both of Riley’s runs in the Minnesota game were designed QB draw plays.

by wearecb4life on Sep 24, 2009 11:31 AM PDT up reply actions  

After the game, while my friends and I were waiting in a short line to get carded as we were entering a bar, a U$C fan walks by. The U$C prick sees the Cal contingent, he takes off his U$C hat, and points to the logo on it and says as he walks by: “This is what it’s all about!”

I’m pretty sure I ran into that guy too. Pretty much an asshat, as you described.

CGB: Wasting Your Potential, Your Time, & Your Life Since 2006.

by BearStage on Sep 24, 2009 1:31 AM PDT reply actions  

with a USC hat, isn’t that redundant?

by LeonPowe on Sep 24, 2009 1:44 AM PDT up reply actions  

Awesome post Hydro!

Ive been thinking about our linebackers in coverage a lot this year, while they are still very talented and quick, I think this is a part of their game where they are still “new”. The zone Cal runs is a read and react to your given area, and it is also based on passing along a target when he leaves your area and making a jump when you know the route/where the ball is being thrown. Given the experience of last years LB’s this was much smoother and that’s why our pass defense played great.

Im not too worried though as some things come with playing the zone game in and game out, and with our next 3 teams being pretty good, but no where near passing experts, it will give the LB’s more experience in that zone and time to improve.

"Best is Best" - Every single broadcaster this upcoming season, completely original and funny right???

by HOUSE66 on Sep 24, 2009 6:43 AM PDT reply actions  

I totally agree on the Sofele hit. He arrives after the ball (perfect timing I would say) and doesn’t lead with his head in any way. There is facemask-to-facemask contact but it looks like a clean, hard, well-timed hit to me. The return guy should have called for a fair catch. That really set up Minn for that last TD and gave them the mo into the half and the 3Q.

GOLD OUT MOZAMBIQUE!

by OskiMonsta on Sep 24, 2009 7:10 AM PDT reply actions  

The Sofele hit was definitely NOT interference. So that part of the call was wrong. But if memory serves, the officials also called a separate personal foul penalty for the helmet to helmet aspect of the hit.

Sofele timed it perfectly and blew that guy up. Just too bad that he went helmet to helmet.

Praise be to Tedford!

by Ohio Bear on Sep 24, 2009 8:29 AM PDT up reply actions  

But should there even have been a flag for the helmet contact? There is no way you can say he led with his head or that he was spearing. Maybe I don’t get the new rule.

GOLD OUT MOZAMBIQUE!

by OskiMonsta on Sep 24, 2009 8:58 AM PDT up reply actions  

The funny thing is, at Sofele’s height and size I don’t really see any way he can make a good tackle without SOME kind of helmet to helmet occurring. What’s he supposed to do, yank his neck back like a horse?

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

by Spazzy Mcgee on Sep 24, 2009 12:50 PM PDT up reply actions  

Isi Sofe-neigh!

Sorry…I’m going to go back to the DBD now…

dboneisloose

by HolmoePhobe on Sep 24, 2009 2:17 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah it was legal from a timing standpoint...

But there was still a foul for helmet-to-helmet. The returner had the rigidity of a wet noodle as he tried to walk back to the sideline. It was awesome, that kid just got blasted. My guess is that Sofele didn’t play much defense (if any) in high school so he has a bit to learn as far as playing the gunner position but in any case that play was awesome from a physicality standpoint.

by CGK on Sep 24, 2009 1:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

Two Cal sections

You keep saying “the Cal section” but there were two Cal sections. Look at the diagram: https://onestop2.umn.edu/ppoints/public/diagram.jsp. I think the other Cal section (I was in 215) was much nicer than the one you got stuck in :(.

by abaddon on Sep 24, 2009 7:29 AM PDT reply actions  

Forgot to mention, I thought our section was pretty loud. Better than some home games I’ve attended in the alumni section, LOL.

by abaddon on Sep 24, 2009 7:31 AM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah, there were two Cal sections – barely. Cal fans were fairly sparse that you could barely see the blue.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by HydroTech on Sep 24, 2009 10:34 AM PDT up reply actions  

Yes, I was in the other CAL section

We were in 216. So, you could see the big jumbotron.

It was pretty loud for a visiting section. We would do the “Gimme a C” chant after touchdowns, get loud on 3rds, roll on you bears…and then the Bear territory chant at end of game.

However, we were so high up…I doubt anyone heard us.

by DavidsonBear on Sep 24, 2009 11:14 AM PDT up reply actions  

Split in Two. So Sad.

Like DavidsonBear says, we got loud at times, did the standard Cal cheers. There were Gophers amongst us though, friendly for the most part and only playful ribbing at the worst. I bet 216 would have been even louder and more unified if the Straw Hat Band, the Dance Team, and Oski ever noticed us. I kept waiting for that whole crew to move down the field and give us a visit, since Cal fans were split 50/50 in the two sections, but they never came and said hi. Sadness :(

I totally understand why they split us into two groups – it really zaps the potential of your opponent to have unified cheers and noise. Kinda sad, that’s part of the fun of the college game. At USC we have crappy seats, but at least we all have crappy seats together.

by wurster on Sep 24, 2009 2:02 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yards per attempt

Another statistical tidbit:

I compiled all of his completions into a spreadsheet to compute the yds/att sample mean and its error (defined as the sample standard deviation divided by sqrt(n)).

All yds/att = 9.8 +/- 1.5
FBS yds/att = 10.7 +/- 1.9

So he is already beating 2004 Aaron Rodgers in yds/att at 68%CL! It is no fluke.

by the bear facts on Sep 24, 2009 10:19 AM PDT up reply actions  

Statistics question

If you’ll indulge my ignorance here, is a 68% confidence level equivalent to an r-squared of .68?

If having a tough time finding a context in which to place a 68% CL is all and so I’m trying to relate it to something I’m already familiar with to gauge how explanatory that is.

by Nashville on Sep 24, 2009 12:19 PM PDT up reply actions  

Confidence level

Confidence level is not r-squared. R-squared is a means of checking that your underlying statistical model is correct (i.e. linear regression is sufficiently linear). I am assuming the statistical model that pass completion is a binomial distribution (in aggregate, it should look like a dice-throwing or coin-flipping exercise), and then based on the properties of that model, estimating the 68% confidence region, the range of values for which the true intrinsic 2009 Riley pass completion should lie 68% of the time, given the available data. There is a 32% chance his true % is above or below this range.

If completing passes is, on average, like flipping coins, which it may not be, and if the sample of passes I have observed is representative of the rest of the season, which it may not be.

by the bear facts on Sep 24, 2009 3:22 PM PDT up reply actions  

Thank you

If i’ve understood correctly then, you’re saying that 68% of the time, his true completion % is something similar to what he currently has. 32% of the time your assumptions holds that it is actually different (either above/below) of what he currently has.

by Nashville on Sep 24, 2009 9:11 PM PDT up reply actions  

If completing passes is, on average, like flipping coins, which it may not be

This isn’t the first time I’ve seen someone use this methodology on a sports outcome, and I have serious doubts about its validity. There are so many underlying variables that go into a completion or incompletion that I don’t think the assumption holds true. Honestly, I wouldn’t be surprised if it worked out pretty well anyways and wasn’t too far off, but I think you’d have to come up with standard deviation based on a sample of other QB’s to really be accurate…

R-squared is a means of checking that your underlying statistical model is correct

R-squared is just a measure of how much variation your model explains. I see people (especially in sports analysis) use it as some sort of evidence for how good/bad their model is, and it’s not really meant to be used that way. A high r-squared does not mean a model is good and a low r-squared does not mean a model is bad. I just want to make sure everyone understands that. :)

by Missing Barry on Sep 25, 2009 7:55 AM PDT up reply actions  

Awesome. Thanks for bringing your expertise to the table.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by HydroTech on Sep 24, 2009 10:34 AM PDT up reply actions  

Coach Lud

I share your enthusiasm for Coach Ludwig, Hydro. At practice, working with the offense, I see new plays all the time. It’s really interesting to see them practice these things, knowing that I’ll probably see them in the game next week. Ludwig is definitely not done introducing new stuff, that’s for sure.

I've been Honked...

by giantfan5 on Sep 24, 2009 9:15 AM PDT reply actions  

Hydro a comment about the Cal section...

There were two of them. You were in the crappy one above the band. The other one (where I was) was in the nosebleed seats next to the student section. We had a great view of the entire stadium including the large video board. And we were loud but probably not loud enough to be heard in your section due to the whole “nosebleed” aspect.

I’ll post some pics from that section later today.

In other words, Go Bears!

by royrules22 on Sep 24, 2009 9:29 AM PDT reply actions  

Yeah, I knew there were two Cal sections even though I didn’t mention it. Both sections were pretty sparse I didn’t really feel like it was worth mentioning.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by HydroTech on Sep 24, 2009 10:35 AM PDT up reply actions  

But Riley’s numbers are equivalent to Rodgers, and actually even better. But it’s only been three games. Cal has yet to hit the meat of its schedule.

I don’t know how to feel about this yet. On one hand, the defenses Riley’s faced haven’t been as strong as the upcoming games, but it’s not like they’re completely incapable of catching interceptions or defending the pass either. And a lot of the hard work is also done by the receivers making great catches, which wasn’t necessarily an option last year.

by sec119 on Sep 24, 2009 9:29 AM PDT reply actions  

Hydro Tech = Ludwig

srsly

get on Cal Football’s payroll.

"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 Sep 24, 2009 9:38 AM PDT reply actions  

Isi Sofele on punt team

"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 Sep 24, 2009 9:40 AM PDT reply actions  

He’s a Tomahawk?

by turkey on Sep 24, 2009 10:04 AM PDT up reply actions  

Isi’s an ocean of coverage?

by sec119 on Sep 24, 2009 11:46 AM PDT up reply actions  

Isi’s a destroyer?

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

by Spazzy Mcgee on Sep 24, 2009 12:52 PM PDT up reply actions  

Isi’s a dinner bell!?!

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

by Spazzy Mcgee on Sep 24, 2009 12:59 PM PDT up reply actions  

Gosh, you always win Spazzy!

by CaliforniaCMB on Sep 25, 2009 3:02 AM PDT up reply actions  

It is definitely not safe to run with flippy-floppies on.

by Nashville on Sep 24, 2009 12:19 PM PDT up reply actions  

in all absolute seriousness, does alamar have pictures of tedford’s wife or something? i can’t imagine someone as meticulous as tedford to willingly allow special teams to be such a sore point in an otherwise fairly solid team.

i still painfully remember the last notorious alamar special where all the ST personnel weren’t on the field – maurice drew ring a bell? ughhhhh

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

by ch0ster on Sep 24, 2009 9:41 AM PDT reply actions  

Nate Longshore has pictures of me naked. But aside from that, Alamar is a pretty good recruiter. Perhaps that is what keeps him around.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by HydroTech on Sep 24, 2009 10:36 AM PDT up reply actions  

That explains the Arizona game.

by wearecb4life on Sep 24, 2009 11:34 AM PDT up reply actions  

really, absolute seriousness?

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

by Spazzy Mcgee on Sep 24, 2009 12:52 PM PDT up reply actions  

it's opposite day.

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

by ch0ster on Sep 24, 2009 3:47 PM PDT up reply actions  

Question

What’s the definition of the backside guard? I know the weak side is the side w/o a TE – is the backside the side that the ball isn’t being run?

dboneisloose

by HolmoePhobe on Sep 24, 2009 9:41 AM PDT reply actions  

Exactly.

strongside – the strength of the offense, usually dictated by the location of the tight end.
weakside – the weakside of the offense, the side w/o a TE
playside – the side of the offense which the ball is being run to
backside – the side of the offense where the ball is being run away from

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by HydroTech on Sep 24, 2009 10:38 AM PDT up reply actions  

Got it, thanks.

dboneisloose

by HolmoePhobe on Sep 24, 2009 11:24 AM PDT up reply actions  

Is there still a weakside with 22 personnel (that means two tight ends right?)

by Nashville on Sep 24, 2009 12:21 PM PDT up reply actions  

I think 22 means 2 TE 2 RB…in which case the weakside would be the side without a receiver? Hydro?

dboneisloose

by HolmoePhobe on Sep 24, 2009 2:18 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah that’s correct.

Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com

by Avinash on Sep 24, 2009 2:28 PM PDT up reply actions  

22 is 2 TEs, and 2 RBs, but just to be clear, the first digit refers to RBs, and the second digit refers to TEs. There really isn’t a strong or weak side when the team lines up with 22 personnel in the standard big-I formation. I suppose you can consider the side with the WR as the strong side but the formation is fairly balanced and I’m not sure that one can truly say that there is a strong or weak side.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by HydroTech on Sep 24, 2009 2:43 PM PDT up reply actions  

Maybe the side with the fullback?

The The is above help.

by Maharg on Sep 24, 2009 2:51 PM PDT up reply actions  

Good thought. But I’m not sure that may not always work for other personnel groups. At least for 22 personnel grouping when there is a TE on each end of the OL, then that might work. But if the offense has 21 personnel on the field and is in a weak I formation, the strength is the side with the TE, not the side with the fullback. So the fullback can’t be the determining factor all the time.

Clearly, there is confusion on the issue of what is the strong side when the offense has 22 personnel on the field in the big-I. Saying it’s the side with the WR is fine, although perhaps the team dictates the strength by the side that the first string TE is on.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by HydroTech on Sep 24, 2009 5:21 PM PDT up reply actions  

Another spectacular post

Always love reading these, and I can only hope I’m soaking up new facts with each read. Thanks again.

by trisweb on Sep 24, 2009 9:55 AM PDT reply actions  

  1. - so true. How much time is being wasted by that not very loud hand clap on third downs when there’s noise to be made?

by turkey on Sep 24, 2009 10:05 AM PDT reply actions  

err, should be 10.

by turkey on Sep 24, 2009 10:05 AM PDT up reply actions  

After the game, while my friends and I were waiting in a short line to get carded as we were entering a bar, a U$C fan walks by. The U$C prick sees the Cal contingent, he takes off his U$C hat, and points to the logo on it and says as he walks by: “This is what it’s all about!” The bouncer checking our IDs said in response to his other bouncer buddy: “I bet you he has absolutely no affiliation with U$C whatsoever.” The bouncer was probably right. Man, I go to Minnesota and I can’t get away from your typical asshat arrogant U$C fan.

hhahhaaaaa

by danzig on Sep 24, 2009 10:24 AM PDT reply actions  

Minor point, excellent post.
But now, after seeing three games under Cignetti we’ve seen new additions such as: (a) pulling playside guards to the strong side; (b) pulling playside tackles to the strong side; © pulling playside guards to the weak side; and (d) shotgun traps with a backside pulling tackle.

Ludwig?

by Yes We Cannon on Sep 24, 2009 12:02 PM PDT reply actions  

Yes, you’re right. thanks for catching this typo.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by HydroTech on Sep 24, 2009 12:10 PM PDT up reply actions  

taser

so, how long until we see the best/sofele direct snap/fly sweep option gadget?

"He's so fast, he can turn off the lights and be in bed before it gets dark!" -- Lee Corso on Jahvid Best in NCAA 10.

by dirt on Sep 24, 2009 12:22 PM PDT reply actions  

(7) Decker had a great game against Cal’s defense. Not too surprising. Cal countered Minnesota’s passing attack with its usual zone defense. Decker would slip behind linebackers and find the seams, and Webber would throw the ball high above the zones and let Decker jump and catch the ball. Easy. Not too much Cal can do there but get a faster pass rush and have the over-the-top defenders blow up the Decker.

I think for me this was the scariest prospect of all. Cal had a lot of trouble defending one spectacular receiver and one mediocre QB, while owning the Oline and the run game. What happens when we play a team that has both a decent run threat and passing threat? The only one I can think of off the top of my head at this point (<—stressed because Pac 10 talent WILL come out of the woodwork as the season progresses), is OSU. They have a very green Oline but we’re not playing them until fairly late in the season, and we know how they tend to gel.

If UW and Furd can go-to receivers, their games will start to look a lot scarier, esp since they have more experienced Olines.

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

by Spazzy Mcgee on Sep 24, 2009 12:58 PM PDT reply actions  

A mitigating factor on that

Was Decker’s exceptional size.

He was just so much taller that we couldn’t put Syd on him all the time. Now, I know Williams has similar height, but that is canceled out in part by Barkley not being able to use most of the playbook.

I’ll quote The Bear Will Not Quit on this as well (not sure if this qualifies as excessive quotation, but the whole section is so good that I wanted to reproduce it here):

I can literally hear the hands wringing over the cyberwaves. People, listen to me. This is not your father’s Cal secondary. This is not Harrison Smith throwing his arms up in desperation as the ball sails over his head safely into the receiver’s arms. This is still the second or third best secondary in the conference behind USC and maybe UCLA, and probably the best on third down.

But, for a reality check, this is also not last year’s USC secondary, giving up 134 pass yards per game. If you were hoping for that, you should stop watching now. What this is is a very good, well coached secondary, with a sound zone scheme, within a defense predicated on stopping the run and the deep ball. By my count, with the exception of two one-in-a-million plays (Decker’s Kurt Schilling “bloody chin” TD catch and Decker’s Schilling-esque fastball TD pass), they’ve stuck to the script pretty well. And I think the numbers at season’s end will bear that out.

To execute the plays that everyone is up in arms about requires, for the most part, a pretty specific combination of things: a veteran QB that knows exactly where he wants to go with it, with veteran receivers with whom he has chemistry, who trusts his receivers and the playbook, and an offense that is comfortable throwing in rhythm on first and second down. As inferior as MD, EWU and Minn are perceived by fans, all three happened to have this combination. I am willing to go out on a limb and predict we are not going to see that combination much if at all the rest of the year, except maybe vs. Washington. Go down the list:

Masoli (no)
Barkley/Corp (no – run first, conservative),
Craft/Prince (no),
Loebbestal/Lopina/Tuel (no),
Sullivan (no),
Canfield/Moevao (no – run first),
Scott/Foles (no),
Luck (no),
Locker (perhaps).

With the exception of Ore St. and Washington’s experienced QBs, this list is a bunch of QBs with very little experience, behind mostly suspect OLs, who I don’t see throwing 40-50 times a game with laser timing routes to receivers on first and second down.

Also, instead of ruminating over what seems like bad pass coverage, let’s look at the actual numbers. The defense is currently giving up 207 passing yards per game. Let’s compare to Cal’s pass yardage defense over the last 5 years:

2004 – 238 (Pac 10 9th – 1st was Wash 185)
2005 – 240 (5th – 1st was Ore 223)
2006 – 240 (9th – 1st was Ore 170)
2007 – 214 (2d – 1st was USC 189)
2008 – 193 (5th – 1st was USC 134 (as an aside, take a minute and let that last number sink in))

207 is currently well ahead of every pass defense Tedford has had except 2007. Granted, we’re only one quarter of the way through the season, but still those numbers are interesting. And consider one other point: that’s 207 yards given up to pass-first teams who have been trailing Cal in every game, all game long. When you shut down the run, you are going to get thrown at a lot. And when you play quick pass offenses like the last three opponents, you’re going to give up yards.

I am not saying this secondary is perfect. But when you’re averaging 48 points, 488 yards, and zero turnovers on offense, and 62 yards rushing, 3 sacks, and 2 TOs per game on defense, and you have a home run-hitting offense, 207 yards passing per game on defense does not mean the sky is falling.

by Nashville on Sep 24, 2009 2:33 PM PDT up reply actions  

I hope he’s right, but last year we were burned by Arizona’s nonexistent run game, Maryland’s nonexistent QB, and OSU’s nonexistent QB’s…

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

by Spazzy Mcgee on Sep 24, 2009 4:17 PM PDT up reply actions  

Now, defenses who scout Cal will realize that they have to be aware of the zone read and trap plays – two different running schemes from shotgun and not just one.

I thought this is one of the principles of a zone-read? The backside tackle (in a read-option I’m assuming the backside tackle is the one on the opposite side the RB is going?) pulls, leaving the DE unblocked, and the QB reads the backside DE. Maybe instead of pulling in a normal zone read the tackle just goes upfield after a linebacker? Or maybe it’s a zone blocking scheme that requires the tackle block down on the DT (but can he reach the DT effectively)? I guess that would make some sense for calling it a “zone-read”, and a trap, as you called it, is more of a power blocking scheme…

by Missing Barry on Sep 25, 2009 8:02 AM PDT reply actions  

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

Small
Childish Fun With The Stanford Band

Recent FanPosts

Chowder2_small
DBD 7.30.10: Pac-12 Basketball: Round Robin or Tournament?
1262541127_small
DBD 7.29.10 USA! USA!
Small
DBD 7.28.10: Least favorite job
Tedford_avatar_small
DBD 7.27.10. An embarrassment to Cal, I am?
Small
DBD 07.26.2010: Youtube!
Calflag_small
DBD 7.23.10 Funny People
1262541127_small
DBD 7.22.10 We Write Like Chuck Norris
Small
The Fish Report: Aliotti Better Than Carroll?
Small
DBD 7.21.10: Favorite Job

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

SPONSORS

SBNation.com Recent Stories

Photo +14 updates

QB Jeremiah Masoli Headed To Ole Miss After Being Dismissed From Oregon

Photo

With Apologies To Randy Edsall, The Big East Remains Mostly Harmless

FILE -- This is an Oct. 18, 2008 file photo showing Connecticut corner back Jasper Howard (6) trying to get the crowd into the game during the fourth quarter of an NCAA college football game against Rutgers, in Piscataway, N.J.   Jasper Howard had his little sisters' names tatooed on his chest. His friends say it was a constant reminder of why he was at U Conn _ to provide his family with a better life than the one he had in Miami's Little Haiti. (AP Photo/Mel Evans, File) link

In Defense Of Big East Football

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

Calflag_small Avinash

Jahvidtician

Giorgiorope_small Berkelium97

Members Of The Follettariat

Bear__small norcalnick

Jones_1_squared_small solarise

The Hit Squad

Tedford_avatar_small Ohio Bear

1129748640_small LeonPowe

Small atomsareenough

Basketball_desktop_small CALumbus Bear

Ajoceywcalhatpic_small Kodiak