The Autzen Massacre: What Went Wrong With Cal's Offense in Oregon?
A few weeks ago after opening week, Smart Football wrote this post about what makes a football offense terrible, and this really stuck out to me.
- Line play, in every phase: It’s a cliche, but it’s still undervalued. The most important coach on the staff is the line coach. I didn’t say most important assistant, I said coach. The head coach gets things organized, brings in the boosters, the OC calls the plays, but the line coach makes the whole operation go. If you’d like to know how Boise State was able to stymie Oregon’s fancy spread, the answer is simple: they whipped Oregon’s line, which was starting four new guys. Similarly, with all these spread offenses you see a lot who want to throw the ball, but they don’t understand pass protection or focus enough on it. There’s both a "who" and a "how," and awful offenses can do neither. Runningbacks are nice, but beyond Heisman-winning breakaway speed, the run game won’t go if guys can’t block. (Note that with modern zone plays, it is not always about driving guys off the ball, it is about technique and leverage. This only increases the need for good coaching on the line.) And even the most high-flying offenses have been grounded by a lack of pass protection.
After extensively reviewing the gametape of the possessions when Cal's offense could've made a difference in the game (i.e. before the score was 32-3), I'd say that's about an accurate description about what happened yesterday. We all think Jahvid Best can be otherworldly in the open field, but if his O-line doesn't block for him, he is mortal, and so are the Bears.
If you just want the bullet point details instead of the gruesome summary of what I saw, just read below and move on with your day. You will be much happier not clicking after the jump.
- The coach I would be questioning the most isn't Andy Ludwig or Bob Gregory, but Steve Marshall. Oregon's front seven played physical and Cal's offensive line played soft and slow, and it showed, all game long.
- The Bears were unprepared for some of the angles Nick Aliotti threw at them in terms of blitzes, but often it was just straight man fronts overwhelming the O-line.
- The playcalling was occasionally headscratching, only because it became terribly obvious by down and distance (which can't always be controlled) and formation (which can be controlled) near the end when Cal was going to throw and when Cal was going to run.
- I'm not sure Matt Summers-Gavin should've seen action, much less started this game. He looked ineffective for much of the game.
- He wasn't the only one though. Every starting O-linemen had their shares of whiffs or weak blocks, mainly in man but also in zone. Cheadle, Guarnero, Schwartz, Tepper all struggled.
- Will Ta'ufo'ou's presence was missed. Brian Holley played well for us the first three weeks, but his inexperience showed.
- The tight ends blocked well. So that's good.
- Marvin Jones did not. For a guy who's always being signalled in to block, that's bad.
- Jahvid Best's got one big issue to work out before he plans on being an NFL back. But also I'm not sure if Ludwig utilized him well at all.
- Cal's pass offense did not exploit the zone holes, partly due to playcalling, partly due to protection issues.
- Cal was in a lot of long yardage situations. They had one 3rd and short, a few 3rd and 5s, but they were in a lot of obvious passing down areas which had a lot of Ducks dropping into coverage.
- I was really surprised at how conservative we were with our gameplan. Other than that cross route Tucker dropped, the Bears went downfield a handful of times, but a lot of the throws were very short.
- Any play when the O-line played well, the skill players made a mistake, and vice-versa. That's a recipe for offensive disaster. It's like Tedford said Sunday night: "Typically, it was one thing, one guy. It really becomes evident, it’s just so important that 11 guys play together. You have 10 guys doing the right thing and one guy doesn’t do his thing . . . it’s a lot of opportunities we didn’t capitalize on.
Although Kevin Riley made several throwing errors, Verran Tucker dropped a big pass and made a stupid penalty, these things worry me far less than what has become the glaring weakness in our 2009 Golden Bears. How our offensive line adjusts from this game will determine how the rest of our season goes.
After the jump, here's my brutal play-by-play notes and "analysis". I put "analysis" in quotes because I'm a football novice and probably don't understand the nuances of football blocking techniques. I just report what I see. If you see things I get blatantly wrong, correct me in the comments. Bad knowledge is just as dangerous as no knowledge.
What else do you think went wrong with Cal's offense in Oregon, and can it be corrected in time for USC?
First drive, after the kickoff fumble.
1st & 10, ORE 22, 14:56:
Cal Offense: Shotgun max protect, Vereen shifts from weak to strong
Oregon Defense: 4-3 under, seven drop backTepper slow to respond to snap; his man (Kenny Rowe) blows by him; note Rowe is not a typical DE, more of a converted linebacker
2nd & 18, ORE 30, 14:20
Offense: Ace slot right, back strong
Defense: Nickel? Five drop back agains the receiversCal has SEVEN people in pass protection (including Best & the TE) on four (FOUR!) and Riley STILL gets pressured at the end. This time it's Schwartz's man.
3rd & 18, ORE 30, 14:10
Offense: Ace slot right, back strong
Defense: Nickel? Five drop back against the receiversTough throw by Riley to make in all that coverage. A screen would've been nice here considering Oregon was dropping lots of men into coverage.
Second drive, Cal up 3-0 in the first quarter
1st & 10, CAL 41, 13:08
Offense: Ace, two receivers right, two tight ends shift from right to left
Defense: Nickel of some sortGood blocking to the left to give Best room to run to the right
2nd & 4, CAL 47, 12:38
Offense: I-Form, fullback offset strongside
Defense: Not clear.Tepper pulls from the left tackle spot, not really sure if Holley had trouble blocking here
1st & 10, ORE 48, 12:12
Offense: I-Form, fullback offset weakside, tight end to the left, Riley audibling?
Defense: Playing to defend run, eight people in the boxThis feels like a play where they were trying to run something off-tackle or sweep. Best kind of stumbles here, hard to decide whether he could've made it to the edge. The redshirt freshman Boyett does nicely filling Ward's role as safety trying to plug gap.
2nd & 6, ORE 44, 11:33
Offense: I-form, fullback offset strongside
Defense: Looks like a 4-3 under, but Aliotti plays a lot of nickel with an extra safetyUhh, Summers-Gavin, when you have no one to block, and no one's coming to blitz, might be nice to try and help your linemen. Guarnero loses Ferras, who flushes Riley out of the pocket and into a throwaway.
3rd & 6, ORE 44, 11:25
Offense: Shotgun spread, two halfbacks (Best & Vereen), Vereen goes in motion to the left
Defense: Oregon rushes 3, drops 8, and still had Verran wide open on the cross route.Crossing route, pump fake. Pass might've been a little ahead and a little high for Tucker, still could've made the catch.
Third drive, Tied at 3 in the first quarter
1st & 10, CAL 49, 5:45
Offense: Shotgun 2 TE set (Best lined up a little behind Riley)
Defense: Blitz from the weaksideI'm not sure if Best was a decoy here on the swing, but the receiver screen to Ross is thrown maybe a step too early and the throw takes awhile to get there. Summers-Gavin whiffs on a block downfield on the eventual tackler.
2nd & 8, ORE 49, 5:09
Offense: I-form, 2 WR right
Defense: Seven in the box, could've been a big play if the blocks were executed right.Man blocking fail. Jones goes in motion to block. This is a mess to begin with. Guarnero loses his man again, forcing Holley to help, then Summers Gavin can't get on his man downfield either. Leaves two Ducks uncovered to make the tackle on Best.
3rd & 5, ORE 46, 4:30
Offense: Shotgun 2 RB, 3 WR
Defense: Oregon brings 5, maybe a LB blitz?Pretty good pass protection, Riley didn't have to leave the pocket unless it was by design; he flushes out to find Ross on a comebacker
1st & 10, ORE 39, 4:00
Offense: Ace 2 WR left, TE right, someone else lined off the line behind TE
Defense: 4-3 under, 9 men bite! Single coverage downfield left!It's Cheadle's turn to get owned. Cal sets up perfect play action, maybe Riley holds the ball a second too long before trying to hit the corner, but Cheadle can't let Brandon Bair brush him aside like that. Riley forced to run when he might've had single coverage downfield.
2nd & 8, ORE 37, 3:31
Offense: Shotgun spread
Defense: 4-3 underJones goes in motion to the left, goes out into the flat, Riley throws behind dangerously, spinning off his back foot. Again Tepper's failure to cover his man (although he does keep him from getting to Riley) might've made Kevin throw that one a little earlier than he'd have liked to avoid the sack, but still.
3rd & 8, ORE 37, 3:27
Offense: Shotgun 3 WR left, TE right
Defense: Nickel, but here's the first interesting wrink: 2 LBs come in showing blitz; one comes with the rush, the other stay backs (as well as a DT), maybe to defend against Best coming out of the backfield?First call that really left me shaking my head. 3rd & 8 and you go with a WR screen? It might've worked except Summers-Gavin and Guarnero again with a mental error, only brushing at the tackle between them before going into downfield blocking instead of pushing him back; defender goes on to pummel Riley as he's throwing the ball, leading to a low throw and giving Ross no chance to escape Oregon defenders.
Fourth drive, Oregon up 11-3 in the second quarter
1st and 10, CAL 44, 14:46
Offense: Aces, TE left, 2 WR right, someone lined a little left & behind TE (I think it's another TE, can't be sure)
Defense: 4-3 over?Again Jones comes in motion, decent blocking here and nice moves by Best.
2nd & 5, CAL 49, 14:08
Offense: Aces, 2 WR right. Again, someone lined behind TE to the right, TEs shift from right to left, second time I've seen that.Summers Gavin with the false start. Sigh.
2nd & 10, CAL 44, 13:47
Offense: Wildcat, QB left, TE right, 2 WR right
Defense: 4-3 underThis might be the best offensive play of the game. O-linemen seal toward right has a lot of the Ducks D biting right, Best fakes and goes left, freezes up Paysinger, then picks up the 1st down with ease.
1st & 10, ORE 45, 13:18Offense: I-form, fullback offset strongside, Tight ends behind each other,
Defense: NINE Ducks in the box.This is on Cheadle, didn't execute his take down block well enough to knock Simi Toeaina out of the play, who gets up and makes the backfield tackle on Best. Holley also misses his assignment and Guarnero was a step too late on his downfield block. Three Duck defenders were in the vicinity of the Best before he hit the LoS.
2nd & 14, ORE 49, 12:38
Offense: I-form, Tightend lined left, WRs right
Defense: Corner is shading the running back all the way.
Riley audibles, again Jones comes in motion toward the line, again a run. Methinks Oregon is getting the hang of that motion thing, Talmadge Jackson reads it all the way, although the facemask penalty is what slowed Vereen from hitting the hole.1st and 10, ORE 29, 12:13
Offense: I-form, TE lined left, fullback offset strongside
Defense: Eight in the box.Second biggest play of the game for Cal's offense for me. This would've set up 1st down in the red zone. Perfect playfake with the box stacked, put Cal on one-on-one in the end zone, total interference. Tucker with the stupid taunting penalty negating it.
1st and 10, ORE 29, 12:03
Offense: I-form, 2 TE, WR right, again TE moves to the left, then TE from the right motions to th eleft
Defense: 4-3 over, EIGHT IN THE BOXI replayed this one about ten times trying to figure out what happened. Someone was supposed to block out Paysinger. At first I thought it was supposed to be Guarnero. But it could also have been Summers-Gavin, who looked like he was pulling toward that hole but then sort of stayed behind Guarnero in some weird sort of block. (If you guys have ESPN360, go to 59:54, then watch the play develop, anyone know enough about the O-line blocking techniques to tell me what was designed?). If Paysinger gets blocked out Vereen probably goes 10-15 yards.
2nd and 12, ORE 31, 11:25
Offense: Wildcat formation, Riley lines up left, two WR right, TE right.
Defense: 4 man front, plus something else...They run the same play they ran five plays ago, from the same formation. The difference is that the backside guard is pulling from the right (Cheadle) to try and seal the left side for Best to have the outside space. Looks good. Except Cheadle slips. Fuck. Then Holley tries to make the cut block on the defender Cheadle was supposed to take (when he probably should've aimed downfield at the faster incoming d-back) and whiffs. FUCK. And thus, the D-back Holley was supposed to take out finds Best and drags him down quickly.
3rd and 11, ORE 30, 11:08
Offense: Best moves from the backfield to the left side of the LoS, WRs right, TE left
Defense: NickelQuestionable playcall #2: Why are we using a 3rd and 11 with a tight end screen? All these short passes make me wonder how much Ludwig trusts RIley's ability to throw the medium-range pass. The blocking here is slipshod, probably because no one has any idea who and where to block against defensive backs.
Fifth drive, the Riley/Best fumble
1st and 10, ORE 40, 10:00
Offense: I-form, fullback offset strong, TE right
Defense: looks like a 4-3 overMost important play for Cal's offense. This play made me cringe, not only because of the fumble, but because if that handoff is executed right, Best is zooming through the crease, with a great chance to break through to the second level. Seven of the eight Ducks were blocked perfectly man-to-man, and Jones's guy would've been well out of the play. Still not happy that almost every time Jones has been motioned toward the line it's been a run, but a minor gripe compared to the fumble. This is the crucial play that has us standing between a tied game and the eventual rout.
Sixth drive, Oregon up 18-3 in the 2nd q
1st and 10, CAL 23, 8:13
Offense: Ace, two tight ends shift from left to right. Let me guess, it's going to be a run.
Defense: Predictably Oregon stacks eight in the box.
Yep, although there's good inside zone blocking this time opening the inside for Best to cut in and cut left. Great downblock by Anthony Miller coming from right to left. Secondary with good pursuit.
1st and 10, CAL 33, 7:50
Offense: Originally I-formation fullback offset strong, but Best moves into the slot.
Defense: 4-3 under
Best comes from the slot for the direct handoff (we saw a variation of this against EWU). Again Summers-Gavin has trouble blocking out his assignment, Brandon Bair, who gets off him rather easily and chases Best down to prevent further damage.
2nd and 7, CAL 36, 7:08
Offense: Aces, 2 WR left, 1 WR right, TE right
Defense: If I didn't know better, this looks like a 3-4...I must be seeing things.
More motion so the receiver from the right goes left into a trips formation. It got a first down because it recognized the pressure that was coming, but again, these screen passes make me wonder how much Ludwig trusts Riley's midrange game.
1st and 10, CAL 48, 6:45
Offense: I formation fullback offset strong, 2 WR right, TE right
Riley took way too many steps, didn't really look for alternatives other than deep, then launched that football into orbit. Great coverage by Glasper. Left tackle (Tepper? Not sure whot he number was) also allowed another defender to get a lick on Riley.
2nd and 10, CAL 48, 6:33
Offense: I formation, 2 WR right, TE left
Defense: Oregon brings nine in the box, anticipating rush. Try the pass again?
Again Marvin Jones goes in motion to the O-line, and maybe Oregon takes it as their cue that a running play is coming, since that's what happened on almost every receiver going into motion toward the O-line play. Jones makes a critical error not seeing the incoming linebacker, and he spends most of the play looking for someone to block. He's right behind you Marv, making the tackle on Vereen! Guarnero spends his time on this play blocking the ground from the sun, missing on two Duck defenders who help out on getting Vereen.
3rd and 9, CAL 49, 5:57
Offense: Shotgun, 3 WR right, 1 left
Defense: Oregon rushes three and drops eight into coverage.
Isn't the best way to break down this particular coverage zone to go toward the sidelines, like around that 8-10 yard receiver? Anyway, Riley telegraphs Anthony Miller, and that ball should've been picked.
Seventh drive, Oregon up 18-3 in the 2nd q
1st and 10, CAL 36, 3:45
Offense: Two WR right, WR left, FB goes in motion to make I-form fullback offset weak.Riley audibles, Man blocking, Cheadle opens up a hole but can't hold onto his man and the defender closes it up!
2nd and 8, CAL 38, 3:08
Offense: Two WR right, WR left, TE right, RB weak
Defense: 4-3 overQuick throw to Anthony Miller.
3rd and 2, CAL 44, 2:41
Offense: WR right, TE split on both side, I-form fullback offset strong
Defense: Oregon stacks 8 in the boxQuick snap, Holley whiffs on his outside block that allows the outside LB to rush up on Best in the backfield. Think we're missing Ta'ufo'ou right now?
Eighth drive, Oregon up 25-3 in the 2nd q
1st and 10, CAL 20, :59
Offense: Shotgun, RB weakside, 2 WR & TE right
Defense: WLB blitz, 4-3 over
This is on Best for not picking up Rowe rushing blindside, although Oregon did put two defenders close to Tepper, so Best probably felt he needed to help out. I'd worry about the guy unblocked first though. Still, shouldn't we be using Jahvid as a quick dumpoff receiver rather than putting him in pass protection?
2nd and 14, CAL 16, :20
Offense: I form, FB strongside, 2 WR split and TE right
Defense: 3 down linemenSolid gain and blocking from Best. They're using the Bend but not Best D versus the Jet.
3rd and 5, CAL 25, :12
Offense: I form, FB strongside, 2 WR split and TE rightThey're just running out the clock here.
Ninth drive, Oregon up 25-3 in the 3rd q
1st and 10, CAL 20, 15:00
Offense: Best weakside behind Riley in the shotgun, TE right, 2 WR split left
Defense: Could be a dime packageThere's that sideline throw to break the zone! Luckily Riley threw that when he did, because Summers-Gavin again struggled to protect against his man.
1st and 10, ORE 30, 14:46
Offense: Shotgun, RB strong, TE right, 2 WR split left
Defense: Not sureCorner read this right, had a chance at getting a pick.
2nd and 10, ORE 30, 14:41
Offense: Shotgun, RB weak, TE right
Defense: 3 down linemen, Strongside linebacker blitz picked up, it was the tackle Bair who came in untouched.Oh my lord. Three down linemen and Riley still gets hit??? Tepper with a real weak effort containing the edge and Best is nowhere close to picking up that block. Not sure who the FAIL goes to there. I know Jahvid wants to go to the NFL, but so far I've seen two really questionable decisions by him in pass protection, and in the NFL running backs have to learn to pass protect to stay in the game.
3rd and 10, ORE 30, 14:36
Offense: Shotgun, 2 RB, 2 WR right
Defense: Again, 3 down linemen, 8 drop.Riley hit AGAIN as he threw with three down linemen rushing; other players are in the box, but all of them drop. Inexcusable. Schwartz can't seal the right side against Tukuafu and Tepper allows his man to at least get in the throwing path. The worst part is Best was open, scorching on the flat again down the sideline.
4th and 10, ORE 30, 14:31
Offense: Shotgun, RB right, 2 WR right
Defense: 3 down linemen, three up in the box, full on blitz by the linebackersThis time it's Cheadle who's out of position to defend the rushing linebacker and only gives him a brief brush by, and this throw by Riley looks rushed.
Alright, that's about as far as I want to go. In all, here are the mistakes I enumerated, for each blocker.
Matt Summers-Gavin--8
Chris Guarnero--5
Justin Cheadle--5
Mike Tepper--4
Brian Holley--3
Mitchell Schwartz--2
Jahvid Best--2
Marvin Jones--1
That's 30 clear blocking errors on the first 41 offensive plays, almost all of them drive killers (to be fair, some blockers committed their mistakes on the same play, so the average percentage of bad blocking plays was around 55-60%, it wasn't one blocking error per play. Still pretty bad). If you expect to win games making that many mistakes at the line of scrimmage, I have beachfront property on Mars I'd like to sell you.
It's why I find it hard to blame quarterback play or our running game for not getting going. How on Earth can you blame the quarterback and skill players when your linemen keep on missing man assignments, when your guards aren't pulling properly, and you aren't able to contain and seal in the zone?
Finally, I'm not going to absolve Andy Ludwig on this. There were several things I noticed that I didn't particularly like, it made those warnings we heard from Utah and from Oregon before the season all the more unsettling, and Saturday made this mocking animation from Off the Pond seem depressingly prophetic.
*Any time the Bears max protected (stacked up two tight ends or had the fullback in the game), they ran the ball. They stacked the box and we stacked right back against them. I think we tried to play fake and go deep once or twice. Any time Riley lined in shotgun, we passed the ball (it's pretty much automatic at this point that we pass the ball out of shotgun, we maybe do one draw a game, none today).
*I also didn't like that Cal always had a lot of people (fullbacks, tight ends, even tailbacks) staying back in pass protection when Oregon barely blitzed at all and got most of their pressure with four down linemen, so often Cal had six or seven blocking four. You're robbing yourself of intermediary and short passing options when you have Jahvid Best or Shane Vereen blocking on passing downs, and you're allowing the coverage to play tighter on the receivers and making it tough for Riley to get rid of the ball, making it more likely for him to get sacked.
*Now you might be saying "WTF MAN OUR O-LINE GOT KILLED Y U WANT LESS MEN BACK IN COVERAGE." Well, fine, don't listen to me, listen to Aaron Rodgers.
Rodgers on Wednesday said the best thing might be for coach Mike McCarthy and offensive coordinator Joe Philbin to let the front five on the offensive line fend for themselves.
"I think one of the things that happened last week was because of struggles (in protection) in Week 1, we’ve kept more guys in (to block)," Rodgers said. "Our backs were staying in a little bit longer, and so our stuff was all down the field because we didn’t have any of our check downs out.
"The push, hopefully, this is week is, ‘Hey you guys got to hold up up front.’ We need more options underneath the coverage. When they’re dropping off so far, you need some check downs."
It might seem counterintuitive that the guy who’s been getting killed — 10 sacks and 19 hits in two games — wants less protection, but the logic is that by keeping in running backs and tight ends less often, Rodgers will have more options to get the ball out quicker if he’s facing pressure. Against the Bengals, many of his throws were deep because there were so few short options.
*The shifting of the tight ends was interesting, and the tight ends did seem to do their job well in blocking, but it didn't matter with the big five in the middle committing mental error after mental error.
*Almost any time Marvin Jones motioned toward the line, Cal ran the ball and Jones blocked someone on the edge. Not such a great job this week.
*With T.J. Ward out with an injury, we did not test the deep middle at all. How much of that had to do with the wind I'm not sure, but Cal probably had chances to strike up if Riley has time to make his reads or if the O-line pass protects better. The receivers had single coverage on the secondary much of the game except on obvious passing down situations.
*We did not test the sidelines as much as I'd have liked to see. Every time Riley rolled out toward the sidelines he got a first down, and on the first play in the second half Tucker sprinted out for 50 yards on a throw right in the middle of the zone. So Oregon's going to kill us going outside? Let's do it too! Far too late an adaptation by Ludwig.
*Hydro indicated in his Minnesota postgame thoughts that Ludwig had created a whole set of new looks for the offense and there are plenty more blocking schemes in place that give defenses more looks to guard against. While all these new looks are neat and can throw good teams off balance, the fact is throwing in these new wrinkles forces your offense to depend even more on execution. As you can probably guess, no wrinkles and looks in the offense could've saved Cal from themselve on Saturday.
*It begs the question: Was Aliotti a step ahead the entire way? It might've felt that way in the end, but through the middle of the game I'd say Ludwig beat himself more than Aliotti did. The Bears played very conservatively trying to use their blocking to open it up, and we stubbornly kept on trying these long developing plays when it was clear the Cal O-line was off their game. Whether Aliotti knew about Ludwig's tendencies is up for debate, but it's safe to say the Oregon's front seven was masterful at confusing and taking apart Cal's blockers.
*I'd have liked to see more dumpoffs to Best (who we didn't screen or swing to once), or quick slants inside and hitches outside, anything to get the ball out of the pocket as quickly as possible. That Riley was still backing up into throwing routes like he had the New York Giants O-line in front of him reeks of obstinance by the coaching staff. When your O-line isn't playing well, adapt to the situation and make the best of it.
*That being said, I can't really lay the hammer down on Ludwig. The offensive line put up a FAIL, and even if he'd adapted and adjusted properly to the situation, that probably only changes the scoring margin from 39 to 19 or 25.
In either case, Marshall's got a lot of work to do before one of the best defenses in the country comes calling on Saturday. You could argue how much crowd noise, or getting confused by audibles, or just not being able to react to the Oregon defensive gameplan factored in, but the O-line did not execute, and Riley, Best, and Vereen paid the price. A performance like this against USC, and our offense is going to do something it's never done in the Tedford era--get shut out.
Possibly coming later: What's with the defensive meltdown? We'll see if I feel up to it.
51 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Question
*Almost any time Marvin Jones motioned toward the line, Cal ran the ball and Jones blocked someone on the edge. Not such a great job this week.
Has Marvin Jones been the primary blocking wide receiver this season, or has the task fallen to Jones after the injury to Nyan?
Good question
4. Marvin Jones’ blocking. The guy is fine one on one in the open field on a corner, but he’s kind of weak when he’s in tight or on a crack back. A bit reminiscent of the way Jackson used to block. I realize he’s pretty thin, but I’d like to see a bit more hitting from him, as these are sometimes key blocks.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Sep 28, 2009 1:23 AM PDT up reply actions
Jahvid Best’s got one big issue to work out before he plans on being an NFL back.
What’s the one big issue? His blocking?
CGB: Wasting Your Potential, Your Time, & Your Life Since 2006.
Yes
A running back in the NFL has to be able to pass protect and pick up blitzes, especially in this pass-friendly but pass rush-deadly league.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Sep 28, 2009 1:33 AM PDT up reply actions
Speaking of Bear Will Not Quit, he wrote up his recap too
Good stuff there, and I agree with pretty much everything he says. When I said attack the sidelines, I meant attack the flats, which is also what he suggested.
That said, there were some things I thought were missing from the play calling. First off, they should have moved the pocket around, and rolled Riley out a bit more, just to slow down some of the blitzing and change the look up a bit. He can throw well on the run, and it would have added a different dimension to the passing game and the play action game.
Second, they should have attacked with curls and flat routes more. Oregon was giving them this all day. These might have gotten Riley in a bit more of a rhythm.
Third, they should have used the fly sweep action, even if just for fakes, more. When they did, it worked. It’s worked well all season.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Sep 28, 2009 1:28 AM PDT reply actions
Regarding his thoughts on Riley
I said in my preview this game would tell us more about Riley than probably anyone else on the team, simply because Oregon’s defense was going to be the first one to be good enough to put the onus on him. What I saw is a guy who’s play started to suffer when things that should have worked were not working. I am not ready to say he’s incapable of overcoming those types of situations, but he certainly did not show that he’s a guy with nerves of steel who can just block it out. I also think it’s now clear he tightens up on the road.
I believe the moment does impact Riley’s performance, but it isn’t always negative. Riley is streaky. When momentum is on Riley’s side in a stressful situation he can be great, for example when he lead the near come back vrs Oregon St (final play withstanding), the start of the 2nd half vrs USC last year, Michigan St last year, quarters 2-4 of Maryland this year. Unfortunately, momentum can build against him, and he plays poorly. For example, after the called off TD and subsequent tipped INT vrs USC last year, he played poorly. Most of the Maryland game last year, parts of the Minnesota game, Oregon St. last year, and of course Saturday.
It is unsettling having a quarterback with inconsistency issues, and in many situations his receivers and line provided no support. Nonetheless, all it takes for Riley to turn into the gorgeous aeronautical surgeon Dr. Jekyll is one or two nice catches from his wide receivers, leads me to believe the Cal offense has the cliche’d ‘ON’ switch which may be pushed at any moment, this is nice. However, a few bad breaks/drops and Cal’s offense hits the ‘KILL’ button. I still think he gives us our best option at quarterback, and firmly believe he will win several games for us.
Applied to last game, this does mean I believe Riley and the game would have played out much better if:
A) Jones had made catches on the early passes (the passes weren’t perfect, but still catchable)
B) Momentum killing brain farts like Tucker’s taunting penalty after the PI call didn’t happen.
either Riley needs to get rid of the ball earlier, or we need to call faster developing passing plays that don’t involve screens.
The quick out and slant can be unstoppable if executed to a T. Of course, it requires a QB to be accurate and not through high balls 1 out 3 times.
"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark
I was really disturbed at how slow our passing plays developed. Then again, when we did throw quick Riley wasn’t that much better.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Sep 28, 2009 11:10 AM PDT up reply actions
We can analyze all we want, but I can only think that the biggest problem is between the ears.
Maybe if we bring our A or B game, we still lose a close one. But a team with Cal’s talent (and perhaps we are seeing that we don’t have quite as much talent as we thought, but still) just doesn’t get slammed like that without a total and complete brain fart. We are not mentally tough and have not been for at least the last 3 years.
GOLD OUT MOZAMBIQUE!
Program Mentality
OskiMonsta nailed it. This program is weak between the ears and it starts at the top. We all know that losing football games will happen, but losing in the fashion that Cal did (and has in year’s past) is THE problem that no one cares to address. All this paralysis by analysis stuff is a waste.
Where is the leadership in this program? Where is it on gameday?
but losing in the fashion that Cal did (and has in year’s past)
I’m confused. When has Cal gotten the doors blown off like this in year’s past? At least the games in the past were winnable, except SC 05 and Tennessee 06.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Sep 28, 2009 11:11 AM PDT up reply actions
A performance like this against USC, and our offense is going to do something it’s never done in the Tedford era—get shut out.
Well, I’d say Cal’s offense DID get shut out by Oregon. When your lone scoring “drive” goes three plays for minus-8 yards, that’s a shut out in my book.
I’m worried, too, about the offense being able to fix things against USC. My hope for the game rests on a big performance by Gregory’s defense, of which I think it’s capable, forcing a few turnovers and allowing Cal to make just a couple big plays to win the game, a la 1985, by a score of 14 to 6.
Then hopefully the bye week allows the Bears’ offense to get things back in order for the rest of the season.
Go Bears!
by California Pete on Sep 28, 2009 8:05 AM PDT reply actions
Bob Gregory
While this post was on Cal’s Offensive mistakes, my group sitting there in Autzen Stadium end zone noticed more defense errors, constantly, with no adjustments after the half. No blitz. None. We would see Ducks lined up with 3 eligible recv’rs on one side, vs. 2 Cal defenders….a lot. No blitz. Oh, i take that back….the one time Cal blitzed, Masoli tossed a soft pass to his jumping tight end in the middle of the flat, who then broke tackles, and scored.
Avi makes a good point, and did his thoughtful analysis as he normally does. But, if anyone doesn’t think defense was a problem, well…….I glanced up at the scorebored as we began our slow walk of shame through the chorus of appropriate jeers and insults, leaving Autzen just at the end of the 3rd qtr. The Scoreboard read: Ducks total offense: 458 yrds…with another quarter yet to go. And, this: passing, 21 for 25. wtf is that ?…like 92%? For God’s sake….and, 99% of those had to be in the flat, where Masoli looked around for someone open, like as if he were playing sand lot football.
Yeah, there was a notice on that 3rd Qtr Scoreboard bout how terribel Cal’s offensive was….how about 1 for 11 on 3rd down conversions??? But. not going after Masoli, partticularly after the 2nd half began, was a constant dentist drill on an absessed nerve.
Oh, and…..Hate to repeat what everyone knows Chip Kelly’d offense uses most..but it is called.the Zone Read. Get it? ZONE, Bob. as in, “Reading the zone coverage”, Bob. So…don’t play zone, Mr. Gregory, play man. And Blitz.
My applauds, as true blue Cal Fans, to all those in our section in Autzen, who had to endure that slow, dreadful, tormenting walk of shame back to the bus. I never felt that bad at any game, ever. I was almost expecting the jeers and insults to be followed by direct hits of rotten vegetables, hurled by those who wanted us to quickly vacate the smell we brought to their very pretty stadium. Maybe you had to have been there…..but, I dunno. Maybe you could feel that pain all the way back home through your TV set. I was ashamed.
Bear danger
"Running away can activate the bear's hunting instincts and lead to it perceiving the human as prey. Finally, if a bear does attack, the usual advice is to curl into a [[fetal position]] so as to shield vital organs and appear non-threatening."
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
ABSOLUTELY!!!!
Our corners are experienced and a strength. Despite this, they are not playing the zone well AT ALL. The 15 yard pass down the sideline is constantly open because of the amount of time between when the DBs hand off to the safeties. Let our DBs play man. If they get burned on occasion, fine. They’re getting burned now enough as it is.
Domination
Talk about craping the bed, then rolling around in it all night. Did you guys ever get manhandled. That may have been our best all around game I have witnessed in my 15 years as a duck fan. Good luck against SC next week, and sorry about knocking Best out of the Heisman race, for at least a good 3-4 weeks anyway.
Go Ducks!!
I can get you a toe by three o'clock this afternoon.
OLD.
The Oregon game is soo last week.
Point Plankn!
by CalBandGreat on Sep 28, 2009 12:59 PM PDT up reply actions
Yes, well I had sexual intercourse with your mother last eventide!
What happens in Vegas stays in Vegas. What happens in California makes the world go round.
by Spazzy Mcgee on Sep 28, 2009 1:17 PM PDT up reply actions
Bombay
trick
Like my mom once told me after a Cal v. U$C victory in the 90's, "See son I told you, Trojans always pop under pressure"
Real Bears Trust Durex!!!
Excellent dissection... but I have to disagree.
Coming from a duck fan, I have to say, most of the failures of your O-line could be attributed to the Oregon D-line and linebackers knowing exactly what the protection and blocking schemes were going to be before the ball was snapped. Ludwig is horribly, horribly predictable.
Cal has excellent talent, even though there were some young guys who looked bad at times. If put in the right position to succeed, they could have blown the ducks out just as easily. This goes back to coaching and play calling.
They've gone to plaid!
I’m not sure, I saw the blocking whiff on like fifteen or twenty occasions. You’re sure that it was all Oregon figuring out the blocking and protection schemes?
Could you point out specific examples above where Oregon’s front seven knew exactly where the protection and blocking seven? I’m sure you have a much easier time watching the replay of this than I did.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Sep 28, 2009 11:09 AM PDT up reply actions
First time checking in since the 4th Q on Sat...
I know this group is made up of a bunch of football dudes.. from cal… so analytical football dudes. Allow me to get a little sentimental here and represent for all the ladies. Danzig’s first highlight montage for the MD game this year was set to a song that still applies. Especially after this loss. “Don’t Believe Em… when they try to say it’s over..! Just tell em you’re number one. You’re a champion.”
Shake it off boys!! One loss—like one win—only lasts one day. It’s USC week!!
by since1997 on Sep 28, 2009 9:42 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
As depressing of a loss this last one is...
An L is an L is an L is an L…..
Sure we are scared of what might happen (rightfully so, we’ve slid before)…
But if I’ve learned anything its that Cal plays better when underrated with less expectation… No one is getting out of the Pac-10 unscathed this year, its just so happens our cut was pretty deep… Bandage that shit up, throw some cold water on your face, realize you are better than this and get back on the field and play some ball…
Now I don’t know about you guys… But I’ll be just as loud in Berkeley next week, if not louder… Talking just as much trash to U$C fans… (p.s. that maroon and gold you dressed your child in? well that’s child abuse, give your kid a chance at succeeding in life, etc etc)… And ready for the Bears to lay a Strawberry Canyon beat down…
It’s not like U$C has been blowing anyone away this year… I’ve licked my wounds and now its time for some Bear revenge… Go Bears let’s pop the Trojan$!!!!
Things to remember: Girls don't appreciate it when you yell "Beast Mode!" when switching to doggy style
by CruzinBears on Sep 28, 2009 9:51 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Yes, there was bad playcalling by both offensive and defensive coordinators. The o-line was also playing terribly, and Riley was getting progressively worse but that still doesn’t explain the extent of the blowout.
My main gripe about the team is their lack of toughness. Really, I’m better off watching the Niners. Hell, I’m still better off watching the Niners from last year. At least I know that when the Niners are losing big, when their being outcoached, outmatched, and their quarterback can’t make any throws, the team will still try to bust some nuts and at least play with some heart.
Watching this team is like watching Raiders. Nobody, the fans, the coaches, the players, wants to be there when things don’t go your way.
All these short passes make me wonder how much Ludwig trusts RIley’s ability to throw the medium-range pass.
I really noticed this myself. Deep ball, or checkdown/short pass/screen. We need some intermediate routes. Keeps corners/safeties honest, and prevents LBers from being as aggressive.
Tucker sure failed when this was his assignment.
by CaliforniaCMB on Sep 28, 2009 12:59 PM PDT up reply actions
Attitude
I don’t like the attitude of the Bears coming off this loss. Best’s quotes about the national championship sound delusional. And Riley’s bit about “this is not the way it was supposed to go” sounds petulant. I know they want to keep their heads up, but all this talk about “we don’t want to go into a tailspin” sounds a lot like “we’re about to go into a tailspin.”
They should say, “we had a bad game, we made mistakes and were outplayed. This loss will motivate us in practice and in our game next week.”
You can’t say “one game at a time” and “the national championship is still within reach” in the same sentence. Fix the blocking. Add some man-blitzes to the D-scheme. Get more aggressive and less cocky. Put your nose to the grindstone and work your way out of the hole (the way they gave up in this game doesn’t give me confidence that they will do this—they get down and they expect some miracle to save them).
This is a gut-check. And from the quotes, we don’t pass. It isn’t about still thinking that you have a chance to win the rose bowl, it isn’t delusional confidence. It’s about becoming a better team so that you won’t feel this embarrassed ever again. If they don’t feel that embarrassment, then they are missing the major motivational tool here.
by slaphancock on Sep 28, 2009 11:25 AM PDT reply actions 1 recs
and. . . just to see this play out on the micro level, try to figure out when the Bears knew that they were going to lose in that game. Was there any intensity around that moment? Was there leadership getting the whole team excited to make the play of the game? I didn’t see it. It seemed like they always thought things might just turn around of their own accord. I saw zero intensity from the bears or their coaches.
Chip Kelly may have pounded his hand into a pulp arguing for a moot, totally fine, call. But he was IN the game. Our leaders, tedford, riley, thompson, all stood and watched the day unfold just as every Oregon fan had predicted.
by slaphancock on Sep 28, 2009 11:31 AM PDT up reply actions
And, since I’m rolling here. (apologies). This is almost identical to the attitude in 2007, when we started with “it’s just one game” and then “we don’t want to go into a tailspin” and then “we still have a good team, we just aren’t executing.” These are the rationalizations that ensure that we have a losing season. If you think you aren’t doing anything wrong, or that “one bad game happens,” then you won’t put in the work to change.
And it is NOT playing one game at a time to say something like “It’s only one game.” The context of that quote is that you are telling the team “There are a lot of games left, think about how many games we still have to play.” It WAS one game, the most important one of last week, and we got beat. Next week is another ONE game, and it is the most important one of this week. I can’t stand when Tedford’s message about concentration and focus gets muddled by the subtexts of his own motivational quotes. Don’t draw the attention to the context of the whole season (like in the tailspin comments or in the we don’t want 2007 comments). Draw attention to what happened last week and on the field—what you can fix. This could be a major learning moment for the team, but Tedford’s “it’s just one game” trivializes its importance. Turn negatives into postives, don’t ignore them.
by slaphancock on Sep 28, 2009 11:41 AM PDT up reply actions
You're buying into Inman's BS
I don’t understand this notion that the Bears think they played great but believe they were simply outplayed. You look at the postgame quotes on JO’s blog and the Bears acknowledged mistakes in every phase of the game. Not one player has made the impression that there was nothing they could do, that they got gamed by a team with a better plan. The team has clearly made the point that there are problems that need to be fixed.
by BleedinBlue on Sep 28, 2009 11:59 AM PDT up reply actions
I like it how losses this bad bring out the pop psychologists to bore us all to death with trite bullshit. Insult to injury and all that.
"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
Tedford: “We got beat by a better team today. I give them credit. It’s just one loss; we played hard, but didn’t execute. We’ll evaluate on what we can improve on for the next game.”
I have problems with the “it’s just one loss” and the “we played hard” parts of this quote. I know why one would feel like saying those things, but I’m saying that it confuses the “one game at a time” message. If every game is “just one loss” then there’s the feeling that it didn’t mean that much, when you’ve been trying to preach that every little thing matters. It’s lazy.
Tedford: “Momentum was in their favor pretty much all game. I’m really impressed with their defensive front and I give them all the credit.”
Sure, they’re defensive front was good. But we failed. Rather than giving them credit, why not take the responsibility. We didn’t prepare for that kind of edge pass rush. We allowed ourselves to become confused on the line. See what the difference in rhetoric makes?
Riley: “The game wasn’t what I expected at all. I expected to pick up 40 points; we didn’t.”
“We’ve got to fight. That’s all there is to it.”
“It’s one loss, but we don’t want it to be a downward spiral. We’ll come back next week and surprise some people. It’s a lot easier to play at home.”
Ok, where to begin. First of all, yes, I’m sure that the team didn’t score 40 points. Look at where the focus of the attention of this quote is—on Riley’s expectations. Maybe the problem IS the expectation. Why not say something like, we were surprised when we weren’t able to move the ball—that got us out of our rhythm. Rather than something like “In my fantasies before the game, we won the game!”
“We’ve got to fight” Well, that isn’t all there is to it, but I like the effort. The idea that you can keep doing the same thing, just harder, will probably yield the same results, except with more frustration.
“We don’t want it to be a downward spiral” No one does. But this reads as “I am totally aware that we are about to go on a downward spiral.” Why not, rather than thinking about all the games we might lose, focus on getting the details right. Say something like “This is a hard loss, but you will never see us play harder and smarter than we will next week.”
It’s about the message contained in the rhetoric—one way of addressing failure is to minimize its importance and suggest that we were just one or two plays away from winning the game. Another way is to take the responsibility and the leadership to get fired up (not just in a perfunctory way like they sound here—“I made silly mistakes, etc.”)
TEPPER: ""The noise affected me a little, but I made some stupid mistakes anyway."
Look at “stupid mistakes,” do you see what that implies? It implies that he knew better but he made the mistakes anyway. It minimizes the importance of those “stupid mistakes” and distances himself from them. Why not say, “I made mistakes and I need to work to correct them. I will play more disciplined in the future.”
What you hear from these guys is exactly the opposite from what they believe: They think they played hard and didn’t quit, but then why are there lazy mental errors and stupid mistakes (that’s the definition of quitting, they just stop caring about the little things). What I want to see is less “We’re better than that showed” and more “We will be even better as a result of this”
by slaphancock on Sep 28, 2009 12:38 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
I’m guessing our team was shellshocked. I mean it’s not like they were upset by 7-14 points. They got blasted apart. It was totally unexpected, like a threesome in your college dorm. I’d probably have a hard time putting something together that made a lot of sense after that.
Anyway, talk is cheap. How they play THIS Saturday means a thousand times more to me than what they said last Saturday.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Sep 28, 2009 12:44 PM PDT up reply actions
agreed. I just wish they had more of the intensity of Tebow following a loss last year by personally committing himself to being the best player in the universe. Riley’s “I thought we were going to win by 40” is the exact opposite—it looks backwards instead of forwards, it misplaces responsibility rather than accepts it, and it fantasizes rather than confronts reality. I’m worried about this Saturday BECAUSE of what they said last Saturday.
by slaphancock on Sep 28, 2009 12:54 PM PDT up reply actions
Maybe. I really don’t pay attention to that nonsense. The Gators didn’t win just because of Tebow last year, and any knowledgable Gator fan knows that.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Sep 28, 2009 1:15 PM PDT up reply actions
You can cherry pick and find evidence to support what you believe
But that doesn’t change the fact that you’re never really going to get into the players’ heads unless you’re with them at every moment. Like Avi said, talk is cheap. People are buying too much into short sound bites made by a shell shocked team.
to be honest, it’s just me that is nitpicking. And I honestly hope that you’re right and that the players are all in really productive mental states, not depressed, but not delusional either. But I don’t agree that talk is cheap. I mean, isn’t coaching really just talking? Tedford’s contract isn’t cheap.
The idea that this kind of game isn’t a mental (talky talk) kind of challenge is to make the kind of mistake as 2007. The game is played between the ears, as someone mentioned, not just between the lines.
And the Gators may not have won just because of Tebow, but it is undeniable that he is the leader of a very winning team. And as much as I despise him, he knows how to lead, how to manipulate the brain matter inside the helmets of his teammates to get the most out of them, not, like Riley, to simply say “it’s easier to play at home.”
Of course they were shell shocked, and they were all looking for a leader to rally behind. Who is that leader on our team? “Eddie Young” cannot be your answer here. Maybe next week we will see that leader emerge. . .
Of course it’s a mental game, but it’s not a mental game in the sense that stupid fans and media people talk about it. In college, it’s about coaches stepping up and making the right adjustments for their players to handle, not players trying to make their own adjustments in the game. Which is why I feel Marshall and Ludwig have a lot to adapt to in the upcoming weeks, because their players didn’t adapt on Saturday.
That Tebow wins solely based on his leadership is silly. They win because they have a coach who recognizes Tebow’s talent and maximizes his ability based on scheme and playcalling, and has great talent and an O-line around him that makes it difficult for defenses to scheme against. Put Tebow in a pro-style or a Big 10 offense and he’d struggle to win 8-9 games.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Sep 28, 2009 2:11 PM PDT up reply actions
*not to take all the credit away from Tebow, but the situation in Gainesville is perfect for him, compared to if he played in Athens or Baton Rouge.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Sep 28, 2009 2:12 PM PDT up reply actions
I guess my perspective needs qualification
Talk can be cheap, or at the very least, unreliable depending on the context of the situation. From anecdotal experience, expressing internal feelings and knowledge in words is not necessarily easy and cannot always be done one the fly, especially in a situation that Cal players found themselves in. As such, I refuse to put much stock in their immediate post game quotes.
Furthermore, I come away with the feeling that they didn’t know what happened to them; hard to provide adequate self criticism in such a case.
OK! we’re on the same page now. I agree that the words coming out of the Cal players’ mouths were probably just whatever syllables they still had the power to mutter. (Do you guys remember the post-game on-field interview with Leinhart after USC lost to Texas? He said something like “anyway, we’ll learn from this win.” And then he caught himself and said “or, I mean, loss.”) Maybe I’m expecting too much to hope that they could compose themselves in a matter of minutes.
And about Tebow, I am saying nothing about his talent or abilities on the field. I am just saying that if you watch him on the sidelines, pre-game, post-game whenever, he just EXUDES intensity. He expects to win, just as much as Riley, but the attitude he gives off is felt by the players around him. He yells all the time—screaming, neck-vein-popping encouragement. This is not the ONLY thing that helps Florida win, but it does help to turn momentum when they don’t have the crowd behind them. Zach Follet was the same kind of lightning rod last year. I’m just saying I haven’t seen any leadership on the team this year at all, and it’s what we need in tough times.
Yeah I agree. We’ll see what happens.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Sep 28, 2009 4:19 PM PDT up reply actions

by 





















































