Cal vs. Arizona State Post-Game Thoughts
(1) Tedford was showing a bit more fire and emotion. Maybe it's because he can feel the heat and criticism following last week's huge loss to USC. Maybe it's because his seat has never been warmer than ever before (even warmer than 2007). But against Arizona State, I felt like we were seeing a slightly different Tedford. Prior to the kickoff, Tedford came over to the sidelines, jumped on the stone bench in front of the student section, faced the students, raised his fist in the air, and yelled some words of encouragement. The students noticed, saw this, and cheered in response.
Later in the game, Tedford also got pretty heated at Riley (QB #13). On one particular passing play when the team was driving towards the south end zone, Riley scrambled to his left (towards the east sideline) and had room to run for at least five easy yards of gain and perhaps even a first down. Instead though, Riley kept looking down the field, and passed the ball wide out of bounds for an incompletion. This play occurred right in front of the student section. Every student in that section could see the free yardage sitting right in front of Riley that he didn't take. Tedford, of course, saw this too, came out 10 yards onto the field, yelled some words at Riley, and motioned with his hand that Riley should have just scrambled and taken the free yardage. It was hard to see Tedford's face from the distance I was at, but you could just see the anger, frustration, and emotion in his body language.
It's been a while since we've seen Tedford get really emotional and pissed during games. We've also rarely seen him interact directly with the crowd prior/after a game (I can only remember he thanked the students after the 2006 Oregon game). So the fact that he's doing some things seems to suggest even he realizes that things might be on the line more than ever before. After all, the team is middling at .500, its passing game has been struggling, and the toughest part of Cal's schedule is coming up.
(2) One of Riley's best games in a while. Riley was 19/28 (67.9%), with a 8.6 yard per attempt, two touchdowns, and zero interceptions. Statistically, this is one of Riley's best games in a while. Most people might be inclined to say that Riley did "great" this game, but upon closer review, I think he was only "serviceable." Mostly, I'm going to have to nitpick on Riley's deep balls. At least two, perhaps even three, of his deep throws were a little underthrown which prevented sure touchdowns. In particular, the deep pass play to Cal WR #1 Jones right before halftime which got Cal down to the six yard line or so. That pass was slightly underthrown to the point where Jones had to slow down to make the catch, and preventing a touchdown. Of course, subsequently Cal was forced to kick a field goal.
Riley still also was a little off on his lateral passing (east-west passing). He missed an easy playaction bootleg pass to the fullback. On another bootleg pass play his pass to Cal WR #3 J. Ross was behind Ross. Fortunately, Ross one-handed the ball despite it being behind him and ran for yardage. These are easy passes which should be spot on, yet still aren't guaranteed passes due to Riley being completely spot on. A few more errors: not seeing an open TE #80 Miller in the flat while close to the red zone, and taking a sack and not getting rid of the ball while in the red zone.
While I've harped on the negative, Riley did also have some positive. He didn't turn the ball over. He made some great throws. The touchdown pass to Cal WR #21 K. Allen in the southwest corner of the endzone was ridiculous. That was quite the "thread the needle" pass. There was so little daylight in that passing lane with huge potential for an interception, but Riley got it in there. The deep passes to Jones, while underthrown, were still good displays of Riley recognizing that Jones had the defender beat.
Despite the positive numbers from Riley, I'm still concerned about Cal's passing game. It seems, since Riley has become QB, the Cal passing game has become somewhat simple. Maybe "simple" isn't the right word, because I'm sure certain aspects of the Cal passing game are quite complex. But what I'm trying to get at, is that most of Cal's passing game seems to have been reduced to screen passes, hitches, go routes off of playaction, and on rare occasion the slant. These are all fairly short routes which are quick developing, and don't really require extensive and prolonged dropbacks and reading of the coverage. We don't really see some of the longer passing routes like digs, deep outs, posts, flags, post-corners, etc. Why is that? The main reasons for avoiding those longer passing routes is because the offensive line can't hold up in pass protection long enough, or the QB has trouble passing those deeper routes against defenses (for whatever reason). In my opinion, the Cal passing game nowadays is very different than what it was in 2006 and 2007 when Cal had Longshore as QB -- and I think it's because Longshore had the abilities to be a greater passing threats on some of those deeper routes we no longer see.
(3) Cal CB #1 S. Williams takes over as a starting CB over Cal CB #26 D. Hagan. I mentioned last week that I was fairly impressed with Williams' performance against USC. It turns out, that Williams didn't only catch my eye, but also the eye of the coaches who then promoted him to starting CB in replacement of Hagan. Williams' immediately disappointed us all (joking) with his failed interception on the very first offensive play of the game by deflecting an underthrown rainbow pass sure-interception up into the air for an Arizona State completion. Williams should have intercepted that ball. At the least he should have just swatted it down to the ground. However, I think the reason why he accidentally deflected the ball up into the air was because he was wearing a cast on one hand (he was wearing a cast against USC last week too which also prevented an INT). He couldn't catch the ball. He tried, but the ball just bounced off his hand and cast, right over his head into the waiting hands of the Arizona State WR. Oh well, life happens. Other than that, Williams looked to do just fine the rest of the game.
But what about Hagan? Arizona State uses a lot of 3 WR sets (11 personnel). Cal defensive coordinator Pendergast decided to counter with Cal's nickel package. That meant Cal would have three CBs out on the field. Hagan still didn't even get playing time in the nickel package. Instead, we saw Anthony, Hill, and Williams at CB. I'm not sure if this is a permanent thing that Hagan has fallen to #4 on the depth chart, or if the coaching staff just liked the matchups better with the other Cal defenders on the field for this one game. This should be something to look out for in future games.
(4) Cal safety #11 S. Cattouse, in appropriate Halloween spirit, has a monster game. Geez, Cattouse was wrecking people all over the field today. He was breaking on the ball perfectly to just decapitate some ball carriers and ball recipients. Not to mention his interception was just ridic. It's good to see him performing well despite losing some playing time to Hill earlier this season. Hopefully his high level of play keeps up over the season.
(5) Cal kickoff coverage has taken a dip lately. Kickoff coverage against USC wasn't that great. Same against Arizona State. It looks like Arizona State's kick returns were really aggressive in their kick returns (just like USC's). They would just go full speed ahead right into the coverage attempting to slip through any daylight they could see. By doing this, they are setting themselves up for huge returns should they break the coverage. Additionally, it sort of forces the defenders to slow down on their coverage so they don't overrun the play and let the ball carrier just run right by them. On the other hand, the speedy ball carriers are also setting themselves up for receiving huge hits by the coverage team. High risk, high reward.
(6) Genyk teaching some new coverage technique. At the game, I noticed our defenders using some interesting coverage technique to get to the ball carrier. Cal's defenders closest to the sidelines, when cutting in towards the center of the field towards the kickoff returner, would dip their inner shoulder and keep their upper body facing the endzone and away from the ball carrier (instead of the turning their upper body towards the kick returner), thus leaving their back towards the center of the field and to offensive blockers. So imagine a kickoff coverage defender on the far right of the formation. If the ball carrier goes towards the middle of the field or the left side of the field, then the defender will angle his lower body so he's running towards the ball carrier but he will keep his upper body facing towards the endzone, or even towards the *right* sideline so his upper body is facing away from the ball carrier (so that his back is to the kickoff blockers). This technique prevents the kickoff blockers from blocking this defender, because if they do then they will draw a "block to the back" penalty.
This technique is used frequently in various aspects of football. For example, on defense the outside linebackers will often angle themselves inwards and towards the center of the field pre-snap, so that they cannot be blocked in the back by WRs on crackback blocks. If they are blocked in the back, then it increases the chances of drawing a penalty on the offense for the block in the back, or clipping.
Anyways, I haven't this kickoff coverage technique when Alamar was around. I think this is something that Cal special teams coach Genyk brought in with him.
(7) In a huge surprise, Cal QB #10 B. Mansion, sees playing time instead of Cal QB #9 B. Sweeney. First of all, it was a surprise to see a backup QB at all this game. I mean, in last week's huge loss to USC, Tedford still didn't even play a backup QB to get some playing time. Of course, Tedford explained himself saying that he didn't want the starters to leave the game on such a negative note, and that he wanted them to get points on the board to take something positive away from that game. But this game was different in that Cal was winning, and the starting players already had plenty of positives to take away from this game. Thus, the starters came out and the backups came in. What surprised all Cal fans though, was that Mansion came in instead of Sweeney. What is this about? Sweeney has been sitting pretty at #2 since last season. Did Mansion do something in practice this week to boost him back into the #2 spot all of a sudden? Tedford had this to say:
"He has been more consistent (than Beau Sweeney), that is a competitive spot. He has been more consistent in practice and throwing the ball better."
So it looks like Mansion is the new #2.
(8) I liked the way Ludwig was getting the ball to Cal WR #21 K. Allen early, and also to Cal TE #80 A. Miller. Cal seemingly got the ball to K. Allen six times within the first two quarters. Getting the ball into your play maker's hands early will get them pumped up, increase some confidence, and force the defense to take notice of that player and thus opening things up elsewhere on the field. Of course, getting the ball to the playmaker is all dependent on that player being open. Ludwig was able to satisfy this constraint by getting the ball to Allen on screens rather than forcing the ball down the field.
As for Miller, he caught a pass on (what is basically) a throwback screen. This play is a natural progression from Cal's sprint out play which it ran a few weeks ago against UCLA. On that play, Cal had Riley in shotgun, with three WRs to Riley's right, and only Miller to the left on the end of the offensive line. Riley sprinted out right on the QB movement, to pass to the right. Miller provided backside protection with the offensive line. The entire UCLA defense moved with the flow of the offense and there wasn't a single defender covering Miller -- who was an eligible receiver. On Saturday, against Arizona State, Cal shows this same look. It looks like a sprint out, the QB runs to his right, the entire defense shifts to follow the sprint, but then they forget about the tight end on the backside who is left completely alone for an easy gain. Simple stuff. Ludwig is scheming.
97 comments
|
3 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Re: Williams
Can’t believe Steve jumped Darian. Hagan is the best corner we have. The likelier possibility is Hagan is probably injured and is limited in his mobility. He didn’t play much against USC, and I think the staff is throwing Williams out there because they know Hagan’s health is a variable factor and he just isn’t up-to-speed yet. Giving Williams in-game experience can help this team down the road, even if there are some bumps in the road like that first play of the game. I imagine if Hagan is healthy he’ll regain his starting spot and Williams will move back to the backup corner or play the nickelback spot while Nnabuife recovers.
For people who are critical of Tedford not “playing young talent”, Williams seeing time over the experienced Hagan should clear some of those misconceptions. We play whoever plays the best in practice. That’s always how we go.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Oct 25, 2010 3:14 AM PDT reply actions
I tend to agree, but Hagan sure looks healthy jumping up on Cattouse in the photo above.
Cal Football: it is what it is.
Me three. I think he was supposedly limited in practice.
by atomsareenough on Oct 25, 2010 11:40 AM PDT up reply actions
If Hagen isn’t healthy why was he in on Special Teams?
I didn’t see the USC game (thankfully) but maybe Hagen had a bad enough game, and Williams did well enough, for the staff to move Williams up (even if temporarily) to light a spark under Hagen?
After all, pretty much everyone was so dispirited with the play of the starters (for the most part) last week that there were suggestions that backups should have been played. Maybe that’s what we saw here, just a little later after some film from the USC game was digested.
Hagan and Gameplanning
His injury probably kept him out a significant portion of the week (Tues and Weds), which meant that he didn’t take part in the LIVE portion of installation of the gameplan.
Basically, his injury against USC could have kept him out of the installation process for ASU.
Of course, he already knows his roles on STs, and was 100% healthy (or close to it) for ASU.
by happabearfan on Oct 25, 2010 9:47 AM PDT up reply actions
I think I saw hagan on kickoff coverage, and he made that tackle at 1 and was subsequently shaken up in the north end zone. I believe the play was late in the 2nd half.
"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark
Tedford confirmed on the Joe Starkey postgame show that williams’ near-INT bounced off his cast. I think he was a little nervous since they tested him early and Threet threw him an absolute gift.
"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark
Hagan did play
But he played with the second unit. So he’s probably healthy enough to play, just not healthy enough to start.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Oct 25, 2010 1:05 PM PDT up reply actions
Some thoughts after reviewing the game film (soooo much easier to do than last week):
1) I have to applaud the effort. From KA fighting for extra yards, or Vereen going Beast-Mode early, it was clear the guys were ready to play. Besides Vereen’s 2nd and 3rd effort runs, perhaps the best example of this was KA blocking his guy three times in order to free Vereen up for a Wildcat TD run. The guys were fired up for this one. Why the H E double hockey sticks does this only happen at home?
2) Interesting substitution pattern for the Oline. Guarnero/Edwards started. (w/ Schwartz/Schwenke/Cheadle) They played most of the 1st quarter. Good success running to the outside. Not so much running up the middle. At the end of the 1st quarter, MSG and Galas came in. Now we started to have success pounding it up the middle. 3rd quarter was back to Guarnero/Edwards. Couldn’t run up the middle…Could run outside. Switched to MSG/Galas in the 4th…and then to backups. I’m wondering/hoping that the coaching staff has figured out that Guarnero/Edwards aren’t overpowering because they’re a little undersized, but are very athletic at pulling. (hence great at running outside). On the other hand, Galas/MSG are more physical and help w/ the straight ahead runs. I know Marshall and Tedford are infinitely more knowledgeable w/ regards to football…However, I can’t help thinking that playing your two BEST Olinemen might be a good idea.
3) As Cal fans, we have to quibble/nitpick something. Riley’s deep throws. Let’s do this!!!
First deep throw(1st quarter): Jones ran and out n’ up. Both Edwards and Schwartz were beaten badly – Riley had to step up and throw early. Ball was overthrown. Maybe he missed. Maybe this was a throw-away.
2nd deep throw(1st quarter): Third and long. Riley misses Ross on a fade along the sidelines. The CB held Ross, but I think he would have overthrown him anyways. Low percentage play. Riley overthrew it…safe throw – either Ross gets it or no one does.
3rd deep throw(2nd quarter): You know that play out of the offset-I where the WR motions inside and we ALWAYS run? Play-action pass. Riley goes deep to Jones for the TD. After replaying several times, I have trouble finding too much fault w/ the throw. If you hat Riley, he missed the throw. If you sunshine pump Riley, Jones deliberately ran the CB inside towards the post and then jumped back outside to clear space. (like a savvy rebounder) Or, the cigar could just be a cigar. I’ll take the points.
4th deep throw (3rd quarter): Just a bad, bad underthrow. Jones adjusts for the ball and outfights Bolden for the reception. Better than a punt, right?
Conclusion: Some folks say it doesn’t matter why the deep balls are off. I disagree. I think there’s a significant difference between a correctable issue, and a non-correctable issue.(timing/execution vs. a lack of talent/skill) My suspicion is that Riley still has a confidence issue – he’s so worried about turning it over that he’s hesitating until the WR comes open or he simply doesn’t have the time(due to shoddy pass pro) and he has to just put it up. Theory #2: DJax, Hawkins, Jordan were really good. They were able to adjust to off-target deep balls to the extent that we never realized that they were not quite right. Riley is the same guy that he’s been since the AF Bowl. We’re just seeing it now with an inconsistent Oline and less-talented WR corp. Theory #3: He’s just not throwing the deep ball as well as he did as a frosh. Who the heck knows why. Aaaaaallllllaaaaaamaaaaaarrrrr?
4) I don’t like how Tedford is calling out the fanbase. Perhaps this is an overreaction. I can understand playing the “us against the world card.” Pre-game. But after the game, I could understand a “I know some folks lost faith in us, but I really appreciate the fans that came out despite the poor weather and MLB game to support us.” Instead, a unilateral “Our fans lost faith in us and the negativity is depressing rant” bugs me a little. Um. If you hadn’t just produced the worst loss in the past decade, I think the fans would be more likely to come out and support you. Yeah, there’s always going to be a group that nit-picks and likes to find fault in everything. But how about acknowledging the loyal die-hards who endured rain and cold? It was pretty loud when ASU had 3rd and long. Let’s face it – you sort of stink on the road. Home-field advantage only works when the home-field has your back. Throw the faithful a bone? Maybe? (Aw hell – Did I just get my sunshine pumper merit badge revoked?) On the other hand, he did go and try to fire up the student section. At least that’s something.
5) I really liked the diversity on D. They mixed up rush 3, drop 8 (sacrilege!!!) with a variety of different LB blitzes and some CB/Safety blitzes. Jordan absolutely abused their Oline all day and allowed us to be really clever with our different looks. Cool idea to go nickel but use an extra Safety (Cattouse!). Earlier in the year, he was overrunning plays and missing assignments. Nice to see Cattouse with a break-out game. With Conte’s surprising development, and Campbell’s improvement, Cattouse + Conte with Hill/Campbell in the rotation is a really nice package to complement Hagan/Anthony/Williams.(Buife – hurt?) I also appreciated the mental toughness following that flukey first drive. Admit it – you were saying “here we go again.”
6) Props to Stevens for saying “Cast? Just a flesh wound!” and kicking *ss. His run-blocking has greatly improved from the beginning of the year – have to give him credit for springing at least one of Vereen’s TD’s.
7) I liked the playcalling. If the Oline has issues in pass-pro, let’s call more quick throws: screens and hitches – give the ball to our playmakers in space (Allen, Jones, Sofele) and count on the fact that we have good blocking from the TE/WR positions. After the quick stuff forces their CB’s to play tight, let’s use play-action and go deep. I also liked the deliberate attempts to get the ball to Miller – maybe he can’t run the deep seam, but he’s a…um…load to take down in the open field. Yeah, we have issues w/ our oline and our QB…but at least it looks like we’re trying to gameplan a way to compensate.
8) It was the first time my admittedly inexpert eye saw something odd schematically w/ our special teams. When Anger’s punt got blocked, they had three guys on the line with no one in front of them. It was a really wide split on our protection team. It’s like we assumed they were playing for a return and simply ignored all the guys on the line. Blown protection call? I’m glad that happened in this game instead of a close one down the road. Coverage-wise, I’m not sure if ASU just has a good returner, or we’re getting a little sloppier. I wonder if the emphasis on using 2nd teamers to “service” the 1st string is affecting the amount of time they have to work on special teams.
9) No, I have no idea what team will show up at OSU next week. The realist in me says we lose horribly to a better-coached team who knows exact-friggin-ly how to neutralize our somewhat predictable offense. The Old Blue in me says we lose horribly and the world gets swallowed by the sun. The sunshine pumper in me says this the year where Riley offsets all the statistics and finally has a competent game in the state of Oregon. I hat myself so much right now. So, who knows?
Old Toothwrangler
by Kodiak on Oct 25, 2010 3:18 AM PDT reply actions 5 recs
Riley
Regardless of how one chooses to characterize the deep balls he threw, he had at least two “thread the needle” type throws on Saturday. One was to Keenan Allen for the TD that Hydro mentions above; the other was the pass to Mike Calvin near the ASU sideline to convert a 3rd down in the 3rd quarter (the series that ultimately ended in the punt block for an ASU TD).
Yes, I am an Old Blue. Now get off my lawn.
The TD to Allen scared the piss out of me. It was very weird, but that play seemed to happen in slow motion as I was watching, and I even said aloud with fear and dread something to the effect of, “Oh, god – Riley can’t be throwing into that kind of tight coverage!”
Now, if this were Rodgers throwing the ball, I would have likely had a ton of confidence in the completion. But sad to say the fact that I had such agita watching this throw indicates the level of confidence I have right now in Riley. And that just sucks, because I kinda like Riley’s feistiness.
Being an Old Blue means fearing any athletic success.
if this were Rodgers throwing the ball, I would have likely had a ton of confidence in the completion.
I know what you mean. Aaron Rodgers’ concept of someone being “open” is different than that of your average quarterback.
Yes, I am an Old Blue. Now get off my lawn.
The “thread the needle” throws don’t exactly inspire confidence that Tedford’s offense is easy to replicate and run.
CGB: Quality is our Dignity; Service is our Lift.
by Spazzy Mcgee on Oct 25, 2010 10:31 AM PDT up reply actions
Sorry, this doesn’t even make any sense at all. Perhaps if every throw the QB had to make were required to be a “thread the needle” pass, yes. That is hardly the case.
I saw several nice “threaded” passes by the Oregon QB against Stanford, for example. Does that make you think that these passes are required to run the Oregon offense effectively?
With respect to playing your best guys it o-line… it sounds like there are necessarily clear-cut “best” guys. It sounds like these Galas/MSG and Tompek-Guarnero/Edwards are good at different things. You’d hope for more all-around versatile play, but if we have specialized players that’s wha we got. Although I don’t know it speaks well to coaching/talent evaluation (Marshall?) that we’re still experimenting with line-ups to see what works this late in the season.
Agreed on calling out the fans, it wasn’t exactly ideal conditions out there. Anyway, on the blocked punt it seems like Genyk likes the asymmetrical line-up on occasion, with Anger rolling to his right rugby-style. I don’t like it, since it’s seemed for the last few games that the defense can just run straight to the point where they expect the punt to actually be kicked, and that’s what happened this time.
Kodiak
I totally agree with your point #7, I think Ludwig & Tedford have done a solid job in play calling to maximize our strengths and get the offense moving, despite a less than great O-line. To me that has been the biggest (and saddest) story line of the Bears in 2009-10; superb running backs hampered by less than great O-line play. It makes what Vereen does every week all the more impressive, but this would be a much scarier team for the opposition if we had solid line play.
Am I known as Cugel the Clever for nothing?
Fair weather fans
Maybe the coach could have chosen to be more diplomatic, but I appreciate his candor about the lack of support. He shouldn’t waste one moment of his day thinking about how to package his message — just tell it like it is. I know we fans certainly haven’t been afraid to speak our minds, with some folks even raising the issue of replacing the head coach. If we can be blunt, why should we expect Tedford to tiptoe around our delicate sensibilities?
Sure the weather sucked. And sure the team has taken some lumps lately. But there’s a reason why fans who only show up on sunny days when things are going well are called fair weather fans. If they’re going to jump on the bandwagon when it’s rolling along scoring 50-plus every Saturday, they can at least show a little grit when the team is reeling and actually needs the 12th man.
And the Giants game was no excuse. I was able to watch that (and appreciate it more than ever) after sitting in the rain all afternoon.
Something Tedford understands but so many Pac-10 fans apparently don’t is that the 12th man is critical — and not just when you’re killing it, but even more when you’re on the margin, scrapping just to become bowl-eligible. We fans have an important role to play in our team’s success — we need to be there to scream like friggin’ maniacs whenever the other team has the ball. If someone’s just a spectator, that’s fine. But then they really have less grounds to complain about anything the team or coaching staff does.
Fair weather fans wherever you are, you let the team down.
by Monica's Dad on Oct 25, 2010 3:11 PM PDT up reply actions 9 recs
I like you.
CGB: Quality is our Dignity; Service is our Lift.
by Spazzy Mcgee on Oct 25, 2010 5:22 PM PDT up reply actions
Completely disagree
First of all, Tedford was calling out the entire fan base, not just the fair weather fans. As Kodiak noted, instead of saying he noticed some fans have lost faith and some fans are questioning the coaching [NOT the heart of players as he mentioned—-haven’t even heard that from the most vocal critics here], he chose to lump ALL of us together, including those of us who relentlessly defend Tedford and have been attending games since the 90s, including many many miserable rainy day games, never leaving early. Screw that. I’m offended by his comments. Call out fair weather fans if you want but don’t lump everyone together and turn this into an us-against-the-world scenario when that simply isn’t true.
by SonofCalifornia on Oct 26, 2010 7:43 PM PDT up reply actions
And this isn’t about candor vs. sugar coating, it’s about getting the facts straight and not throwing your entire fan base under the bus.
by SonofCalifornia on Oct 26, 2010 7:45 PM PDT up reply actions
Conte
Just slightly OT, but you know, as I reflected on this game (and this season), I’ve actually really come to appreciate the level of play and the stabilizing force that Conte has brought to the secondary.
More than that, I’m really susprised. Honestly, there was nothing in his play the last three years that would have made me believe he could become the most consistent and reliable guy back there. There were so many games in the last couple of seasons in which he looked confused, slow, or just plain over-matched – always catching up to the play or needing some help to not get embarrassed.
It’s pretty clear that the move from DB to safety really suits him. Good grief, but this kid seems all over the field now, from being a very solid pass defender to being vital in coming up for key run support.
It’s really nice to see him finally start living up to the promise and hype he had as that recruit who saw the light and abandoned Ucla.
Being an Old Blue means fearing any athletic success.
The man has come to play the last couple games. I’ve never been as down on him as I’ve read on the webs, but I will say he was one of the few guys who came out last week and then he continued it this week.
by HelloBowlesHall on Oct 25, 2010 9:40 AM PDT up reply actions
I never expected I would be loving Conte this much. In the preseason when he was moved to safety, i remember everyone being worried. (We had absolutely no depth there before Hill moved over)
Anyways, my most memorable play of Conte in his first 3 years had been, DeSean Jackson’s punt return TD vs. Tenn. in 2007 opener, Conte’s first game. Herby said “Colquitt, he’s just gonna slam somebody’s head cuz hes frustrated” that was Conte’s head.
Can we talk about KA21
And that monstrous stiff-arm hurdle he had? (even though it was neutralized)
That is a move for the ages.
“Maybe it’s because his seat has never been warmer than ever before (even warmer than 2007). "
Passive voice and nonsensical syntax. Way to put that Berkeley degree to work, Hydro! ;)
I don’t know what to make of the Hagan thing. Dude still had 6 tackles according to ESPN, so he can’t be that injured. Unless he played that terribly against USC or had a partial benching for violation of team rules I can’t see why his reps decreased.
I only got to catch the 3rd quarter and the first half of the 4th. Gonna go back on the game film when I get the chance.
Interesting analysis
and I think it’s because Longshore had the abilities to be a greater passing threats on some of those deeper routes we no longer see.
Wasn’t Riley supposed to have more zip on his passes though? I don’t understand this either.
The kickoff coverage is more of a concern. We really don’t do well when we lose the field position battle, as evidenced by USC. It looks like the coverage is set up to funnel the returner to the middle, except that the coverage team isn’t breaking up the muddled middle fast enough to tackle the returner before he’s to the 40 yard line. I don’t know if we’re not fast enough or strong enough or if the kicks aren’t long enough (although I think Tavecchio’s been doing well as of late).
I think it could be related to going through the # of reads/progressions when you run through the more complicated combo routes. I remember that Nate supposedly would make it through his 3rd and 4th reads, but Riley would only go with his first or 2nd looks.
Considering how Riley has struggled with consistency, I wonder if Tedford/Ludwig have quietly done what he did for Boller(senior year) – simplified the passing game so that Riley doesn’t have to make so many reads. It might also be why we don’t see as many passes to the TE – it’s usually the 3rd or 4th option after the WR’s in many plays.
/totally wild speculation here
Old Toothwrangler
Why do you keep saying Tedford simplified the playbook for Boller?
Don’t know if you saw my reply to that thought in a previous thread but it’s absolutely false that Tedford did that with Boller.
Nate had a better OL, and he had better receivers. Nate didn’t look so great in 2008, he had to get rid of the ball quicker (avoiding sacks but taking incompletions) as we rarely got good pass protection or separation by WRs downfield.
At least, that is what my (admittedly fuzzy) recollection tells me.
I don’t think it’s just the better OL/WRs. As you point out, in 2008, Longshore did a good job getting the ball out to avoid sacks. That’s something it’d be nice to see Riley do more. When your offense is heavily dependent on the run game, it’s important to avoid negative plays when attempting to pass.
Sure, he did a good job getting the ball out to avoid sacks, and was mostly ineffective as a result. That’s not a “win”, it’s just a different way of not succeeding.
Longshore was also much better at throwing picks. TBH I think it all balances out to some extent; what 2008 showed was that neither was notably more effective than the other.
I disagree with the first point. If the QB has no time to throw on every play, not getting sacked is a “win” when grading the QB. You can’t expect him to avoid sacks and make plays all the time. No QB outside of maybe Michael Vick can do that. I don’t think you can blame Longshore for Oline failures. He did a good job minimizing sacks which allowed drives to last longer and therefore get more chances to throw deep.
Regarding Longshore throwing picks, that was definitely a problem. Those 4th quarter INTs close the gap between him and Riley somewhat.
Well done, hydro!
Would be happy with a competitve loss next week, and thrilled with a win.
"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark
Drive to end the half
I can’t believe nobody has mentioned the drive to end the first half as additional evidence that Tedford is trying something different. After ASU had just missed a 37 yard field goal, with the ball on our 20-yd line with 3:17 to go in the half, we were forced into a 3-and-out. Then Cattouse intercepted Threet at the Cal 29 yard line with 1:34 to go in the half. Being that deep in our territory and already being up 23-3, I figured that Tedford would hand the ball off to Vereen on first down and second down and go into the locker room with a nice, tidy lead and a pretty dominant defensive performance.
But no. Not today.
Here’s what happened:
1st-10, CAL29 1:34 K. Riley passed to K. Allen to the right for 2 yard gain
2nd-8, CAL31 1:19 K. Riley passed to K. Allen to the left for 2 yard gain
3rd-6, CAL33 0:55 K. Riley passed to S. Vereen down the middle for 7 yard gain
1st-10, CAL40 0:45 K. Riley passed to M. Jones to the left for 7 yard gain
2nd-3, CAL47 0:28 K. Riley passed to J. Ross to the left for 5 yard gain
1st-10, AZST48 0:20 K. Riley incomplete pass to the left
2nd-10, AZST48 0:17 K. Riley passed to M. Jones to the left for 42 yard gain
1st-6, AZST6 0:07 K. Riley incomplete pass to the left
2nd-6, AZST6 0:02 G. Tavecchio kicked a 23-yard field goal
Eight, count them, eight consecutive pass plays, with a near TD throw to Jones with 7 seconds on the clock. Had we not gotten a thumping by USC last week, I’m not so sure that Tedford would have been so aggressive to end the half. Frankly, I’m happy with this development because until a game is safely in hand, I think the team needs to play “balls to the wall” aggressively, rather than “not to lose.” Granted we only got three points out of it, but we also gained some momentum to end the half and the drive must have been demoralizing for the ASU defense.
It also showed me that Tedford had confidence that Riley wouldn’t turn the ball over with a careless pass deep in our own territory, running a 2 minute offense. The team covered 65 yards in 8 plays in 1:32. More of this please.
Did anyone else notice this and think that it was unusual/out-of-character for Tedford?
by daveman on Oct 25, 2010 11:00 AM PDT reply actions 6 recs
I liked this too, I was very impressed with the go for the throat mentality at the end of the 1st half…
"Remember the Maine! TO HELL WITH STANFORD!"
by CruzinBears on Oct 25, 2010 11:08 AM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, really good point.
Especially taking one last shot at the end zone w/ 7seconds to go was really uncharacteristic.
I liked it a lot.
Might be worth mixing in a series or so of no-huddle throughout the game as a change-up.
Old Toothwrangler
And Riley has matured to the point where he wasn’t going to tuck it and try and run with it (no timeouts remaining) or throw it over the middle into coverage. I think Ludwig put him in a position to succeed with the quick out/fade to Jones and he almost made the play, but for a few inches.
Riley put the ball where either Jones would make a spectacular play or nobody would get the ball. I was concerned when it appeared that they were going to overturn the play and the clock was reading 0:00. But the refs did the right thing and put the 2 seconds back on the clock and the Xtra point attempt turned into a FG for Giorgio.
Yep noticed this too.
But then again he did this vs Maryland last year in the opener. A beautiful two minute drill when totally not needed ending with a TD pass from Riley to Boateng. I remember posting that I love this new aggressive Tedford. Of course then we never saw it again (except vs ASU when the game was on the line).
In other words, Go Bears!
Totally agree!
I was so sure that JT would sit on it and take the 20pt lead into the half — and couldnt argue.
And even when we got into 3rd down and about a minute left and I think ASU had some time outs, we came out throwing.
I liked it and it was nice to see JT sell out a little. Hopefully it will calm the riled up fan base.
by ArtVandelet on Oct 25, 2010 11:34 AM PDT up reply actions
I did…and it felt like same ol’ same ol’ with Tedford & Co w/ 3:17 to go in the half. Was excited to see Tedford/Ludwig march down the field, and have Riley execute a near perfect 2 minute drill.
You could also say Cal nearly got 2 TD’s, as the 42 yard pass to Jones was almost a TD had it been thrown a little better (as Hydro noted).
Also, hat tip to the coaches for calling a play that could be pulled off with 7 seconds to go and still allowing for a FG attempt.
"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark
I agree and enjoyed it immensely.
CGB: Quality is our Dignity; Service is our Lift.
by Spazzy Mcgee on Oct 25, 2010 11:36 AM PDT up reply actions
He’s done it before. But mostly in routs. I wonder if we’d see the same thing in a 7-10 point game.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Oct 25, 2010 1:09 PM PDT up reply actions
Good point
I was convinced we were going to run out the clock and go to halftime content with a 23-3 lead. I was glad to see us try to get more.
Yes, I am an Old Blue. Now get off my lawn.
Maybe it's because 3 years have passed and I'm looking at things through a blue-tinted sunglasses but...
… I miss Longshore.
In other words, Go Bears!
I miss pre 2007 @Oregon Longshore. Post… he tried his best, and I don’t dislike him or anything, but I don’t think our results with Longshore would have been any better than with Riley… different, but not better.
TBH I am not sure the “pre” Longshore would be much better. I have a lot of doubt that he was so much worse after, I think the team really took a turn for the worse and it reflected badly on both QB’s (who have their own warts to begin with).
I’m a little concerned about RB whenever the post-Vereen era arrives. I don’t think debo or sofele are #1 tailbacks, and I’m also concerned Yarnway’s down to #4. I think Debo could have a really good senior season, but I don’t see his junior campaign as being a breakout. Perhaps Yarnway can turn it around, or Trajuan Briggs becomes BeastMode 2.0? I think Sofele’s in the perfect role.
"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark
Too early to tell, IMHO. I think we have quality depth. I agree we don’t seem to have the “star” running back to fill in that we have seemed to have so frequently.
Then again, did anyone think Forcett would have the year he did as a senior in 2007?
I think a lot of people expected Forsett to be good in 07. We had a good O-line (no one knew about the short yardage troubles just yet), a good FB and Forsett had proven himself vs Oregon and other such games.
In other words, Go Bears!
You must hang out in different (online) circles. All I remember is concern about him being too small and being unable to carry the load. I don’t think a single person predicted the 1500+ yard campaign he ended up with.
I thought he’d be great. Always liked the Force.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Oct 25, 2010 1:10 PM PDT up reply actions
there was a lot of media concern
I didn’t hear a lot of fan concern.
Forsett is one of those guys you have to see to understand. Like Vereen he runs heavier than he is, and is put together well enough to take some pounding.
That said, it would be best for us if the starter at tb keeps it to 20-25 carries, and 5 passes a game, and the back ups get in a good 10-15 touches. This does two things that are good for the team 1) rest for the starter, it’s a long season. 2) expereince for the guys who will be the starters in the future. One reason we have not had the drop-off at TB (imo) is experienced back ups.
Go Bears Go
by Rocksanddirt on Oct 25, 2010 1:37 PM PDT up reply actions
I was pretty confident. He had a pretty tremendous YPC going into ’07.
by atomsareenough on Oct 25, 2010 1:51 PM PDT up reply actions
I will take all of your collective words for it that you aren’t remembering with the benefit of hindsight. I certainly didn’t expect him to do nearly as well as he did, and was very happy to be wrong.
I wasn’t sure he would be quite as awesome as he was, but I felt more than comfortable about him being the starter, I’ll put it that way.
by atomsareenough on Oct 25, 2010 3:02 PM PDT up reply actions
that was also made possible because we had a very potent passing threat. too much talent all over the field on offense.
Odds on Vereen leaving after this season...
Anyone? He is, after all, just a junior with an additional year of eligibility. If he were to stay another year, it would give us time to find out who will be the next feature back (Sofele, DeBo, Yarnway, Briggs, Lasco, someone else).
95% sure this is his last year
Secret’s out on Cal tailbacks. I’d be happy if he opted to return, but I can’t see any reason why he’d stay.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Oct 25, 2010 2:16 PM PDT up reply actions
Yeah, I guess. He’s not getting any of the Heisman-type hype that Jahvid was, though. I wonder if he’ll be a first rounder.
by atomsareenough on Oct 25, 2010 3:01 PM PDT up reply actions
Heisman-hype has no correlation with draft stock. Where did Gerhart get drafted? Cam Newton isn’t going to be a first rounder.
Scouts who’ve been paying attention to Vereen probably already know he’s NFL-ready.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Oct 25, 2010 3:51 PM PDT up reply actions
Come on, it may not have a TON of correlation, but I wouldn’t say it has none.
by atomsareenough on Oct 25, 2010 4:01 PM PDT up reply actions
Why? Did any of us expect Tyson to get drafted in the top 10? Most scouts don’t pay attention to the runaway hype train.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Oct 25, 2010 8:11 PM PDT up reply actions
To be fair...
most scouts don’t work for the Jacksonville Jaguars.
"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark
If Cam Newton keeps it up, he’ll be the Raiders first round pick…
"Remember the Maine! TO HELL WITH STANFORD!"
by CruzinBears on Oct 25, 2010 4:24 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Tebow is a strange and unique case.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Oct 26, 2010 11:34 PM PDT up reply actions
I think he’s gonzo if he feels he’ll be drafted within 3 rounds.
I don’t think the returning offensive line and new QB gives him enough hope that he’ll be better off, draft-wise, if he stays. It’ll be “:shutdown Vereen.”
"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark
Hmmm
Not sure if I’m more worried about a post-Vereen era or a post-Riley era. I hope we don’t have a season or two like the post-Rodgers era (Joe Ayoob anyone?). So far, I have little to no confidence in:
- Mansion (Jr.)
- Sweeney (So.)
- Maynard (So. ?)
- Bridgford (RS Fr.)
- Hinder (Fr.)
- Boehm (HS)
Is the next Aaron Rodgers in that group somewhere? From what we’ve seen, I don’t think Mansion or Sweeney starts next year and Maynard had a good, not great season in Buffalo last year. So it might be time for Bridgford or Hinder to step to the forefront. Any way you look at it, we’ll be putting a totally inexperienced QB back there. Good times.
Rankings
For what its worth:
BCS – 37(billingsly) (40-BCS guru)
Coaches – 33
Harris – 42
Massey (KM-BCS) – 33
Real Massey – 25
Anderson (AH – BCS) 42
Sagarin (JS-BCS) 31
Real Sagarin 8 (!) We must be the best 3 loss team in Sagarin history
Billingsly (RB-BCS) 34
Wolfe (PW-BCS) 40
Colley (CM-BCS) 41
BCS Fan Poll 35 (Defend your vote site)

by 
























































