Cal vs. Washington Post-Game Thoughts
by HydroTech on Nov 29, 2010 3:00 AM PST
in California Golden Bears Football
Email
Print(1) The passing game sucked, to say the least. The entire game, you just got the feeling that Cal couldn't pass the ball. Maybe it was the fact that it seemed like a third of Cal's passes were screens. Or maybe it was the fact that Keenan Allen (Cal WR #21) was essentially playing QB instead of Brock Mansion (Cal QB #10). Right? I mean, it must say something about your QB when he's... not playing QB.
This is one of the most inept and lamest passing offenses I've ever seen from a Cal football team in the Tedford era. I mean, we practically seemed like a high school team out there. It's shameful. Embarrassing. Tedford, the "QB guru", has one of the worst passing offenses in the Pac-10 if not the worst.
I know a lot of people will say that our passing offense has sucked since 2007, but I think that overlooks the fact that a lot of it was due to Longshore's injuries (ankle in 2007, and pectoral tear in 2008), and now Riley's (Cal QB #13) injury in 2010. If you toss out those injury years, you're only really left with 2009 as being the truly bad year despite a healthy QB. So, I think the whole "OMG Tedford's passing offense has sucked FOREVAIR" reactions are a bit overblown.
Of course, I'm not excusing some of the poor QB play in Riley in 2008 and 2009, and Mansion in 2010. But that's just one starting QB (Riley), and one backup QB (Mansion). It's not like Tedford has been turning out bad starting QBs year after year. I'm sure Longshore is coming to mind for a lot of people. But contrary to popular opinion, Longshore really wasn't that bad. And ask yourself, who would you rather have at QB: Longshore (2008 injured pec version), Riley, or Mansion? I've asked a lot of my friends this, and they've all said Longshore. Maybe that's just my friends though.
Bottom line, while Cal has certainly suffered from four year stretch of inconsistent passing offenses, I think there is some silver lining in the fact that injuries were the cause of most of those problems, and due to Riley not quite turning out to be the next Aaron Rodgers. If Longshore was healthy yet horrible in 2006, 2007, and 2008; Riley sucked in 2008, 2009, and 2010; then I would be worried. But as it stands now, 2010 is going down in the books as another starting-QB-got-injured-and-Cal-was-screwed kind of season. Am I not the only that is thinking that if Riley wasn't injured that the Oregon game, Big Game, and this Washington game might have turned out a bit different? I'm betting they would have.
(2) Why has the QB play declined since 2008 (aside from injuries)? This is purely speculation, but I'm going to guess that Tedford has removed himself from the development of quarterbacks to focus more on his "CEO" role of being a head coach.
Remember in 2002, we'd always read quotes from Kyle Boller saying how he was working with Tedford on his technique? And how we'd hear about Aaron Rodgers playing "checkers" with Tedford? And remember all those times we heard Riley talking about how he worked with Tedford on his .... oh wait, I don't remember anything like that. And remember all those times we heard Mansion talking about how he played "checkers" with Tedford.... oh wait, I don't remember anything like that either.
Coincidence? I'm leaning towards nope. It's pretty well speculated that Tedford has taken himself away from more of the X&O part of the program, to focus more on the team as a whole and the overall football operations ever since 2007 and the whole "cancer in the locker room" thing. I remember reading some of the quotes from the defense in 2008 about how Tedford was now coming around to the defensive side of the ball (during practices) and defensive meetings more to keep an eye on things and how he never really did that before that prior to 2008. And then of course, I don't really remember reading any quotes or hearing about Riley or Mansion talking about special technique sessions with Tedford. Mayyyyybbbeee, there was one article just prior to the 2010 season where I think Riley might have mentioned something about Tedford and him working on his technique, but I just feel like there has been an overall removal of Tedford from QB development.
All this is pure speculation on my part though. I really don't know how much time that Tedford spends on developing the QBs himself, rather than leaving QB development up to the offensive coordinators. I would really like to know though.
If Tedford is leaving QB development up to the offensive coodinators instead of doing it himself, I think he's making a huge mistake. Tedford's biggest selling point when recruiting high school QB prospects is that he is a "QB guru," and can point to the likes of Akili Smith, Joey Harrington, Kyle Boller, and Aaron Rodgers as products of his mystical QB-guru ways. All those guys got to the NFL from Tedford's teachings. But then if Tedford is sacrificing QB development time to do more CEO stuff, then I think we're going to see a drop off in QB play. We might be seeing that a bit right now. Tedford is a greater asset to the development of QBs than any other coach in the Cal Football program. I think he truly needs to play a heavy role in QB development.
(3) I'm sort of surprised Cal just didn't run, run, run the ball. It was quite obvious Cal was having serious passing problems. The receivers weren't getting open, and Mansion was scrambling. Even when Mansion had the opportunity to throw, his passes weren't exactly that accurate. Mansion has a tendency to fastball some of his throws into the ground. He did that on a few passes, besides under throwing Marvin Jones (Cal WR #1) along the sideline resulting in an interception. On the other hand, Cal's running game was doing decent. Shane Vereen (Cal RB #34) was averaging 4.6 yards per carry behind the Cal offensive line. Those aren't bad numbers. With that kind of average, you can't help but like the offense's chances of getting 10 yards in three downs. Hell, if Cal won the game with Mansion not throwing a single pass, I wouldn't complain. I'd be happy. Of course that would suggest Cal's passing game sucks (something we already know), but if we can get dub-uh-yuh by rushing every single down... then why not?
(4) My couch offensive coordinator suggestion of the day: fake bubble screen to Allen. So Cal was trying to get the ball to Allen at any costs. Allen was the target of at least four or five screens himself. Washington was keying in on those plays and forgoing a lot of down-field coverage once they realized a kitten was more dangerous than the Cal downfield passing game. So if that's the case, then why not fake the screen to Allen, and instead pass the ball to one of the would-be-bubble-screen-blockers streaking down the field as fast as he can. Basically, I'm saying Cal should have run the play like what Cal ran against USC in 2008 (the play which was called back for ineligible receiver down field). Just my two cents.
(5) Who wrote this script? Jake Locker passes the ball deep down the field. Cal has Marc Anthony (Cal CB #2) in perfect position to make an interception or at least bat the ball down. But when the ball arrives, the Cal defender helps bobble the ball up into the air so the Washington WR can catch the ball and waltz into the end zone. Then later, Locker passes the ball again down the field. Cal has Darian Hagan (Cal CB #26) in good position along the sidelines between the ball and the WR. The ball is thrown way into the middle of the field rather than along the sidelines, and the Washington WR somehow squeezes around Hagan, and dives like 10 yards laterally into the middle of the field, and makes the catch. Washington would then ultimately score on that drive to win the game. It's like when Cal should successfully defend the play, God intervenes and decides to just screw Cal. God hates us.
It's like 50/50/90. When you have a 50/50 chance of being right, 90% of the time you'll do the wrong thing. But in Cal's case, it's like 75/25/100. When Cal has a 75% chance of successfully defending a play, Cal will 100% of the time get screwed. We just can't win! Who didn't sacrifice a helpless farm animal this week to appease God?
(6) Lowered Expectations. It seemed like only a few years ago, Cal fans would get *pissed* when a run play only went for three yards, or a pass play wasn't at least a ten yard gain. I remember being in the student section a few years ago and hearing some Cal students cussing out the QBs and WRs for sucking when they didn't get a first down with every catch. It was mind-boggling. Expectations were so high. Every play had to be a successful huge gain. Now though, expectations have dropped to an all time low. Mansion completes a pass for a modest six yards? Everyone cheers like it's a touchdown. Mansion runs for a positive gain rather than getting sacked or having to throw the ball away? Everyone cheers like it's a touchdown. I found it really funny to hear the crowd around me cheering some of these really small gains. When you suck so bad, completing a pass is like the greatest thing ever.
(7) Who's gonna get sacked? When Cal finished the 2007 season -- the worst season that Tedford had seen at the time, a couple of Cal coaches got the axe. Since Cal did even worse in 2010, I would not expect anything different. But who is going to get fired? Marshall (OL coach)? Ludwig (offensive coordinator)? Daft (WR coach)? Those seem to be the front-running candidates.
I think Marshall is the most at risk. Cal's offensive line has been very sub-par the past few years. Whatever Marshall is doing, or isn't doing, isn't working. In Marshall's defense, I don't think this year's offensive line was that talented to begin with. In other words, Marshall might be a fine coach, but the players he has to work with just aren't making him look good.
As for Ludwig, I don't think Ludwig is going to get canned. Not this year at least. He and Tedford have somewhat of a history which I think buys him some leeway. I haven't been terribly disappointed by the playcalling this year and I think a bigger problem than playcalling is just the team's talent and execution. Those responsibilities fall more on the shoulders of the positional coaches.
As for Daft, he's at risk because a lot of the WR drops. But I think it's fair to say he's pretty much on the hot seat only because Jones (Cal WR #1) has been dropping balls. Right? I haven't seen many of our other WRs dropping balls that much. Michael Calvin (Cal WR #11) used to drop a lot of balls but this year he's actually turned things around quite a bit and has been catching everything thrown his way -- even some very uncatchable balls. Daft definitely earns some credit for this. But otherwise, is it fair to put Daft on the hot seat just because Jones had a few brain farts? Perhaps there are some other issues at play too that I'm not seeing, such as the WRs not running correct routes or something. While I think a lot of people want Daft gone, I don't think he's going to get the axe this year. Not yet. He's a young coach, and was a graduate assistant at Cal during Tedford's early years. I think those two facts buy him a little leeway.
189 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Nailed it, Hydro. Going to miss your post-game analysis – really wish we got to read one more this year. (sigh) Some additional things I saw:
1) As painful as watching the offense was, it was really enjoyable watching the Cal D. On the opening drive alone, we used at least 4 different types of pressure packages with guys rushing from different positions. (LB on the line of scrimmage, slot CB, LB lined up in coverage, S lined up in coverage) Because the Oline couldn’t predict where guys were coming from, we were often able to get pressure just rushing 4 guys.
Even though the goal line stand didn’t go our way, it’s tough to call out the D. Our boys clearly came to play. We got out-fought with a fortuitous bounce on a one-on-one for their long TD. Otherwise, they held their own with lousy field position and little rest all game long. Hold your heads up, guys.
Old Toothwrangler
The D played great, almost excellent. An excellent defense would have stopped Zona, Oregon, and Washington on key 4th quarter drives. I really like the D’s ability to adapt to Oregon and Arizona’s offense, as well as making adjustments to stop UCLA’s offense. I really liked how they switched to the 3-3-5 on occasion, but wished they would have used the 4-3 a bit more with Hill and Tipoti/Payne as the DT’s against teams like USC and even Stanfeit.
"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark
Yeah – I agree with you. Clancy’s been known to mix in plenty of 4-3 depending on the match-up, down/distance…might not have had enough healthy bodies for it.
I think that Hill, Payne, Tipoti were banged up in the middle of the year…especially Payne.
Old Toothwrangler
If you re-watch that final play (oh the agony), you’ll see that we got great pressure up the middle and had it been a Locker sneak or a straight ahead run by Polk, I’m confident we would’ve stopped them short. You have to credit Sark for making the right call (running outside) in that situation. I thought the defense played well against Washington and given a more competent offense that keeps our defense off the field, the more effective they will be.
One thing I was thinking about in regards to Clancy and the defense
Do you believe Clancy will be able to bring in his own defensive staff eventually? I am not advocating for the the position coaches to be fired, replaced, or that they did a bad job this season. I am just wondering if Clancy would ever be able to bring in his own people that he trust to coach the LB’s, DL, and DB’s.
Who is our DB coach is that Simmons?
i thought our DBs have done well and like what I saw of the young guys this season.
Perhaps you could kind of explain a bit more on why you feel this way?
Mainly it seems as if the pass D was just way too, well, passive. I know I’m seeing this through a bitterness lens right now, but it seemed as if the only long passes we were able to “defend” were those where the ball was poorly thrown or the WR simply dropped the ball. In every instance where the ball was well placed the other guys caught it, regardless of how “well” our DBs were defending. There never seemed to be any ability to actually break up a pass if the ball was catchable, and none of our INTs came from great plays by our secondary – they were all from poorly thrown balls.
On top of that, the safety play was inconsistent. Conte was a stud and played some of the best ball in the conference. But Cattouse varied from meh to flat out horrible. His tackling never went beyond trying to fling his body at a guy, and Andy Luck can tell you how effective that was.
I’d llike to see more of our DBs actually making plays on the ball rather than just running stride for stride with the other guy hoping for a drop or to knock the ball loose after the catch. That strategy simply doesn’t work if you don’t have hard hitters out there, and I’m not sold on our guys being able to bring the pain.
Calmer than you are.
I will agree that our DBs, particularly Anthony and Hill, need to play the ball more than the player, but the microscope is still very unfairly focused on the D simply because the offense couldn’t score enough points to give the D any margin of error. No defense can play 100% perfect and stop every play, and that’s basically what we were asking them to do.
Ravenous Ute may post on CGB, but please don’t mistake him for a Cal fan….
by Spazzy Mcgee on Nov 29, 2010 10:30 AM PST up reply actions
I know I’m seeing this through a bitterness lens right now,
I think you got that right because based on what I saw this year, it seems like you are remembering the bad plays the DBs did not make rather than the ones they did.
I’ve been telling people about Cattouse. Looks like an NFL guy at times and pop warner player at other times.
That’s actually a perfect reflection on the fact that Simmons is not coaching him up to his potential.
Jeff Tedford. Providing Cal with more blowout losses than Tom Holmoe at 5 times the cost! Go coach!
Recruiting updates on Twitter
by CaliforniaEternal on Nov 29, 2010 10:50 AM PST up reply actions
Also the same issue with Brett Johnson. The kid had NFL measurables at the pro day last year but was never consistent as a safety. A good part of that is coaching.
Jeff Tedford. Providing Cal with more blowout losses than Tom Holmoe at 5 times the cost! Go coach!
Recruiting updates on Twitter
by CaliforniaEternal on Nov 29, 2010 10:52 AM PST up reply actions
So Simmons did a good job with Conte but failed with Cattouse.
Some of you guys always blame the coaching. Sometimes, just SOMETIMES, the players aren’t very good.
And sometimes, just SOMETIMED, the players are good despite of their coaching.
I think we can place Conte in that group. I give him all the credit in the world for being a student of the game and really getting his head into his play. Honestly, I don’t think Conte’s play was because of coaching. Though it may have been despite it.
Calmer than you are.
This is such a complicated parsing that I don’t think we can ever really make a clear determination on. There are so many factors that we never know about.
Last year, all of you would have said “What happened with Hagan? Is it the coaching? Why did he regress? Is it because he is not as good as we thought?” And then there were so many factors that we didnt know about.
None of us really know whether the failures are due to execution or coaching in most situations.
CGB's Jimmy Carter
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
I agree that each situation is unique, but by looking at the aggregate of the play one can make at least a reasoned conclusion. It may be incorrect, but it’s at least based on some observation.
And my conclusion is that our secondary has been poorly, or at least inadequately coached. Cal49a disagrees, and he may be right. But from watching this team and comparing them to other teams, I simply believe that our guys have been coached to play a passive style of pass defense that relies more on poor offensive play (or at least pressure from our D line messing up the passing game) than on DBs going out and being aggressive and making plays.
I’m not claiming I’m right, but from what I’ve seen, that’s my feeling.
Calmer than you are.
I find minimal fault with our D all season long, to be honest. We asked them to play 100% perfectly. Either they pretty much did (and we still lost) or they were on the field so much a stronger offense overpowered them. I didnt watch OSU, but regarding USC and Stanford in both situations, the D was on the field soooooo much they didnt stand a chacne
CGB's Jimmy Carter
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
I think you may be underestimating just how raw these players are coming out of HS. That the coaches are able to take a string bean like Cattouse (I saw him at the RSF his freshman year) and turn him into an even serviceable safety is hard in and of itself. Were they able to turn him into Taylor Mays or Thomas Decoud? No. But he definitely improved over his years at Cal.
Ravenous Ute may post on CGB, but please don’t mistake him for a Cal fan….
by Spazzy Mcgee on Nov 29, 2010 11:20 AM PST up reply actions
*is amazing in and of itself.
Ravenous Ute may post on CGB, but please don’t mistake him for a Cal fan….
by Spazzy Mcgee on Nov 29, 2010 11:21 AM PST up reply actions
Not every play can be successfully defended. I think the same complaint about relying on the offense messing up was said about Bob Gregory, which I think just goes to show that that complaint can be made about pretty much any situation where the defense isn’t completely dominant. And I can’t think of a single team whose defense I would call completely dominant with no assist from offensive miscues.
by sec119 on Nov 29, 2010 11:45 AM PST via mobile up reply actions
I strongly disagree
Sure, you can always cherry pick plays or players that don’t go well and blame it on the coach and pick players that do well and claim they did it despite the coaching.
Remember that Simmons coached Squid (good tackler and playing the ball in the air), Conte (good tackler), Nnabuife (good tackler), 2008 pass defense that had the most INTs at Cal in decades.
And most importantly, I think you only notice the failures in playing the ball in the air because the DBs were so good at coverage. They were often right on their man so they had more opportunities than most to both look good and bad. This year, they looked bad more often than we would have liked but I really think that Simmons is very very low on our list of problems.
Also, did Simmons coach Cattouse to go for a youtube knock out blow against Luck? Or did the player decide to do that himself? From what I’ve seen from Simmons, he doesn’t coach that. But you know what, it must be the coach’s fault for the player doing that!
The other question to ask is whether Simmons coached his DBs to tackle (i.e. wrap up the other guy and bring him down) or not? If so, the memo didn’t reach Cattouse. If not, well, then that’s another matter
Calmer than you are.
I think that is the bitter beer face talking right now
In every instance where the ball was well placed the other guys caught it, regardless of how "well" our DBs were defending. There never seemed to be any ability to actually break up a pass if the ball was catchable, and none of our INTs came from great plays by our secondary – they were all from poorly thrown balls.
Well sometimes the QB is able to place the ball really well so that only his guy can make a play. I know we aren’t used to seeing this from our own QB’s but other QBs have the accuracy to place the ball in the perfect spot and thus beat great coverage. I thought we did a fine job breaking up passes on catchable balls this season. I remember Hagan had some good pass breakups in the WSU game, one in the endzone that saved a TD stands out in my mind. Anthony was in good position to break up the ball against UW that went for the TD, just an unlucky bounce for us.
Hagan was in great position to break up the long Criner catch, undortunately Criner is one of the best and tallest WR’s in the Pac10 and was able to beat Hagan on the jump ball.
As far as position coaches go on the defensive side of the ball I would rank our LB coach, Thompson as our weakest link. This is mainly because I haven’t seen much growth from the younger guys and the struggles of the LB’s last season.
I thought our DB’s did a really good job this year defending both the pass and helping in run support.
Apparently my disappointment with the defensive secondary isn’t shared by anyone else. But then I did say it was likely that I was viewing this with a bias. I suppose those critical plays just still sting too much. Particularly giving up the low % passes against Zona and UW.
Oh well, the best tonic is a turn around next season.
Calmer than you are.
regarding Conte
He became a really key player this year, for the first time, in his 4th season. And that was because he was moved to play Safety. Who moved him to safety? Pendergast. He came in and saw his potential at safety, not CB. Simmons had seen him for years and never noticed that.
I think the DBs played really well this year. They had a really good coverage, resulted in many coverage sacks. The improvement in their play can be credited to Pendergast, not Simmons, I think. Well, its just my opinion.
Or it could have also been that Bob Gregory saw Conte as a CB and decided
to keep him at CB. I am not sure how all the decisions are made on a players position on defense but I would assume the DC has the final call? I could be completely wrong but I would imagine that Simmons couldn’t just move a player from CB to safety or vice versa.
Clancy or Simmons also moved Hill from CB to safety as well.
That was Clancy too, who moved Hill to safety.
But yeah, you could be right. I dunno if it was Gregory or Simmons who kept Conte and Hill at CB.
I guess what I am trying to say is, I am not sure you can blame
Simmons for not moving Conte to safety earlier. Clancy came in and saw both Conte and Hill as safeties so he moved them to a different position.
Perhaps Simmons saw Conte as a safety and went to BG but BG said no, he is a CB and didn’t move him.
Who really knows how these things happen. I am just happy for Conte that he was moved to safety and was able to have a great senior year.
I thought Conte wanted to play CB
I could be remembering completely incorrectly, but I thought I remember seeing reports that Conte saw himself as a cornerback and preferred to play there. The coaching staff could have just been allowing him to play where he preferred while we still had good safeties around. This year, with holes at safety, it made more sense to have him move there.
2) You know that bubble screen that killed us all last year? I think we finally figured it out. But the surprising thing is that our zone coverage scheme looks pretty darn similar to the “cover 3 guys with 2 guys in zone” approach that Bob Gregory took. What’s the difference? Better recognition from the LB tasked to watch the slot guy. Last year, we had new starters at LB and it showed. It reminded me that we did a nice job with “slower” LB’s two years ago, but their experience made up for sheer foot speed. Kendricks and Holt both showed exponential improvement this year.
Old Toothwrangler
3) We’re really going to miss MikeyMo. The defense wasn’t the same all year when he was out or limited. We never did find the answer for the other OLB all year. Now we’ve got a big question mark at ILB, too. It concerns me that missed assignments by the backup ILB’s and the OLB opposite Kendricks was an issue all year. It’d be nice to say that Fanua/Mullins are ready to step up…but we simply haven’t seen much from them yet. It may have to be one of the young guys and that has “growing pains” written all over it.
While we’re on the topic, a hat tip to Derrick Hill for fighting through injuries, to Conte for ignoring the doubters to turn himself into a solid safety, to Darian Hagan for a bounceback year, and to Cam Jordan for maturing into the force we were waiting for. You made us proud.
Old Toothwrangler
by Kodiak on Nov 29, 2010 6:28 AM PST reply actions 4 recs
Big ups to the Seniors
I don’t think anyone can point to any of these guys not putting in the effort and playing with their guts hanging out. Hopefully their dedication and passion has rubbed off on the underclass and we see the same level of intensity from the guys next year.
Calmer than you are.
I’m definitely rooting for Jordan to see action on Sundays.
Ravenous Ute may post on CGB, but please don’t mistake him for a Cal fan….
by Spazzy Mcgee on Nov 29, 2010 10:18 AM PST up reply actions
4) Generally speaking, in terms of practice time, (benefits to recruiting and program visibility are arguable) a bowl would have been a good thing. However, under the status quo, I find it hard to believe that more of the same would miraculously fix what ails us on the offensive side of the ball. Crawling into a minor bowl might have allowed us to delude ourselves into thinking "we’re just young, “we just had some key injuries,” or, “we just didn’t execute.” Instead, we have been full-on smacked in the face. How do we respond? How does Tedford respond? Is this a call to change our recruiting strategy? Do something different with our development and practice habits? Change how we hold players accountable, stars and veterans alike?
Old Toothwrangler
5) With his well-documented struggles this year, hats off to Georgio for stepping up and making 47 and 53 yard field goals. Had we held on, we would have carried him of the field as a hero. It’s nice to see that he didn’t give up on himself. Now go make a few gazillion kicks this summer under pressure. Is it legal to play Russian roulette if no coaches are watching?
Old Toothwrangler
Too bad we can’t retroactively trade those two awesome kicks for a make at Zona and a make against Oregon.
Agreed though, great kicks on Saturday from Giorgio.
by jali on Nov 29, 2010 12:31 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
Why does everyone say that Ludwig and Tedford have a history? I don’t believe they’ve ever worked on a staff at the same time until Ludwig was hired last year. Ludwig followed Tedford at Oregon but is that “history”?
Inspiring and completing since1997 since2010!
Quarterback Play
First off, HT, this is brilliant analysis. Couldn’t have said it better.
I don’t think it’s any secret that our success boils down to quarterback play. Nate Longshore was actually brilliant in 2006 from my memory and was great in 07 before the Oregon injury. Sad to say, but I can’t help but think of how good this team could be if we had someone like Andrew Luck at QB. Am I just delusional in saying Cal could be (at least) top 5 with just the addition Andrew Luck to the roster?
I’m very confident in the defense with Pendergast and we definitely have talent at every position. I think that the current OL is actually rated higher talent-wise (at least in recruiting) than all our previous OLs so perhaps that says something about Marshall. I really just hope we can develop another great QB. Cal’s success will definitely hinge on this. The talent is there with Mansion, Maynard, Sweeney, Bridgford, Hinder and now Boehm. We can’t miss on all 6, right? Right? RIGHT!?
diehard warrior & niner fan.
possibly the only cal + SC fan in the world
I think we’d be Top 5 with the addition of Andrew Luck’s OLine. That OLine is amazing and I think it makes Luck look better than he really is.
CGB's Jimmy Carter
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
Luck’s pretty good tho. He’s accurate, he doesn’t panic (thanks O-line!), and he can scramble. Cal’s QB’s, even with time, in the post-Longshore injury era have missed wide open wide receivers even when they’ve had plenty of time.
"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark
I really thought Luck would struggle without Toby this season
however, that OL is so good that they really haven’t missed a beat in the running game without Toby.
No doubt the OL is a strength and makes life easier for Luck, however, I also believe Luck is really good though. His pocket awareness is great, he can feel the pressure coming and seems to know when to tuck it and run. He just has that internal clock in his head dialed in.
Plus he has had to put up these numbers with his best WR (Owusu) injured for most of the season.
Thanks for this series, Hydro.
Insightful recap, as always. It’s too bad this is the last, but I suppose it’s better to leave your readers wanting more, at least until your eight-part analysis of what went wrong :)
There was one play in the fourth quarter, where I thought that Cal did line up as if it were a bubble screen, only to have Mansion look deep first and then check down underneath (the ball was knocked down at the LOS anyway). I am not willing to relive the 4th quarter though, so maybe it just looked sort of similar but wasn’t.
Thank you for pointing out that the QB issues are incorrectly identified. I feel like I’m talking to a brick wall, but I’ve tried pointing out that our offensive ineptitude spans one, possibly two QBs, plus two QB injuries. Granted, the development of Riley and now Mansion is subpar, but we DID have a decent to good QB only a few years ago (and only a couple of starters ago). The Riley era was a long one, and he didn’t develop as well as we had hoped, but at the end of the day he was only one quarterback.
Finally, it seemed as if UW really keyed in on the run game after halftime, since it was blatantly obvious that was all we could do. I wish I had the quarter-by-quarter rush average comparison, but I didn’t think we did as well in the 2nd half as the first.
I remember this play as well
There was one play in the fourth quarter, where I thought that Cal did line up as if it were a bubble screen, only to have Mansion look deep first and then check down underneath (the ball was knocked down at the LOS anyway). I am not willing to relive the 4th quarter though, so maybe it just looked sort of similar but wasn’t.
We faked the bubble screen and it looked like Mansions first look was to go deep but he pulled it down and tried to go over the middle to his second read. However, the ball was knocked down at the LOS.
I found this on the Internetz. It’s old but it highlights an interesting moment:
Jeff Tedford committed the cardinal mistake of a head coach in 2007 when he did not fully realize how big of an impact the injury to one key player, QB Nate Longshore, was having on the entire Cal team. The back-up QB Kevin Riley, played great in a comeback against Oregon State, but a critical error at the end of the game near the endzone cost Cal a shot of taking the game into overtime, and that mistake seemed to deep-six Riley’s playing time until the bowl game. What seemed obvious to anyone that was watching Nate Longshore warm-up and play in the games, was that he could not plant his leg to throw the ball, which was causing havoc with Tedford’s precise/attacking passing game. With Longshore playing hurt, opposing teams were able to focus on the Cal running game, and Cal’s offense and personnel are not suited to generate a lot of yards on the ground, which just led to more pressure on the QB. With Tedford sticking by Longshore, Cal stumbled to a 6-6 regular season record, but by the time of the Armed Forces Bowl rolled around it was obvious that the QB job was open to be won by the best man, and Kevin Riley got the Bears offense back on track against a very good Air Force team.
I wonder if Tedford didn’t start Riley because of the OSU gaffe. I believe a key part in Riley’s failed development was him rotating in/out of the lineup in 2007 & 2008. Said another way, if Riley wins the 2007 OSU game, does he start the following week(s) while Longshore heals?
"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark
I wonder if Tedford didn’t start Riley because of the OSU gaffe
I hate that I’m going to do this dance with you again, but I wonder if Tedford didn’t start Riley in 2007, because in practice he saw that Riley was the rawer version of the inconsistent QB we’d later come to love and hate.
CGB's Jimmy Carter
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
I also think part of it could have been that Tedford didn't trust Rileys decision making
after he decided to take off and run for that TD against OSU. Perhaps, Tedford felt that Riley, due to his youth and inexperience couldn’t be trusted.
The two games that Riley did play in that season he did put up some really good numbers.
Or perhaps injured Longshore played better than hot-shot Riley in practice. Because that’s usually how Tedford has made all his decisions.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Nov 29, 2010 1:55 PM PST up reply actions
I think after seeing how Sweeney couldn’t throw for shit versus a 1AA team (Davis) and Mansion might be worse than Ayoob people aren’t going to question Tedford when he next says that the starter is starter because he is better than the backups. I remember a lot griping about that earlier this year.
With Mansion starting we might have been 3-9 instead of 5-7.
In other words, Go Bears!
Very well could have been true and probably was
I am just saying that perhaps after Riley decided to run for the game winning TD against OSU Tedford decided he couldn’t trust a young and inexperienced QB to lead a veteran team that was still very much alive for a Pac10 title.
As bad as Riley may have looked in practice, he looked good against OSU and great against Air Force.
That team was so talented on offense that it was able to still be competitive despite Rileys inconsistent play and Longshores bum foot all the while making both those QB’s look good.
He looked good in the 4th quarter against OSU. He did not look good in the first three quarters. Torching a poor AF pass defense doesn’t really do much for me.
People need to give more credit to Tedford. He doesn’t make snap decisions. He goes by what he sees in practice. Longshore was distinctly better than Riley (which is why Riley never saw the field). Riley was distinctly better than Mansion this year and Sweeney last year (which is why neither saw the field). And now that Mansion’s in charge, he runs things better than Sweeney. Simple as that.
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Nov 29, 2010 3:18 PM PST up reply actions
Maybe? Certainly it can’t be ruled out. I do think the 2007 Riley and 2008 Michigan St Riley were never seen again.
"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark
You can speculate all day long if you want, carp. But I just try to do it based on the facts that we can discern from the field. In 2007, Longshore gave Cal the better chance to win games. It is as simple as that. Knowing everything we know about Riley in 2008, 2009, and 2010, that seems fairly obvious to me. Of course,in 2007, we didnt know all that yet and so the second guessing was quite severe and misguided in my view.
CGB's Jimmy Carter
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
In 2007, a healthy Longshore gave Cal the better chance to win games. It is as simple as that.
From the on-field results I’ve seen from Riley, his accuracy has decreased since 2007 and his jitteryness/crackheadedness has also increased. We didn’t see the same productivity as his career evolved. He regressed.
"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark
2009 Stanfurd Riley disagrees
In other words, Go Bears!
by royrules22 on Nov 29, 2010 1:02 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
given the defense, I’d say 2009 UCLA Riley disagrees.
"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark
by carp on Nov 29, 2010 10:35 PM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Regardless if Cal had won the OSU game in 07, he would have started the UCLA game
if had just thrown the ball away and not run with it. Atleast, that is my opinion.
I believe a key part in Riley’s failed development was him rotating in/out of the lineup in 2007 & 2008.
The key part in Riley’s failed development is that he was not a student of the game until recently. He didn’t take things serious enough at the beginning and when he was forced into the starting role in 2007, he was not ready mentally for it nor was he mature enough to handle the demands of a QB in Tedford’s system. Things spiraled from there until finally, this year, Riley and Tedford were on the same page.
Ludwig
I don’t know that making Ludwig the fall guy will really solve anything. It seemed that far too often the offensive flameouts were the product of execution rather than actual play calling. It seemed that either the line would find some new (and wondrous) way of screwing the pooch by whiffing on a block or moving before the snap, or the WRs would drop a ball, or the pass would be uncatchable.
Given that, it seems that a good place to start would be with Marshall. He may be a nice guy and know his stuff, but his experiement at Cal is done. Sometimes people and places just don’t fit, and this seems like one of those times. The OL (despite the talent level) has just not been performing since Marshall came on board. Even last year with Mack the OL had too many bad plays.
Next, I completely agree with Hydro regarding QB coaching. Ludwig is the QB coach, and he simply is not connecting with his players. If at all possible, Tedford needs to take that back. The question is whether he really has the time to mentor and coach that position while still being the CEO. But then, perhaps even 50% Tedford is better than 100% Ludwig in that respect. In any case, much like Marshall and the OL, it’s clear that the Ludwig as QB coach experiment is not working.
Finally, the TE and WR positions need some attention. If I’m correct, Genyk is the TE coach and Daft is WR coach. How does that make sense? Either bundle the TEs with the OL or the WRs, but keeping them under Genyk is a big fail. Their blocking is atrocious, their routes are lazy, and their receptions are way down. Granted, this is only Genyk’s first year with them, so perhaps they will improve. But the same courtesy can no longer be given Daft, as his WRs have consistently been poor. I tremble to think of how much damage his coaching may do to Keenan Allen.
Lastly, I think some concern has to be shown on defense as well. Yes, our D played with some mustard this year, and had great games against Zona, Oregon, and UW – up until the last series for each game. Then they simply folded. Long pass completions, huge runs, poor tackling, and breakdowns on crucial third & fourth and long plays lost games for us. We hold Oregon on their last drive and we have a chance to win that game. We hold against Zona and UW and we’re looking at a bowl game. It may seem unfair to pick on the D since they kept us in games, but those last drive collapses point to some problem. Particularly in the secondary. I gave up on Hagan and Anthony and the rest (aside from Conte) by the time we got blown out by Nevada. Too many big plays given up way too often. The coverage seemed good, but just being a shadow and staying next to a guy isn’t really playing effective defense.
Anyway, the offseason should be interesting at least.
I'm faking an injury right now! Or ... am I?
I really am starting to believe Marshall just is not a very good coach
Given that, it seems that a good place to start would be with Marshall. He may be a nice guy and know his stuff, but his experiement at Cal is done. Sometimes people and places just don’t fit, and this seems like one of those times. The OL (despite the talent level) has just not been performing since Marshall came on board.
If you look back to his time while with the Houston Texans and Cleveland Browns, one of the weakest links on those teams were the OL’s that he was coaching.
The only way Cal makes progress
is if it hires real D1 coaching talent and not journeymen (Cignetti, Pendergast, Ludwig, Marshall, Simmons) and no-experience (Thompson, Lupoi, Daft) coaches. That leaves us with Genyk and Gould.
Replacing any of these guys with more of the same might result in success (Lupoi, perhaps Pendergast?) but I think it’s riskier than hiring guys with proven track records.
"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark
I think I get what you’re saying, but I don’t know if I completely understand how you define “journeyman” coaches. Are they the ones who simply get a lot of jobs? Almost by definition most coaches then are journeymen, because long-term tenure is pretty rare. Good coaches constantly get snapped up by programs and move about.
More confusing is you lumping Tosh in with a stack of coaches that you wouldn’t hire (the no-experience guys) – even though you go ahead and contradict yourself later by admitting that he’s done a pretty good job here (understatement intended).
I’m far less concerned about how often a guy moves about and how much experience he may have as I am with whether he’s able to actually teach young players how to get better. Sometimes that’s a personality issue and whether a coach can fit in with the existing culture of the other coaches, the players, and the program as a whole.
Calmer than you are.
by ‘journeymen’ I mean guys who’ve bounced around with some success and a lot of failure. I don’t think Marshall, Ludwig, or Pendergast’s former teams feel like they “lost a good one” like when a Mike Shanahan left the Niners.
Lumping Tosh in there was intentional. He was hired as a D-line coach after being a grad assistant and was largely discussed as “an aggressive promotion.” He’s been a great hire. Hiring raw/inexperienced guys can work out, just as rookies can work out very well (Buster Posey).
I would just like to see the journeymen/rookie coaches balanced out with a few more really good college coaches.
Interesting to see how Texas assembles it’s staff:
http://www.mackbrown-texasfootball.com/sports/m-footbl/spec-rel/coaches-bios.html
Almost all coaches have additional titles and I suspect that allows them to get paid more.
"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark
I think you’re a little too focused on this experienced assistant thing. You have to pay massive amounts of money to hire what often turn out to be overrated assistant coaches. Ed Orgeron is making serveral times Tosh’s salary and there is no difference in quality. Same thing with Monte Kiffin and Pendergast. No way is Kiffin senior worth a million bucks a year.
Jeff Tedford. Providing Cal with more blowout losses than Tom Holmoe at 5 times the cost! Go coach!
Recruiting updates on Twitter
by CaliforniaEternal on Nov 29, 2010 10:17 AM PST up reply actions
expect to see a bunch of those guys at Texas get the chop. Tolleson is “retiring”, McWhorter, Madden and Kennedy are likely getting chopped and rumors continue to swirl that Davis will be moving on as well.
re: money, Texas has so much of it they spend a ton on their assistants. Dunno if titles have much to do with it, perhaps so.
Inspiring and completing since1997 since2010!
by Fire Starkey on Nov 29, 2010 2:00 PM PST up reply actions
I’m sort of surprised Cal just didn’t run, run, run the ball.
I think that Washington figured out that we couldn’t throw early on and just stacked the box and we started to lose yardage and started having less success in the run game. I just don’t think there’s a way to be successful if your offense is one dimensional.
I swear I saw 10 in the box at times. And the other times while they had corners out they were turned facing Vereen for all intents and purposes it was 11 in the box.
In other words, Go Bears!
Yup, saw the same thing, we really couldn’t just run, run, run, or I think we would have.
Am I known as Cugel the Clever for nothing?
Radical idea
Let’s say Ludwig gets the chop this year. Does anyone else think that promoting Gould to OC/RB coach could reap some rewards?
Calmer than you are.
I have often thought about this and the only thing I can think of is that Gould doesn't
want to be the OC, he likes being the RB’s coach too much.
I think it would be kind of interesting if we went to two coordinators and Gould could be the running game coordinator and the QB coach could also be the passing game coordinator? SImilar to what Arizona does and I believe Wisconsin does something similar. I am not so sure how something like this would work or if it would work well for us but I just thought I would throw that our there.
What about RB/Run game OC
I think I’ve heard a few teams that have one run-game OC and a pass-game OC (strange, I know). But what if we had Gould do the run-game, and Tedford coach QB and the pass game. That would give him more time to do head coaching CEO-type stuff.
I’m guessing that the rationale here is that if Gould is a good RB coach, then he’ll be a good OC too. I’m not sure that’s a connection we can just assume. Positional coaching and OC are wwwwaaaaaayyyyyyy different.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
what about the correlation between coordinator and head coach?
"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark
Yeah, Chip Kelly, Pete Carroll and Nick Saban never were coordinators…
Email: bearsnecessities@gmail.com
by Avinash Kunnath on Nov 30, 2010 1:31 AM PST up reply actions
Seniors Leaving
Jeremy Ross
Kevin Riley
Jarred Price
Bryant Nnabuife
Mike Mohamed
Jerome Meadows
Keith Browner
Cameron Jordan
Derrick Hill
Darian Hagan
Chris Guarnero
Garry Graffort
Richard Fisher
Donovan Edwards
Michael Costanzo
Chris Conte
Potential Leave Early: Shane Vereen
Offensive Starters Returning:
LT – Schwartz (Jr)
LG – Summers-Gavin (So)
RG – Schwenke (So)
TE – Ladner (So)/Miller (Jr)
QB – Mansion (Jr)
FB – Stevens (So)/Kapp (Jr)
RB – Vereen (Jr) – ?
WR – Jones (Jr)
WR – Allen (Fr)
Defense Starters Returning:
DE – Guyton (Jr)
OLB – Kendricks (Jr)
ILB – Holt (Jr)
CB – Anthony (So)
CB – Williams (RFr)
S – Cattouse (Jr)
Special Teams Starters Returning:
P – Anger (Jr)
PK – Tavecchio (Jr)
LS – Rios (So)
The defense isn’t really in that bad of shape since a lot of guys played a lot of minutes on the line including Tipoti (So), Owusu (Jr), Payne (So) and Coleman (RFr). Josh Hill (So) also played a lot of minutes in the defensive backfield. If anything we’ll have a great D-Line and a pretty good defensive backfield with some question marks at LB.
Other than the obvious (QB and possibly RB), we need a LT so Schwartz can play RT.
"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark
I actually think that Schwartz will stay at LT and we’re going to need to find a serviceable RT among these guys: DeMartinis (Jr), Rigsbee (So), Siddoway (RFr), Crosthwaite (Fr)
I hope so, although it worries me none of those guys were better than Edwards.
"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark
I’m waiting to see who the new C will be. I’m not fully impressed with Galas meself. I want that kid from New Jersey to play
In other words, Go Bears!
I’m hoping the line will look something like this:
LT – Schwartz (6’5", 310)
LG – MSG (6’3", 280)
C – Brazinski (6’2", 280)
RG – Gibson (6’4", 325)
RT – Siddoway (6’4", 290)
Can you imagine running to the left side with Gibson pulling?
Any chance KA plays both ways next year?
Go Bears!
by California Pete on Nov 29, 2010 1:45 PM PST up reply actions
The departure of Cam Jordan might not hurt as much. By the end of the season Guyton was pushing Owusu for playing time. Coleman has looked dominant at times. I presume Gabe King will enter the rotation next yr and Todd Barr/Mustafa Jalil might even play as true freshmen, if they sign.
Kendrick Payne and Aaron Tipoti need to step up after Derrick Hill. Not sure what Keni Kaufusi can do just yet. Signing Viliami Moala from Grant should be a priority.
http://twitter.com/solariseCGB
i was just thinking about it last night too
2011 starters: Owusu, Payne, Guyton.
Backups will be Coleman, Tipoti, King. not too bad.
for LB, if Wilkerson and Whiteside can start, that would be pretty awesome, combined with Holt and Kendricks.
The last depth chart I saw had Owusu as a back-up and Guyton starting, but all those guys on the D-Line played a lot of minutes so it didn’t really matter who started. We’ll also hopefully have Kaufusi (RFr) back — I think he was injured most of the year. I think the D-Line will again be awesome with the addition of Gabe King too.
(5) Who wrote this script? Jake Locker passes the ball deep down the field. Cal has Marc Anthony (Cal CB #2) in perfect position to make an interception or at least bat the ball down. But when the ball arrives, the Cal defender helps bobble the ball up into the air so the Washington WR can catch the ball and waltz into the end zone.
The guy who wrote the same script in 2006:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9DsRpxhUvs
Ravenous Ute may post on CGB, but please don’t mistake him for a Cal fan….
My couch offensive coordinator suggestion of the day: fake bubble screen to Allen.
I could have sworn that we tried at least one fake bubble screen but that it was the most obvious play in the world (and didn’t work). However, take that with a BIG helping of salt. I watched quite a bit of football this weekend and I could be confusing our passing ineptitude with another team’s.
Gunn High School?
Ravenous Ute may post on CGB, but please don’t mistake him for a Cal fan….
by Spazzy Mcgee on Nov 29, 2010 12:09 PM PST up reply actions
They are very good at badminton!
Ravenous Ute may post on CGB, but please don’t mistake him for a Cal fan….
by Spazzy Mcgee on Nov 29, 2010 12:48 PM PST up reply actions
Ludwig’s performance…
The playcalling this year was so incredibly predictable. Sure, we lined up in a zillion different formations, but only actually ran three or four different plays — run, screen, short pass, reverse, repeat. Predictable, boring and ineffective. Now I’m not saying we should up and fire yet another OC. It would be nice to have some stability there. But I’d like to see Tedford assert himself again on the offensive side, and take a more hands-on approach with the quarterbacks again. And I’m hoping Ludwig has it in him to learn and improve. Because so far, he ain’t fooling anyone.
Marshall and Daft…
The offensive line has been pathetic. Part of that is personnel — who can we name on the line that really has a nasty temperment conducive to blowing opposing linemen off the ball? Who would we compare to Alex Mack, Aaron Merz, Mavin Philip, etc.? So it’s not all on Marshall. But some of it is. Not only have our kids lacked the killer instinct to physically beat their opponents, they’ve lacked the discipline and preparation to even be in the right positions. I’m sick of seeing O-linemen blocking air while defenders are in the QB’s face. At least get run over! Be a speed bump. Slow down the rush if you can’t stop it. But to just wave traffic through? That’s on the coach. If Marshall is here next year, I’d be surprised.
As for Daft, I think it depends what his role has been in determing which players hit the field. Because we seem to be playing who we think should be good rather than who actually is. I’m talking about Marvin Jones — a really nice kid who either isn’t a very good receiver or isn’t mentally prepared. I know it’s hard to stay focused on catching passes when so few are catchable, but when those few do arrive on target, a good, prepared wideout has got to make the most of the opportunity.
Unfortunately, I suspect the problem is more one of ability than preparation. I recall Marvin consistently blowing past defenders, but dropping ball after ball in the 2009 open spring practice. Balls were bouncing off his hands, off his pads, off his knees in stride. You name it. I took a pic of one “shoulda-been-a-TD” and posted it here…
http://www.flickr.com/photos/virtualsugar/3456887182/
At the same practice, I was very impressed with Alex Lagemann and said as much here…
http://www.flickr.com/photos/virtualsugar/3868243079/
Loggy isn’t the fastest or most elusive receiver, which is probably why he hardly plays. But the kid catches the ball. He kinda reminds me of Geoff MacArthur, and I wish we’d include him in more plays. I’m sure we’d have a more effective passing game as a result.
I hate to call for anyone’s job. It would be great if the coaches could just be coached up themselves, and be open to changing their approach to their specific functions, schemes, etc. But at the same time, if changes have to be made…
I’m available.
I would say that Galas and MSG are the only two OL that have shown a nasty temperment
conducive to blowing people off the line.
I really believe Marshall is not a very good coach. Look at how bad and unprepared his OL’s were while he was coaching the Cleveland Browns and Houston Texans. I believe the year that Houston set the record for most QB sacks, Marshall was the OL coach that season.
run, screen, short pass, reverse, repeat.
Run and short pass are not plays. Run is one type of potential offensive attempt. Short pass is one way to pass the ball.
As for screen and reverse, firstly, screens are great when you dont have a QB who can throw long, but have really athletic WRs and want to get them in space. As for reverses, I feel like we saw a few of them. But we had to do wahtever we could to get our playmakers the ball. Mansion wasnt getting it to them.
I have no problem with the play calling.
CGB's Jimmy Carter
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
by TwistNHook on Nov 29, 2010 1:45 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
A short pass (when it’s almost a backwards pass) is a sort of extended hand off so it’s not too far-fetched to call it a run play.
In other words, Go Bears!
Either way, I don’t necessarily see the validity of the criticism there. He says we run the same plays over and over again, but doesn’t name plays that we run, he names things like “run” or “short pass.” Yes, we ran alot. And we threw a lot of short passes. Thats bc Mansion couldnt throw long. His one long bomb got picked, IIRC.
I felt within the constraints of not having a QB, Ludwig did the best he could. I also believe Ludwig shoulders some of the blame for not having a QB as he is the QB coach additionaly.
CGB's Jimmy Carter
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
I think Mansion threw one (underthrown) deep ball to MJ for a TD vs OSU as the clock ticked down.
Ravenous Ute may post on CGB, but please don’t mistake him for a Cal fan….
by Spazzy Mcgee on Nov 29, 2010 1:57 PM PST up reply actions
He threw it to Miller not Jones. The clock hadn’t ticked down (I know this because I remember yelling when we kicked off instead of attempting an onside).
In other words, Go Bears!
I meant in garbage time, basically, not as the clock went to 0:00.
Ravenous Ute may post on CGB, but please don’t mistake him for a Cal fan….
by Spazzy Mcgee on Nov 29, 2010 3:48 PM PST up reply actions
I don’t know the play names — but all our plays look exactly the same. Maybe we could inform Ludwig that it is still legal to pass have receivers run beyond the first down markers. Maybe they could mix in some intermediate and deep throws. Or a few gadget plays, like flea flickers. To me, when you throw to the same two or three points on the field over and over, regardless of what formation you ran it from or who went to what spot, you’re still running the same play. Points A and B are the same. Opposing defenses only have to defend a small fraction of the field.
Maybe we don’t have the QB to put up monster numbers. But how can we be sure? We’re too offensively inflexible (or timid?) to try and make big plays. One deep throw per game isn’t enough to get safeties to respect the possibility of a big play. And refusing to run intermediate routes altogether does nothing to pull linebackers away from the line of scrimmage.
Whatever you call the individual plays, they all seem to take place within 15 yards of the line of scrimmage.
by Monica's Dad on Nov 29, 2010 2:26 PM PST up reply actions
Mansion can’t pass. Why risk throwing so much when your QB can’t hit a wide open receiver? Why risk it when your true freshman WR is a better QB than your actual QB?
In other words, Go Bears!
We had nothing to lose in seeing what would happen. As it was, defenses knew exactly what was coming every play. So maybe Mansion (and Riley before him) looked worse as a result. Maybe opening things up would have made it easier to complete the short stuff, and built up the kids’ confidence. These are just college kids we’re talking about, after all.
by Monica's Dad on Nov 29, 2010 2:31 PM PST up reply actions
If you plan ain't working, get a new plan.
Had to reply to myself with that. It’s so true, isn’t it?
by Monica's Dad on Nov 29, 2010 2:33 PM PST up reply actions
We had nothing to lose in seeing what would happe
After Brock Mansion is 3-28 with 4 interceptions and is crumpled sobbing in a heap on the sidelines, I think we have a lot to lose.
CGB's Jimmy Carter
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
Use him up while he’s available.
More where that came from!
by Monica's Dad on Nov 29, 2010 2:34 PM PST up reply actions
With the game plan yesterday we were two fluke plays away from winning it. If we had Mansion go 3-28 with 4INTs we’d have been blown out by UW at home.
In other words, Go Bears!
And the season would have been different somehow? We’re home for the holidays. We’re getting no bowl money. We’ve done nothing to develop Mansion for next season, or build him up. We’ve stunted our wideouts’ development in running full route trees.
What if we were bolder not just this week, but from Week One with Riley under center? Who knows how different this year might have been.
by Monica's Dad on Nov 29, 2010 2:41 PM PST up reply actions
Hindsight is 20/20.
At that point in the game, it was very winnable and the best strategy for Cal was to do what we did. It turns out we got unlucky (really really unlucky) and we lost.
Had we put the game in Mansion’s hands the chances of losing it would’ve been very high (some may say astronomically high).
It’s a simple risk calculation.
In other words, Go Bears!
I don’t know the play names — but all our plays look exactly the same.
Because they all look the same to you doesn’t mean they aren’t appropriate plays.
Or a few gadget plays, like flea flickers
We ran a SHITLOAD of gadet plays. SO much Wildcat.
Maybe we don’t have the QB to put up monster numbers. But how can we be sure?
I knwo you’ve been watching the games. I saw you after the game. I know you were there because you have all your great photos. Look at the QB!
CGB's Jimmy Carter
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
The Wildcat isn’t a surprise anymore since we run it, like, 25 times a game.
by Monica's Dad on Nov 29, 2010 2:34 PM PST up reply actions
We have a lot of different looks out of it, though.
CGB's Jimmy Carter
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
Naturally, I liked it when Allen took the snap. That was cool.
Maybe we switch to the option next year? Or out-Duck the Ducks?
by Monica's Dad on Nov 29, 2010 2:46 PM PST up reply actions
I wouldn’t be opposed to sticking KA21 as QB a la Thomas for next year if the alternative is Mansion
In other words, Go Bears!
KA21 will be busy next 9 months
He’s got to practice running routes, throwing balls, running between tackles, and maybe playing DB if still wants to play on both sides.
I think the last couple games
we had a lot of creative plays, especially with KA21 in crazy formation.
More than QB Injuries
I think it’s a bit short-sighted to just assign blame for the offensive problems to QB injuries. Yes, if Riley hadn’t been hurt we probably win 1 or 2 more games and are going bowling right now. No doubt that the offense was hamstrung under Mansion.
Even given all that, though, this year’s offensive production was poor by any standard. After Longshore was injured in 2007, our offensive point totals were 28, 21, 20, 20, 17, 23, 13 and 36(!). That’s a half-decent offense in there, though definitely way down from the 30+ points per game in the first half of the season. Heck, even in 2005 with Joe-freakin’-Ayoob starting most of the games at QB we averaged about 33 points per game.
The Brock Mansion era? 7, 20, 13, 14, and 13 points. And that’s with a game against WSU and 2 defensive TDs padding the stats. Given what Tedford’s offenses used to be like, that’s horrific; even given that the backup QB is starting, there’s no way things should be that bad. There are systemic problems throughout the entire offense right now, and they render JT’s efforts to improve the defense and special teams entirely moot. WR drops, bad blocking, false-start and formation penalties galore, burning timeouts because we’re running the wrong play; given where JT’s offense was even as recently as 2007, I never imagined we’d be in this situation at any point during his tenure.
However, I tend to agree with the conclusion that the least JT could do is go back to personally coaching the quarterbacks. It seems like all of the QBs on the roster are lost to varying degrees; there’s nowhere to go but up from here.
I'm really going to miss some of our Defensive starters
MikeMo: Unheralded, gained fame as the “all around backup” in 08, became the leader in 09 when I thought he would regress, and held the team strong this year. We got killed without him vs Nevada and other games. I dread our ILB position next year. Here’s hoping Forbes and/or Wilkerson represents.
Conte: The only photo I have of myself with a player is with Conte after the Tenn game in 06. He had tons of tackles as a CB but he wasn’t very good. And then in 08 and 09 he was replaced by Hagan and Hill respectively. The only thing I can remember was his pick off of Rudy in 08 where Rudy couldn’t believe it. But then this year he switches to safety, wins the job and outshines almost everyone. He was arguably the best player on the team. His intensity versus Arizona and UW was amazing. I swear I saw him lie down on the EZ after the fateful play on Saturday just absolutely devastated.
Cam Jordan: Came in with high potential and showed flashes of it in 07-09 but never really took over the game even when offenses ganged up on Alualu. In fact Gregory even demoted him once for being a joker. But he stepped up magnificently this year and as far as I can tell he was constantly pressuring himself.
Derrick Hill: Every time I see his name all I can think of is that “oh crap he’s injured again”. This year wasn’t too different in terms of injury but oh man what a force he was. NT is hard position to play in a 3-4 D but he did it in my opinion. The fumble TD versus Oregon might be his best play and it almost won the game for us.
Now this person is not a defensive player nor was he well liked. And I’m not going to say he was an awesome player. But I think it’s worth giving thanks to him:
Kevin Riley: Came in with high promise and when pressed into starting after an injury he expertly led a Cal offense lacking in DeSean Jackson versus Oregon St almost to a comeback win. Everyone remembers his ill fated scramble at the end of the game. I chose to instead remember how he avoided a sack in the end zone and throw for a big gain. And then he did it again (Hawkins was of course a big help). And again. A few games later he comes in down three or four scores and has one of his best games ever leading to a superb comeback win in a bowl win. His very next game, next year he had a wonderful performance even with a dismal group of WRs. This included an improbable first down conversion to Morrah that even Coach Dantonio of MSU admitted broke their back. It wouldn’t be ‘till next year’s Big Game that Riley came up with another good performance. In between and afterwards he continues to be topsy turvy and pissed off many fans. His career ended with him completing a tantalizing pass to Jones, a perfect reflection of his entire career. For what it’s worth I’ve never known a year of Cal football without Riley and I have not liked the post-Riley era thus far.
Good luck to all.
In other words, Go Bears!
by royrules22 on Nov 29, 2010 1:21 PM PST reply actions 3 recs
Riley
It was more disappointing than when Jahvid went down with injury last season. I think thats because Jahvid has accomplished so much already, and was surely going to play on Sundays. For Riley, he still needed to redeem himself, and he lost the chance to do so. He’s not going to be a NFL QB, and had to end his career on a low note.
Good luck Riley, whatever pass you decide to take.
I know I will, I was really sad for JRoss
missing his last two games due to injury. I wanted Cal to go to a bowl game just so he could play one more game and I could see him hurdle a defender one last time.
In a lot of ways JRoss was the WR equivalent of Riley, so much potential but he couldn’t put it all together.
Mansion's Status Downgraded...
…from “Questionable” to “Sucks”
KA21 in the "crazy" ( or "wildcat" or "wildbear" or "direct snap" or whatever you want to call it)
I was fully expecting a pass out of that formation. I’m a little surprised it didn’t happen during this game.
It looked liek there was one time when they were going to do it and Allen fumbled the handoff from the Wildcat.
CGB's Jimmy Carter
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
Yeah I remember that play
Isi took the direct snap, the snap was bad and when Isi tried to hand it off to KA he fumbled it and we lost yards. I think we were almost in the redzone too at that point. Between the lost yards on the fumble and I think a penalty we ended up out of FG range, IIRC.
IIRC, Allen was heading backwards as he grabbed the fumbled handoff, indicating that he was setting up for a pass. Perhaps given how poorly that particular play went, Ludwig decided not to try it again.
We had an absoultely thin margin of error on offense.
CGB's Jimmy Carter
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
Yeah the snap was low and to Isi's left and he barely was able to gather it in
before KA came around for the hand off. The hand off was all sorts of awkward due to the bad snap.
From what I remember, once KA got the ball he began loop backwards kind of at a jog, rather running at a faster pace towards the LOS, indicating he was trying to set up a pass. However, he couldn’t get the handle on the ball and smartly fell on the fumble.
Yeah we had a very thin margin of error. Our offense (atleast the running game) did well moving the ball between the 20’s in the first half and kept getting us into UW territory, however once there we proceeded to get a sack, penalty, or some other negative yardage play that forced us out of FG range or into long FG’s rather than TD chances.
Oh well, such is life when you do not have a competent QB and passing attack.
Ohh that play. Weird that we decided to run the pass on a play where Isi got the snap and KA was the sweep option. On most of the other plays, KA was receiving the snap directly. I guess giving it to him to pass on the sweep is simliar to the end-around pass plays that he’s done already. However, it isn’t as direct of a counter to the plays we were running because it was a different look.
If it was a pass play, then I think having Isi receive the direct snap rather than Allen is a good idea. We had been forcing the ball to Allen all game. So naturally, when the guy receiving the snap isn’t Allen, but then hands off the ball to Allen, they’re automatically going to assume that Allen is just going to keep it and run… which is when we pass.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
Ah true. I just thought we’d show the direct snap to Allen look and make it a pass at some point. I have no problem with making it an end-around pass as well, both seem reasonable.
However, if Allen had succeeded on a pass play on a direct snap, we might as well have just had him play QB instead of Brock.
Does Anyone have clips of Sweeney?
Everyone says that he’s worse than Mansion (aside from driving a truck over his teammates legs, I don’t see how he could do worse) – so I want to see for myself.
Well we haven't seen him play much and what little playing time he has had in games
he hasn’t thrown much. He did look shaky and hesitant against UC Davis. After seeing how bad Mansion was and knowing that Mansion beat Sweeney out for the 2nd string spot I can’t imagine how bad Sweeney must look at practice.
Beau Sweeney
is the son of former Dallas Cowboys QB Kevin Sweeney (who was under-sized for the NFL). And Kevin Sweeney is the son of Jim Sweeney, whom Tedford played for when he was a QB at Fresno State. Jim Sweeney also took Tedford on as a volunteer assistant coach after Tedford’s playing days in the CFL were over. Tedford became the QB coach and OC under Sweeney before he left for Oregon. So there are definite ties between Tedford and the Sweeneys, but it doesn’t shed any light on whether Beau can be a serviceable QB.
Sweeney perhaps regressed a bit this year. I remember seeing him against Eastern Washington in ’09 and he looked much more confident and decisive.
http://twitter.com/solariseCGB
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
GoldenBlogs' FAQ and Community Guidelines
Related FanPosts on California Golden Blogs
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recommended FanPosts
Recent FanPosts
FanShots
Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.
Recommended FanShots
Recent FanShots
I recorded the entire last out as Cal clinches the first ever PAC12 Softball Title! It was also a...
Pac-12 On SBN
Pacific Takes (Pac-12) NORTH AddictedToQuack: (Oregon)
UW Dawg Pound: (Washington)
CougCenter: (Washington State)
BuildingTheDam: (Oregon State)
Rule Of Tree: (Stanford)
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: (Cal)
SOUTH
BruinsNation: (UCLA)
ConquestChronicles: (USC)
HouseOfSparky: (ASU)
Arizona Desert Swarm: (Arizona)
TheRalphieReport: (Colorado)
Block U: (Utah)
Golden Bears Football Schedule
| Fresno St. | Sat 09/03 | W 36 - 21 |
@
Colorado
|
Sat 09/10 | W 36 - 33 |
| Presbyterian | Sat 09/17 | W 63 - 12 |
|
@
Washington
|
Sat 09/24 | L 23 - 31 |
|
@
Oregon
|
Thu 10/06 | L 15 - 43 |
|
USC
|
Thu 10/13 | L 9 - 30 |
|
Utah
|
Sat 10/22 | W 34 - 10 |
|
@
UCLA
|
Sat 10/29 | L 14 - 31 |
|
Washington St.
|
Sat 11/05 | W 30 - 7 |
|
Oregon St.
|
Sat 11/12 | W 23 - 6 |
|
@
Stanford
|
Sat 11/19 | L 28 - 31 |
|
@
Arizona St.
|
Fri 11/25 | W 47 - 38 |
|
@
Texas
|
Wed 12/28 | L 10 - 21 |
