(More) 2010 Post-Season Thoughts
(1) Ludwig moves on to SDSU. Uh, what what??? I didn't see this coming. Again, you have to wonder if this was a firing or a voluntary departure. The timing suggests... well, let's talk about the timing. Since this happened so far after the end of the season, it suggests a voluntary departure since Tedford is (usually) pretty quick to fire coaches (within a few weeks, max). But there are a few other factors in play. And that factor is...
(2) Michalczik returns to coach the OL ... and perhaps do more than that. The magician returns. He's quite possibly the most important coach on the roster aside from Lupoi (DL coach) and Gould (RB coach). It's a bit interesting that Michalczik has returned considering the word was that he wanted to become an offensive coordinator, and since that wasn't going to happen at Cal, that's why he left (and went to Washington). So I think Coach M's return says one of two possibilities: (i) He has been promised a role as an offensive coordinator or at least a co-offensive coordinator; (ii) he has given up on his hopes of being an offensive coordinator. I think it's probably the former. If I recall correctly, wasn't Coach M the assistant head coach or something in 2007? I wouldn't be surprised if he takes on some greater title than just "offensive line coach." Perhaps "run-game coordinator" or "co-offensive coordinator".
When I spoke to some of Cal's offensive linemen from the 2006 year, they were all spoke very highly of Coach M. One stated that the guys believed he was the best OL coach on the west coast. I don't have any reason to doubt them. Coach M has had a knack for turning relatively low regarded recruits into consistent, impactful players, and even NFL players. I'm glad he's back. I hope he stays for a long time. I think this is an excellent hire.
(3) Perhaps Ludwig was kindly shown the door now that Coach M has arrived. That's what some people seem to think and I think that's very plausible. Perhaps Tedford wasn't quite sure if Coach M would be retained by the Raiders and that's why there was delay in hiring Coach M. And because Tedford wasn't sure that he was going to get Coach M he decided to wait on showing Ludwig the door. No use on prematurely firing the guy you already have when you're not sure you're going to get the guy you want to replace him, right?
I still find the Ludwig departure a bit puzzling for a few reasons.
First, I was thinking that perhaps Tedford was going to aim for some stability and consistency with his OCs. The best way to achieve that would be to.. you know... keep one around for more than two years. I mean, the offense does change every year, even under the same coordinator, but it can be expected to change more if you bring in a new guy. The new guy has to learn Cal's terminology. The Cal players will have to learn some of the new guy's terminology which he has brought with him. Cal's playbook has evolved so much over the Tedford era it's a bit mind-boggling. You see remnants from Dunbar in the "open" formations (5 wide). You see remnants from Tedford's offense in 2007 with twin-TE sets, and pro-style formations. You see remnants of Frank Cignetti's wildcat ("crazy" formation), and outside toss runs and blocking. You see some of the sandbox creativity remnants of Andy Ludwig with these gimmick plays (hook 'n' ladder, quasi fumble-rooski with a hidden Sofele, fake-substitution pass Vereen along the sidelines, etc.). The Cal offense does so much now, and it's only going to do more. I guess what I'm getting at is, perhaps the offense needs to tone down the "more" part for a few years and just work on the "execution" part. Learn how to do a few things really well, instead of doing so many things but not really do any of them very well.
The second reason I find the Ludwig departure a bit puzzling was because I felt like Ludwig was finally "the guy." It seemed like Ludwig and Tedford had a bit of a history. Here are a few snippets from one internet story reporting Cal's hire of Ludwig:
Ludwig has been an offensive coordinator the last 12 years with stops at Utah (2005-08), Oregon (2002-04), Fresno State (1998-01) and Cal Poly (1997). He left Utah for the offensive coordinator position at Kansas State following the 2008 campaign before deciding to move to Berkeley and coach with Tedford. "I am happy and excited to have Andy join our staff," Tedford said. "I've kept in touch with him over the years and followed his career, and we have a lot of history together. Andy is an excellent coach, which is evident by his guiding Utah to an undefeated record last year. He is an outstanding offensive coordinator and play caller." Although Tedford and Ludwig have not previously coached together, they have been closely linked at Fresno State and Oregon. When Tedford left Fresno State to become offensive coordinator at Oregon, Ludwig replaced him as offensive coordinator for the Bulldogs. The same happened when Tedford left Oregon to become head coach at Cal, with Ludwig moving to Eugene for three years.
Tedford says they have kept in touch over the years. That seems to suggest Tedford and Ludwig just aren't professional correspondents but perhaps even friends. They have "a lot of history together," and Tedford seems very impressed with his abilities as an offensive coordinator. I thought that Ludwig was finally that OC that Tedford wanted, whom he really truly trusted to call plays, and would stick around for at least five years or so. Nope.
What's also interesting to note is that Ludwig's previous stints at other schools have been pretty short too. He has only stayed one to four years at his previous jobs. Perhaps he likes the challenge of moving to a new team, figuring out how to utilize these new players, and calling plays with these new kids. Or perhaps he wants to become a head coach and he realizes it's not really going to happen here until Tedford is fired (at least another two years at the very earliest). But then if he wanted to be a head coach, then why go to SDSU who just hired Rocky Long?
I guess we'll never really know whether this was a voluntary departure, a firing, or a kindly-shown-the-door deal.
Am I concerned about losing Ludwig? Not really. Because...
(4) Perhaps this also means Tedford will take over QB development responsibilities. I think this is atop every Cal fan's wish list for this off-season. We want Tedford to groom the QBs like he (seemingly) did in his first few years.
Normally, in past years, the offensive coordinator at Cal has had the duties of grooming the QBs. I think this... hasn't gone well for a few reasons. First, the OCs are Xs & Os guys. I don't really see them as positional coaches and technique guys. In 2006, when Dunbar was Cal's OC, I don't remember him EVER giving pointers or tips on QB technique to Longshore and the other QBs (caveat: I wasn't always around the QBs so I can't be sure of this, but when I was he was mostly talking Xs & Os stuff to them).
Second, technique is something teams don't work on as heavily during the season than the off-season. The season workouts split time doing technique drills, and also gameplanning. Whereas during the off-season the team is mostly doing technique drills, and scrimmages. So instead of getting tons of technique reps during the off-season, then practicing that technique in scrimmages, 7 on 7s, or 1 on 1s, you're only getting half the time doing that stuff. Technique begins to degrade a little bit, and can often get a bit ignored in the X & O heavy position that is QB.
(5) Perhaps Tedford takes over playcalling duties too. This is another reason why I'm not exactly concerned about losing Ludwig. To me, this seems like a long-shot. I don't see Tedford taking over playcalling duties again since he's all about keeping a "pulse" on the team and being more of a CEO; that's why I expect Coach M to do the playcalling. But if Tedford does take-over playcalling duties, then I think we're in good hands. Nobody does it like Tedford. The players still have to execute otherwise Tedford's great playcalling will go to waste, but Tedford is also pretty good about tailoring the plays to the players' strengths.
I suppose some people might be a bit afraid of Tedford calling plays since 2007 wasn't that great of a season overall (mostly the second half of the season). But, as I so heavily chronicled in the past, I think the problems that season were mostly performance issues and not playcalling issues.
(6) Coach K(razinski) gets fired. Okay, that was a surprise. He was the one that helped design the SHPAC and now he's not even going to be the guy to break it in with the players. Sucks for him.
I found this firing a little surprising. Why? Well, he seemed well-liked among the players. Players respected him. Many NFL players came back to train with him, and many of the NFL-prospects chose to train with him instead of going to expensive training camps in Arizona to prep for the NFL Combine. And Coach K was also one of the few remaining coaches that Tedford brought with him from Oregon. He was one of the original Tedford guys. So much for loyalty, huh, Tedford? Cal fans ought to be happy about that.
But was Coach K a good developer of talent? I can't quite say with certainty since I didn't get to sit in on tons of weight-lifting sessions, but I did get a ton of time watching him do summer workouts. From what I saw, he did his job. He worked his guys. He was always telling them about their technique and getting them to improve it. He was trying to get them faster and stronger. He was encouraging. He was friendly.
One rumor I heard going around was that Coach K's biggest fault was that he was stubborn and didn't respect modern training techniques. I don't have enough information to comment about this. I do remember though from summer workouts that he would have new drills to do from year to year, so the players weren't always just doing the same thing over and over again, but perhaps that wasn't enough.
Another rumor was that while the players were getting stronger, they weren't exactly getting faster. I think someone might have even mentioned how Coach K himself sort of embodied that idea; he was a strong guy but he also had a gut. Perhaps he focused too much on strength and not enough on speed.
I guess if I were to critique Coach K, my biggest critique would be that it never seemed like the players were truly gassed and exhausted from his workouts. Yeah, they'd hit the weights and build muscle. Yeah, they'd sweat outside doing stairs, and other drills on the field. Everyone was tired but nobody was as seemingly gassed as the current players are reporting to be under new strength and conditioning coach Coach Blasquez.
(7) Rumors that Tedford will coach the QBs himself. Hallelujah!
(8) Rumors that Tedford will hire a TEs coach. Weird. Seems like an awful lot of money to spend on a guy who will pretty much be responsible for coaching only five to six players on the team.
If Tedford does hire a TEs coach, then that means Cal will not hire an OC as since all the coaching slots will be taken up. This of course suggests that Coach M or Tedford will be doing playcalling.
(8) Addendum: Okay, so in the time which I wrote this post and it was published, FootballScoop is saying that Tedford will hire a graduate assistant to coach the TEs (scroll down to January 27, 2011 post):
Cal: We have learned that Jeff Tedford will hire a grad assistant to coach the tight ends.
The wording of the FootballScoop rumor is a bit puzzling. Do they mean that a GA (graduate assistant) will be the coach for the TEs? Or do they mean Tedford will promote a GA to a full-time coach, and have that person coach the TEs? If it's the former, then Cal will still have a coaching slot open. Tedford could either than fill that slot with another coach, or just go without that coach and use the saved money to increase the salary of some of the existing coaches on roster. If it's the latter, then obviously all of Cal's coaching slots are filled and that means Cal won't be hiring an OC, and thus Tedford or Coach M will be doing the playcalling.
(9) Tedford & Co. may offer juco runningback C.J. Anderson out of Oakland. I usually don't talk about recruiting too much but I think this is interesting. Tedford doesn't usually recruit juco guys. Well, to be more precise, Tedford seemed to refrain from heavily recruiting juco guys over the past five years or so. In Tedford's early years, he signed tons of juco guys. Why sign juco guys? Because they are more experienced, and they are more likely to be able to play and contribute right away. Thus, they are a great way to fill an *immediate and pressing need*. Oh, what's that? Did I say "immediate pressing need"? I did. Yes, at runningback -- where Cal already has five scholarship players (soon to be seven if you include incoming recruits Lasco and Bigelow). It seems to me like offering a scholarship to C.J. Anderson would be Tedford & Co. stating that they are a bit uncertain about our current stable of runningbacks, and that perhaps none of them will be able to be our #1 guy. Interesting.
(9) Addendum: Okay, another change in news since I wrote this post. C.J. Anderson has committed to Cal!
(10) Cal (pretty much) had the number one defense in the Pac-10 last year, yet still (only) went 5-7. I find that pretty sad. Let's look at some of the statistics.
#1 in the Pac-10 for least amount of defensive plays (797, or about 66.4 plays per game).
#1 in the Pac-10 for least amount of yards given up (3827 yards, or about 319 yards per game).
#2 in the Pac-10 for least amount of yards given up per play (4.8 yards per play).
#1 in the Pac-10 for least amount of yards given up per game (318.9 yards per game).
#2 (three-way tie) in the Pac-10 for sacks.
#1 in the Pac-10 for forced fumbles (but only #9 in the Pac-10 for fumble recovery percentage )-:).
#2 in the Pac-10 for opponent third down conversion (but #10 in the Pac-10 for opponent 4th down conversion )-:).
#3 in the Pac-10 for opponent red zone conversions.
Wowzers. I know we played a few crap teams. But still. If the defense is that good, you think that the team would win more than five games. And since the team didn't win more than five games, it just goes to show how bad that offense was.
(11) One other benefit of bringing Coach M back is that it could also result in improved TE play. Uh what what? Yes, TE play.
Everyone knows that Jeff Genyk is the current TEs coach (and Alamar was the former TEs coach). Everyone seems to think that those coaches were the only guys coaching up the TEs. That's not true.
At least when I was with the team, the TEs would also work with the OL coach (at the time, Coach M). Alamar would work with the TEs on their position specific techniques, but there were always a few periods of every practice where the TEs would go over to the OL and practice their pass protection assignments with Coach M. Coach M was the main coach during those periods and it was him who coached up the TEs on the mental aspect of the game. If this same practice structure and coaching structure exists this upcoming season, then we should be comforted in knowing that Coach M will also play a hand in the development of the TEs too.
(12) Tedford still plays a heavy role in the Cal offense. Thanks to Avinash for pointing this out, but it appears as if one of the reasons why Ludwig left Cal was because he wanted more freedom to run his offense. Here's a Ludwig quote from Sign On San Diego News:
"At Cal, I was an offensive coordinator with a coach who was also an offensive coordinator," he said. "I'm excited to get back to running my system. I have nothing but positive things to say about my time there and we'll be implementing a similar system to what we had at Cal, just with my signature on it." (emphasis mine)
Pretty juicy quote right there, if you ask me. It sounds like Tedford was meddling with the Ludwig's duties a little more than perhaps Ludwig liked. I think this suggests that Tedford doesn't quite trust other people to call plays that he wants to be executed. If that's the case, then perhaps Tedford needs to just call the plays himself. After all, he is (supposedly) one of the best offensive minds in college football, right?
Here's another hearsay quote from the same article, supra:
Ludwig said he left Cal on very good terms with head coach Jeff Tedford, who he called one of the best offensive minds in all of football.
As the old adage goes: if you want something done right, then you had better do it yourself.
(13) Did you see Alex Mack score a touchdown?! See our post on it. A few aspect of this video that really stuck out to me. First was Alex Mack's work ethic, and seriousness. It all starts in the very beginning of the play. After Mack snaps the ball, he is still protecting his QB despite the defensive line not showing any interest in pass rushing (you can see Mack's left arm contacting a defender). All the other offensive linemen are just standing around and not even grabbing onto or pushing any other defensive linemen. Why is this significant? It only takes a moment for a defender to slip past an offensive linemen to give up a sack. Mack isn't letting this happen.
Second, Mack also has his head on a swivel and is STILL watching all directions for possible stunts and twists by the defensive line. I mean, who does this?!? It's the freaking PRO BOWL for cryin' out loud. But Alex Mack does this. Why? Because it only takes a moment of inattention for an offensive linemen to give up a sack.
Third, when the ball is thrown, who is the ONLY offensive linemen down the field trying to make a play? ALEX MACK. Why is this significant? Because a lot of lazy offensive linemen don't get their lard asses down field fast enough because they think they are too far behind the play to be of assistance. But not Alex Mack. Dude is down the field, giving effort, and trying to score a touchdown.
Why am I making a big fuss about this? I mean, we're talking about the PRO BOWL here. We might as well be talkin' about PRACTICE. Am I right? WHO THE F--- CARES?!?!
Those three traits I pointed out above are why Alex Mack is so good. Those three traits are reasons why Alex Mack made the Pro Bowl. Those three traits are what makes an offensive linemen a GOOD offensive linemen. Those three offensive traits are things that Cal's current offensive line has lacked a lot of since the more disciplined veterans of the mid-Tedford era have left.
People wonder why our offensive line hasn't been that greatly. It's not all coaching, folks. It's not all innate player talent either. It comes down to the players' mental discipline. It comes down to whether they are willing to put in 100% effort, and have the drive and determination to make themselves better every practice and every day. Alex Mack had that. I saw it every freakin' day in practice. He was serious. He was intense. He just didn't go through the motions. He was a perfectionist. Look where it got him. And Aaron Rodgers too.
Cal needs more players who have the discipline, hunger, and drive to be better players. These players don't become successful by accident. Nor do the teams that these players are on become successful by accident either.
125 comments
|
1 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Coach M as OC
It’s a bit interesting that Michalczik has returned considering the word was that he wanted to become an offensive coordinator, and since that wasn’t going to happen at Cal, that’s why he left (and went to Washington).
Coach M had the “offensive coordinator” title in 2007, the last season of his 1st stint at Cal. But Tedford was still the primary playcaller, no different than the arrangement when Cortez was the OC.
Yes, I am an Old Blue. Now get off my lawn.
Coach M was at Cal through 2008
Yes, Michalczik was the nominal OC in 2007. He then spent one more year at Cal before moving, first, to UW as the putative OC, then second, to the Oakland Raiders as OL coach.
I’m struggling with the definitional distinctions between “nominal” and “putative” OC, and, you know, an OC.
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Jan 31, 2011 1:57 PM PST up reply actions
A putative OC is one which you have struck on an agar plate and may or may not contain the plays necessary to win over a liquid culture at 34 C.
It’s a nice place for people to go watch your stupid [2010 World Series Champion San Francisco Giants].
by Spazzy Mcgee on Jan 31, 2011 3:30 PM PST up reply actions
For #10 – keep in mind just how tough Cal’s schedule was (6th toughest in the nation by Sagarin ratings), as well as point differential. The 3 close games they played they lost each one (losses by 1 point, 2 points, 3 points), with just a little more luck, Cal could have easily been 8-4. Heck, look at Washington – they were outscored in conference play 275-186, and still wound up with a 5-4 conference record. Luck matters a lot, and I’m not talking about quarterbacks…
The more I think about it, the more I think it was a lot better than it felt. This team is going to go down as Tedford’s worst, but I’m really not sure how accurate that is when I look at objective evidence. I know it feels like the talent isn’t there after missing a bowl (especially when the teams two best players, Cam and The Prophet, are gone next year), but I really think there might be more talent than it seems. Seeing as how there’s been mention of a 2/3 win season next year, I think we could be surprised. Not calling for a run at the conference title or anything, though….
by Missing Barry on Jan 31, 2011 7:56 AM PST up reply actions
I know it feels like the talent isn’t there after missing a bowl
It’s not just that. It’s—
Lost to Nevada 52-31
Lost to USC 48-14
Lost to Oregon State 35-7
Lost to Stanfurd 48-14
So could we have won 2 or 3 more games with a little luck here and little break there? Yeah, maybe. But 4 losses by a combined 117 points is what really made it feel so bad.
Do I think we have talent? Yes, I do. I’m just at a loss as to how we can be blown out so badly by teams we should be able to compete with.
Yes, I am an Old Blue. Now get off my lawn.
by Ohio Bear on Jan 31, 2011 9:09 AM PST up reply actions 2 recs
That was the most alarming aspect of last year
We simply did not show up at $C or vs. ‘furd. ’07’s collapse was gentle in comparison. I never thought I’d see the day when a Tedford team failed to compete, regardless of the competition. I’m glad that he’s made so many bold moves. Hopefully, they will bring back the Tedford swagger.
I completely agree
I do believe this team has talent but those four blow outs, combined with the four from the 09 season really makes it feel so bad.
I remember when Tedford teams used to beat good teams by those scores.
Glass half full!
Colorado – 52-7
UCLA – 35-7
Arizona St – 50-17
Was it you who was talking about the team next year winning maybe 2 games? If not, I apologize for the accusation. Anyways, the point is, teams like that are the competition for trying to get to middle of the pack in the Pac-12. You think Cal has rebuilding to do….what about them?
by Missing Barry on Jan 31, 2011 10:34 AM PST up reply actions
I said the team would be rebuilding next season and I could see a 2-5 win season
next year. Although I guess I would change that to 3-5 wins. No way do we just win two games next season.
As for next season, ASU is a preseason media favorite to win the south. ASU has a lot of returning starters and we will have to play them at ASU next season. I would have much rather had Arizona at home this upcoming season.
Are we for sure playing Colorado next season? I have heard so many conflicting stories about this game being played, not being played, not counting as a conference game, etc.
We should beat UCLA and I would mark that as a W if not for the fact it is in LA.
We’ll see what happens. I mean, you do have some reasonable points, but I think I do as well. The truth is probably where it always is – somewhere in between. ;)
by Missing Barry on Jan 31, 2011 10:49 AM PST up reply actions
LOL, yeah you are probably correct
I really hope we win at a minimum five games.
Ohio
The defense could have done better against Nevada; however the other losses were the result of an inept offense. If we were to win against USC and Stanford, it would have been in a shoot out because our defense was not going to hold either of these teams to less than 4 socres.
At Oregon State, we lost Riley. We may not have won, but it would not have been a blowout.
It’d be interesting if a parallel universe existed where The Prophet played against Nevada to see what kind of impact he would have made….
by Missing Barry on Jan 31, 2011 4:02 PM PST up reply actions
Sagarin ratins aside, how can you hold the #1 team in the country to just 15 points and STILL LOSE THE GAME?! Our offense was horrible. You can have the best defense in the country and if your offense stinks, the team is going to stink.
Drinking the Kool-Aid. Pumping the sunshine. Livin' the dream. Go Bears!
by dballisloose on Jan 31, 2011 8:55 AM PST up reply actions
Or you could look at it as: they held the #1 team in the country to 15 points. Glass half full. Best performance against the Oregon O of any team the entire season…
by Missing Barry on Jan 31, 2011 9:39 AM PST up reply actions
If your defense is that good, your team can’t really “stink”…
by Missing Barry on Jan 31, 2011 9:39 AM PST up reply actions
Final score? Result = LOSS. That stunk. I like to drink the kool-aid too, but I don’t care if you held the #1 team in the country to 15 points, you have to win the game under those circumstances.
Drinking the Kool-Aid. Pumping the sunshine. Livin' the dream. Go Bears!
by dballisloose on Jan 31, 2011 11:47 AM PST up reply actions
I’m not sure what you’re getting at…? Losing close games to really good teams generally indicates your team doesn’t “stink”….
by Missing Barry on Jan 31, 2011 12:00 PM PST up reply actions
What I’m getting at is that there are few real moral victories out there, and that they’re always subjective anyway. You and I have different interpretations of the result, in that you feel it was a moral victory and that our team didn’t stink. I look at it and say, our defense had a heroic effort but our offense was awful and the result was still a loss.
Drinking the Kool-Aid. Pumping the sunshine. Livin' the dream. Go Bears!
by dballisloose on Jan 31, 2011 12:17 PM PST up reply actions
No, nobody said Cal took anything out of that game. What he said was that there’s no reason to think Cal “stunk” from the result of that game, and I happen to agree. I think your logic is a bit flawed. You say that if you hold the #1 team to 15 points, you have to win the game under those circumstances. I agree in the sense that that’s the only chance you actually HAVE to win that game. But they’re the #1 team for heaven’s sake. Under those circumstances, they also have to find any means they can to win. And they did, because they’re the #1 team and we’re not. We don’t stink because we gave them a run for their money. With an inexperienced backup QB at that. I bet you with Kevin Riley, we win that game. So no, I don’t come out with any Pyhrric victories, but I also don’t think that game was any reason to think “Geez, we stink!”
You’re right, we’ll pick another game to agree that “geez, we stink”.
Drinking the Kool-Aid. Pumping the sunshine. Livin' the dream. Go Bears!
by dballisloose on Jan 31, 2011 12:41 PM PST up reply actions
I’m not trying to say it’s a moral victory. I’m more saying that things like point differential, SOS, and other factors that tend to be fairly predictive are indicating that the team didn’t stink. All losses are not equal. A team that loses that game by 40 points is more likely to be worse than a team that loses it by two points, even though they both lost.
by Missing Barry on Jan 31, 2011 12:40 PM PST up reply actions
No point in arguing anymore about it, we’ll all find some reason to believe we’re right. At the end of the day, we lost the game. Where you guys are getting tripped up is on really subjective descriptions like “stunk”. Whatever, the team didn’t win as many games as they lost.
Drinking the Kool-Aid. Pumping the sunshine. Livin' the dream. Go Bears!
by dballisloose on Jan 31, 2011 12:41 PM PST up reply actions
Offense is key.
I said this around when the season ended.
When you have a car with a bad engine, you aren’t going to go anywhere. Sure, you can have amazing brakes (our defense) but if you don’t have an engine (offense) you’re stuck in one place or rolling backwards down a hill.
"Today's weather, excessively violent with a chance of dismemberment. Tune in later for our 5-day forecast!"
~ Three Dog - Fallout 3
by Swamphunter on Jan 31, 2011 11:16 AM PST up reply actions 1 recs
Our problem was the loss of Kevin Riley.
Say what you will about him but we would’ve easily beaten WSU, beaten Oregon (we left as much as 3TDs if not more out on the field) and crushed UW. Instead of 5-7 we could’ve been 7-5 at the least. And we would’ve been much better vs the Furd than we actually played. Maybe good enough to sneak a win by.
I hate to do this but Brock Mansion is fucking terrible. I’d rather have Ayoob. I hope to never see Mansion throw a ball again. Not even in practice. Give the practice time to someone who’s good.
In other words, Go Bears!
by royrules22 on Jan 31, 2011 10:18 AM PST up reply actions 2 recs
probably a loss vs. Furd, but a win vs. Oregon and definitely blow out wins vs. WSU and UW with Kevin Riley for sure.
As far as Mansion, had Tedford coached the QBs, things might have turned out differently. Feel bad for him, coming into Tedford’s program and not being developed by Tedford as he had expected.
Even with those wins we it still wouldn't have changed the blow outs to SC, OSU, and poor
offensive showing against Nevada. At best we are left with the same mixed results/feelings of the 09 season. Add to that a winning season might have meant all those coaches that were fired/let guys might have been retained.
That is true and that is the silver lining I am holding onto
so far I see upgrades at the WR and OL coaching positions.
As for the DB coach, I will take a wait and see approach.
might have meant all those coaches that were fired/let guys might have been retained.
Not so sure about that.
In other words, Go Bears!
It is one of those things that we will never know
I do believe Marshall was gone regardless of how good or bad the season turned out.
I’d rather have Ayoob
Noooooooooooooooo. Ayoob was fucking terrible. I don’t think anyone could possibly be worse. :)
by Missing Barry on Jan 31, 2011 10:35 AM PST up reply actions
No I disagree, Mansion was much worse
by SDBear on Jan 31, 2011 10:44 AM PST up reply actions 2 recs
Nah, that’s just recency affect. Ayoob couldn’t throw the ball farther than 20 yards, and had actual talent around him! But yeah, I’m not trying to argue Mansion is something other than bad…..
by Missing Barry on Jan 31, 2011 10:47 AM PST up reply actions
IIRC, Ayoob was able to actually hit his targets when they were there. His problem was randomly throwing into areas where there were no receivers. It’s up to you guys to decide who’s actually worse: the guy with dyslexia or the guy who just flat out sucks.
I dunno, whenever I watched him, I didn’t get that feeling at all. If the target was farther than 10 yards down field, he was going to have a hard time getting the ball there….
by Missing Barry on Jan 31, 2011 12:40 PM PST up reply actions
Was Ayoob ever replaced a fucking WR as QB against a terrible defense? And if I remember from looking through all the 05 games stats Ayoob actually led a comeback vs WSU (a better one than the one in Pullman now) and was somewhat decent at times.
Mansion is just terrible all round.
In other words, Go Bears!
Ayoob did light up an equally bad UW defense in Seattle
so he has that going for him as well. I think that UW game was his best of the season, IIRC.
Was Ayoob ever replaced a fucking WR as QB against a terrible defense?
Ha, not sure what you’re trying to say, exactly, but I can tell you Ayoob was ultimately replaced by a fullback. Also, WSU sucked in 2005, especially their D. 1-7 in conference, but hooray, they did beat a 1-7 conference UW! Ayoob really wasn’t decent at times, he just had Marshawn, Forsett, Desean, Hawk, Robert Jordan, Craig Stevens, Merz, O’Callaghan, Marvin Phillip, Erik Robertson……stacked. It’s hard to not succeed with that kind of talent, yet Ayoob managed it anyways.
by Missing Barry on Jan 31, 2011 11:34 AM PST up reply actions
I may be mistaken but wasn’t Levy a QB converted to FB that converted back to QB? Whereas Keenan Allan is a WR that was playing better QB than a 3rd year actual QB.
In other words, Go Bears!
Yes, something like that. Levy wanted to play QB but FB was his best opportunity for playing time.
Drinking the Kool-Aid. Pumping the sunshine. Livin' the dream. Go Bears!
by dballisloose on Jan 31, 2011 12:42 PM PST up reply actions
I still don’t know what you’re talking about. Are we talking about the same Keenan Allen, he of the 1 passing attempt for the entire season? How is that playing QB?
by Missing Barry on Jan 31, 2011 12:43 PM PST up reply actions
You’re so fucking argumentative today
Drinking the Kool-Aid. Pumping the sunshine. Livin' the dream. Go Bears!
by dballisloose on Jan 31, 2011 12:47 PM PST up reply actions
You’re so fucking argumentativetoday
Fixed. ;)
by Missing Barry on Jan 31, 2011 1:00 PM PST up reply actions
Dork
Drinking the Kool-Aid. Pumping the sunshine. Livin' the dream. Go Bears!
by dballisloose on Jan 31, 2011 1:03 PM PST up reply actions
He has a TD pass vs Furd. More than Mansion could muster.
And when your WR got a large share of the snaps (as a wildcat QB) than your regular QB then we have a problem
In other words, Go Bears!
I wouldn’t really call the wildcat position a “QB”. I guess it could be a QB in the mold of a spread option running attack, but yeah, going from pro-style QB to wildcat is completely changing up your entire offensive scheme, not just switching up QB’s….
by Missing Barry on Jan 31, 2011 4:03 PM PST up reply actions
Same here.
Ayoob’s problem was confidence.
If he came in for an injured Riley he would have done a FAR better job.
"Today's weather, excessively violent with a chance of dismemberment. Tune in later for our 5-day forecast!"
~ Three Dog - Fallout 3
by Swamphunter on Jan 31, 2011 11:11 AM PST up reply actions
Ayoob’s problem was he was trying to play Pac-10 quarterback with the arm strength of a 5th grade girl….
I think I make a pretty compelling case how bad he was above. Read about the talent he was surrounded by. Then look at his numbers. Under 50% completion percentage. 6.7 Y/A. 15 TD’s v 14 INT’s. That’s over 250 attempts. That’s bad. Like really, really, really freaking bad, which he was.
by Missing Barry on Jan 31, 2011 11:36 AM PST up reply actions
I remember Ayoob had a lot of dropped passes count against him, but he had even more wild throws, throws into the dirt, throws while staring down his WRs. It was just as bad as you say. But I would give him a little more credit, he threw with the arm strength of at least a 9th grade girl.
Drinking the Kool-Aid. Pumping the sunshine. Livin' the dream. Go Bears!
by dballisloose on Jan 31, 2011 12:26 PM PST up reply actions
New pickup line for Rishi: Hey baby, that ass has the talent of a Div-I QB
Drinking the Kool-Aid. Pumping the sunshine. Livin' the dream. Go Bears!
by dballisloose on Jan 31, 2011 12:43 PM PST up reply actions 2 recs
Like Hydro, I was totally surprised by the Coach K firing. He was such a constant figure with the program, it felt like he was going to stay there forever. The strength and conditioning coach is an interesting position to me, because he spends so much time with the players, but often isn’t noticed by fans.
Looking back, I have to agree with Hydro that:
I guess if I were to critique Coach K, my biggest critique would be that it never seemed like the players were truly gassed and exhausted from his workouts.
I don’t think he ever did a bad job, but perhaps the change will be beneficial.
I've been Honked...
Signing Day Activities
Since it’s just a couple days away (Feb. 2, right?), can anyone outline how CGB will follow the action? Will it be an open stream, or a list of players who’ve sent in their letters, or…
Getting excited ! Thanks.
I'd like to smell the Roses before I die.
Is there anyone left Cal is trying to get that have not committed?
Matt Cain: 38th Best Starter at Best
San Francisco Giants Won the 2010 World Series: Not a Typo
Don't know...
…but love to know the letters showed up !!!!! Seems last year there was a pretty good thread with lots of virtual excitement from CGB members. Yee-haw.
I'd like to smell the Roses before I die.
Still (at least somewhat) in the running for Marqise Lee. There’s also some chance with Kameron Jackson. And there’s a good chance Puka Lopa will come to Cal.
Lopa visited last wkd. Haven’t heard much from his visit. What can be better than line-uping next to his best friend Moala every Saturday w/ their family & friends watching?
http://twitter.com/solariseCGB
Or even lining up next to his best friend Moala every Saturday.
Drinking the Kool-Aid. Pumping the sunshine. Livin' the dream. Go Bears!
by dballisloose on Jan 31, 2011 12:27 PM PST up reply actions
Is he projected to play DL or OL in college?
Drinking the Kool-Aid. Pumping the sunshine. Livin' the dream. Go Bears!
by dballisloose on Jan 31, 2011 12:28 PM PST up reply actions
Question for you, on Scout.com you can search for players who visited Cal, but doing so seems to only yield players who verbally committed….but I can’t imagine that every player who visits ends up committing, otherwise we should get players to visit more often!
Drinking the Kool-Aid. Pumping the sunshine. Livin' the dream. Go Bears!
by dballisloose on Jan 31, 2011 12:46 PM PST up reply actions
Do players visit and not commit? Why are they not included in the scout search?
by Missing Barry on Jan 31, 2011 1:01 PM PST up reply actions
Now we’re on the same page. Yes, what he said.
Drinking the Kool-Aid. Pumping the sunshine. Livin' the dream. Go Bears!
by dballisloose on Jan 31, 2011 1:04 PM PST up reply actions
Players often visit and not commit (Ari Kouandjio, Lorenzo Waters, George Farmer, etc.). Scout & Rivals visit searches are not reliable imo since they 1) record mostly official visits and 2) only updated haphazardly.
http://twitter.com/solariseCGB
It would be really interesting to see how many players visit and don’t commit to certain schools. Though I guess the usefulness of that information is really only relevant for official visits since they’re limited in how many they can take.
Drinking the Kool-Aid. Pumping the sunshine. Livin' the dream. Go Bears!
by dballisloose on Jan 31, 2011 1:09 PM PST up reply actions
I think it’d be interesting analytics as market research/feedback. Marqise Lee commented on how his unofficial visit to Cal was surprising and totally unexpected.
Using Cal Junior Day as an example:
Mustafa Jalil, DT Cathedral Catholic (verbal)
Chance Early, WR Cathedral Catholic
Jonny Martin, RB Cathedral Catholic
Sheldon Richardson, DL College of the Sequoias
De’Anthony Thomas, ATH Crenshaw
Victor Blackwell, WR Mater Dei
Max Wittek, QB Mater Dei
Rob Hankins, LB Parish Episcopal Dallas, TX
Brandon Bigelow, RB Central HS (verbal)
Conor Loftus, LB Servite
Bryce McGovern, WR Monte Vista (verbal)
Blake Renaud, LB De La Salle
Shaq Thompson, ATH Grant Union (Sophomore)
Nick Sherry, QB Casa Grande
George Atkinson, ATH Granada HS
Josh Atkinson, DB Granada HS
Robert Ash, OL Elk-Grove-Cosumes
Brian Farley, OL San Diego-Patrick Henry
Jordon Rigsbee, OL Pleasant Valley (verbal)
Tony Popovich, DL Marin Catholic
Sam Atoe, LB Maria Carrillo
Lional Louis, LB El Cerrito
Jason Gibson, LB Serra (verbal)
Ray Hamilton, TE Strongsville, OH
5 out of 23 (taking out Shaq since he’s Class of 2012) recruits verbally committed for 2011. If you only look at recruits who got Cal offers the success rate would be even higher.
http://twitter.com/solariseCGB
I imagined you being very annoyed while writing this comment.
The author, who has 35 years’ consulting experience, has taught at University of California Berkeley, where he was able to observe the culture and the way the senior management operates.
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
if you want live and up to date alerts
Text CALSIGN to 51234
you’ll get all the times they do it
Don't Tread on Me.
by THESeymoreBear on Jan 31, 2011 7:45 PM PST up reply actions
It is wednesday. As of now, our plan is as follows:
1. Solarise has written a great preview post to be run tomorrow.
2. We are intentionally leaving Tuesday evening open as sometimes major news breaks at that hour and we can have a thread up quickly for discussion, hopefully.
3. Open Thread starting Wedned morning. Edit in information as it comes in. Hopefully, everything will run smoothly! There is a lot of action that happens that day so its very roll with the punches.
4. Perhaps recap it on Thursday/Fri and then in coming weeks.
5. Look to 2012!
The author, who has 35 years’ consulting experience, has taught at University of California Berkeley, where he was able to observe the culture and the way the senior management operates.
www.CaliforniaGoldenBlogs.com
I still like CDJs potential to win the RB position or at least help share the load
I think Isi will remain our change of pace/fly sweep back and get a few carries as well but I doubt he is the starter.
The last big juco recruit that Tedford landed (Ryan Davis) has been a major bust so far.
Yeah I forgot about Edmond but I am not sure a lot was expected of him
from what I remember big things were expected from Ryan Davis. Davis had some hype to him as he was supposed to step into the rush OLB position.
Don’t forget Jarred Price who was also brought in as a rusher. The talent level is so high in the Pac-12 right now that we need really high level guys AND we need to develop them AND we need a scheme that take full advantage. Those are three difficult things to accomplish (just ask $C last year — 2/3).
Say it like Ron Burgandy signing off: "Stay Classy, Bears!"
by PlayClassyBears on Jan 31, 2011 11:22 AM PST up reply actions
Was much expected from Price? That year we brought in Price, Davis, and Hurrell
I believe Hurrell was the third juco LB we brought in but I could be wrong. Of the three, the only one that was expected to really contribute was Davis.
I agree that we need to accomplish those three difficult things to succeed.
yeah, meadows got hurt this year. from calbears.com:
CAL CAREER (Career Stats): Played in 11 games during his two seasons at Cal from 2009-10 but missed his last 11 collegiate games with an injury … totaled five career tackles (two unassisted, three assisted) and 0.5 tackles for loss (-1 yard) … Wore No. 55 in his first season at Cal in 2009 but changed to No. 41 for his 2010 senior campaign.
Drinking the Kool-Aid. Pumping the sunshine. Livin' the dream. Go Bears!
by dballisloose on Jan 31, 2011 12:22 PM PST up reply actions
Donnovan Edwards also sucked.
"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark
I really don't see Isi starting next season
one of the other RB’s will win the job but I think we will see a bit more RB by committee approach to start the season.
I do agree that I would not be surprised that whoever starts at the RB position to start the season may lose his job midway through.
Yeah, I wanna hear more about Briggs. Hell, we don’t really know anything about the RB pecking order right now.
Seems to have talent but its hard to tell since he missed much (or all?) of his senior year in high school. Was it Briggs or someone else that was playing big on the scout team this past fall?
Drinking the Kool-Aid. Pumping the sunshine. Livin' the dream. Go Bears!
by dballisloose on Jan 31, 2011 12:48 PM PST up reply actions
That’s good to hear, he had good tape from high school. I thought they usually named scout team MVPs every year, but I kind find any record of it from 2010.
Drinking the Kool-Aid. Pumping the sunshine. Livin' the dream. Go Bears!
by dballisloose on Jan 31, 2011 12:51 PM PST up reply actions
If Isi starts, The Future at RB doesn’t look as good as I’m picturing it.
"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark
I bet CDJ starts
and puts up a 1,000 yard season.
Isi and Anderson will back up.
Hector Sanchez: Underrated. Fighting body bias since the 2009 off season. I still love you, son, even if you're fat.
Question: What about Ludwig did some folks actually like? I mean, his play-calling was serviceable – tough to evaluate since no one knows who/how many people really sucked ass last year on the offensive side of the ball. It seems other than a good relationship with Tedford, Ludwig’s main positives was that he coached at Oregon and helped lead Utah to a 13-0 season (about 3 games were actually toughies). The fast-paced offense that Utah used to stun a talented ‘bama team never surfaced at Cal (for whatever reasons). Whether it was Ludwig or not, with Ludwig being in charge of the unit I’m quite pleased he’s being replaced with Coach M.*
*This is carefully written: It’s one thing to let somebody go, but that’s only part of the equation. You actually have to replace that coach with a superior one. If he would have, say, hired Mike Johnson, then I’m quite skeptical that such a switch would be an upgrade.
I am a bit concerned that we may be asking for too much from Coach M, as OC and OL coach, given that the Oline is That Bad, the Oline needs a lot of recruiting in 2012, and being a creative and effective OC is a challenge at the FBS level. Perhaps the last coach Tedford hires will be an asst O-line/TE coach? Someone who is groomable (by M) but has had successful football experiences.
Such a situation would leave us fairly solid from a coaching perspective:
Tedford – QB coach
Gould – RB coach
Kiesau – WR/passing game coordinator
New Guy – Asst O-line/TE coach (perhaps OT/TE coach…some schools are dividing the interior/exterior line coaching responsibilities these days).
M – OC/O-line
That would allow Tedford, Kiesau, and M, with key insights from Gould (who has been around forever), to be the offensive strategists. Combined with effective recruiting and results on the defensive side of the ball, I think I really like how Cal’s moving forward.
"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark
I liked his quality, creative playcalling that adapted to situations as needed.
It’s a nice place for people to go watch your stupid [2010 World Series Champion San Francisco Giants].
by Spazzy Mcgee on Jan 31, 2011 12:58 PM PST up reply actions
I liked how he would occassionally wear a double-breasted suit to press conferences. And how he once punched that old lady in the face while trying to evict her.
Drinking the Kool-Aid. Pumping the sunshine. Livin' the dream. Go Bears!
by dballisloose on Jan 31, 2011 1:04 PM PST up reply actions
Seems like we’re hiring a GSA to take over as TE coach. Kevin Daft iirc was a GSA before becoming WR coach?
http://twitter.com/solariseCGB
So what if Tedford coaches up the QBs?
What are the chances that Mansion will improve by leaps and bounds with an entire spring/summer of Tedford mentoring? I’m assuming that Tedford did very little with the QBs the past few years and will now do a whole bunch of tutoring. It worked for Boller….
Middle-aged toothwrangler (HT: Kodiak)
So if Rodgers wins the Super Bowl
Looks like I might be in need of a new moniker…
by Another Failed Tedford QB on Jan 31, 2011 3:15 PM PST reply actions
Nothing personal but...
I think Rodgers proved your moniker wrong as early as two years ago. Also, winning Superbowls is such an overly used and irrelevant way of determining whether a NFL QB is truly elite or not.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
But then how will you guys know who I am?
Will I lose my identity?
by Another Failed Tedford QB on Feb 1, 2011 10:40 AM PST up reply actions
You could be “Another Successful Tedford QB”. We’d still all know who you are.
www.californiagoldenblogs.com
I love it HT
Look out for the debut of ASTQ next week!
by Another Failed Tedford QB on Feb 2, 2011 9:23 AM PST up reply actions
Oh, I just assumed your handle was ironic/sarcastic….
by Missing Barry on Jan 31, 2011 4:04 PM PST up reply actions
"Execution" Over "More"
I definitely agree with this. Of course, video games are extremely different than real life situations, but I basically subscribe to this philosophy.
On NCAA ‘11, with Cal’s playbook, I really only run twenty to twenty-five plays (usually), but I run them to perfection. Sure, it’s vanilla, but it’s extremely effective because I’ve honed them to perfection.
The Bears should get back to something like that.

by 






























































