I'm a bitter masochist so I rewatched the game... and what do you know?
by fiatlux on Oct 15, 2011 8:52 AM PDT
Email
PrintLet me start by saying, Thursday night was one of the most miserable experiences I have had at a CAL football game, and that includes a lot of games coached by Gilby and Holmoe and Roger Theder. The atmosphere was hideously flat thanks to the determined efforts of CAL’s Sales and Marketing to destroy everything great about the CAL football experience; I fear they have almost completed their project. As I posted previously, in my many years of attending professional and college sporting events, never have I seen the home team so abdicate the home field by allowing the visitors to have the best seats in the house. This picture I took disgusts me and should get people in marketing fired. This is what our team had to stare at the entire game. CAL Sales and Marketing, you should be deeply ashamed.
So before I get into the game stuff, I get why many of you want to fire Tedford. So to preempt that, and to show this is not a full throttled defense of him as a coach, this is what I have said repeatedly this year:
I've said this before, but I do not believe Tedford is owed anything more than to be treated fairly, as we all should be. That means if for some reason (and I don't think this will happen) we were to absolutely tank this season, then Sandy would be absolutely in her right to make a change. We cannot afford to have a depressed and apathetic fan base next year... or for the next 15 years!
After the jump my thoughts from the game on why I see more than a little hope.
I realize these sites and we as fans in general tend to be binary on these things, but I believe we need to look at the bigger picture in addition to assessing the present moment.
As bad as the game felt in person, for some reason I went back and watched it again. Despite the title of this post, I am not a masochist… I can’t remember the last time I went back and watched a loss like that. But here’s the thing, I am glad I did, because it was not nearly as bad as it was in real time and there are some real signs of hope. That's right, you read that correctly.
Maynard:
I know I’ll get some howls for this, but there was actually a lot there to like. The first interception was simply awful. Terrible. Soul crushing. Actually, after that, I was saying Tedford needed to bench him and bring in Brigford. But I am glad Tedford is the coach and I'm not because Tedford didn’t do that and the guy was 25 of 43 for 300+ yards and he made some very nice passes and got out of trouble a couple of times. I also counted 5 totally dropped passes… I’m not talking about passes a receiver had to leap for or dive for, but balls that hit them in the hands or numbers. Balls that even the commentators said they absolutely must catch. (and yes, they made some great catches, but receivers are supposed to do that). I am hoping Tedford sees what everyone else seems to see and designs more plays to take advantage of his mobility.
The TD. A great designed play. More of that please. And yes, we would have all liked to have seen that at Washington.
Here’s the thing. We all knew this wasn’t going to be a great year coming in so what we need to do is get Maynard experience. Next year is where we reap the dividends.
Keenan
I think this guy has the chance to be a great talent, but he needs to be coached to worry about making the plays first and then waaaaay down the list he can do is yapping thing. (I hate that stuff and always have, even when Treggs the Elder was doing it at CAL when I was a student). Not sure why this isn’t getting more attention, but Keenan Allen absolutely cost his team a TD because he inexcusably didn’t keep focus and wandered out of bounds on what should have been a TD. Yes, he made a great move after the catch to be in that position, but once you are you have to not screw up and make no mistake about it, that was a screw up. He wasn’t forced out… he wasn’t avoiding a defender. He just sort of lost track of where he was and wandered out. Further, after we scored our TD Keenan (I could be wrong on this) earned a 15 yard penalty for doing a “throat slash” thing, which of course completely changed the dynamic of the ensuing kickoff. I think he has lots of talent, but he needs to understand results and team come first (I may be treating him too harshly in this regard but those plays I saw on the field are things that drive me nuts).
Special Teams play
Almost all of it was sound. The blocked extra point was just a good play by the defense (a 6’7 guy at that). The punts were decent. The coverage was good. Field goals were good. GT even kicked one to the end zone… BUT… how can we call for another fair catch inside the 10. Everyone is fully justified in being upset at that.
Defense
I thought for the most part defense played lights out, particularly the position they were put in by the short fields. Once again (last year being the notable exception) against USC we shut down, for the most part, their star players.
Coaching
It felt way worse in real time. I was absolutely stewing in my seat and throughout was suggesting that Tedford has indeed lost it (8 straight losses to USC will do that to me) and may be time to go. When I was able to get back and reflect more on it, I remembered what our expectations were going into the year. Tedford has shown much more aggressiveness this year. I think, with exceptions, the team is playing well. But there are glaring, key let downs that earn the justifiable wrath of many people, including me. I know you may not see it from what I post on here, but I’m not the most fun person to be with when CAL is losing like we did Thursday night.
Most of us thought we would be 6-6 or 7-5 going into the year. We’re pretty much on track for that. But we all know there are 7-5 seasons, and then there are 7-5 seasons!!! 2003 was one such year because it included wins over SC and Stanfurd. That is a GOOD 7-5 season!!!
Finally, there are so many example of coaches, including our men’s basketball coach, who had average stints over their first ten years not achieving as much as Tedford did, who then went on to great things.
From this point out I’m not going to argue with anyone who thinks Tedford should be fired, because I understand where you’re coming from and your annoyance. And as I’ve said above, if we tank, I’ll probably be there with you. But if we don’t, and is we finish as expected, I think this year could be building for a great year next year.
Thursday night sucked. No two ways about. But I’d like to see what happens now and I really do have hope for the very near future.
GO BEARS!!!
The opinions expressed in a FanPost are, in every way, reflective of the opinions of every California Golden Blogs Marshawnthusiast. Moreover, they are reflective of every employee of SBNation, including Tyler "Blez" Bleszinski.
358 comments
|
4 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I was absolutely deflated while watching this at Busby’s West in LA (which by the way, had gotten filled with U$C fans regardless of it being a Cal bar). I called for Bridgford so many times, and really, after Maynard’s 7th possible interception, still didn’t understand why he wasn’t pulled out in favor of Maynard.
Seriously, Maynard doesn’t go through his progressions. Keenan sees it and calls him out it himself for gosh sakes. In the post game presser, LB Chris Gallippo said, “I don’t want to take anything away from him, but (Cal quarterback Zach) Maynard just telegraphed the heck out of his passes.” I mean… Come on, man.
I agree the defense did as much as it could, special teams play was decent (although it seemed that Bigelow really struggled to use his blockers). I’m just annoyed it took Maynard a whole half to start getting comfortable. And as much as I hate Craig James, he ha a point in saying he mostly throws to his left dominant side, and throwing to his right is a crapshoot.
no bear, no care
by EchoOfSilence on Oct 15, 2011 9:23 AM PDT via mobile reply actions
Busby's
I’ve never gone to see a game there, but I honestly think that whoever picked this place as the official West LA Cal Alumni bar needs to be replaced.
Why? Because there is absolutely nothing about the place that indicates that it is an official Cal Alumni Association bar.
For one thing, it seems to also be home to Wisconsin. How do I know this? I think my first clue was the seven-foot inflatable Bucky Badger that stands outside the place every Saturday. And, from the uclol pennants they have outside, you’d think it was also a baby-blue bar as well. There is no Cal promos, banners, streamers, or anything to indicate it is Bear Territory.
Pretty sad.
Being an Old Blue means never accepting success.
Yeah. There’s also Mr. Pockets in the South Bay, and I heard that has a better atmosphere, but it’s a large bar that hosts other teams as well.
What we need is a smaller bar that ONLY hosts us, like the one the DC alumni chapter has.
no bear, no care
by EchoOfSilence on Oct 15, 2011 12:07 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
There was one in Hollywood owned by some CAL guys… I’ll find out what it is. SInce I’m up at most of the game I have not been there.
Awesome, that’d be great to know.
no bear, no care
by EchoOfSilence on Oct 15, 2011 12:22 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Sick. Will try
no bear, no care
by EchoOfSilence on Oct 15, 2011 1:02 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Well, they're down!
http://twitter.com/BluePalms_Brew/status/125302029638840320
no bear, no care
by EchoOfSilence on Oct 15, 2011 1:18 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Yes…those guys over at the Blue Palm have been trying for at least 2 years to get a Cal crowd there. I remember the Cal owner guy coming over to BI 2 years ago and last year telling everyone in the L.A. area to come on down. I think I remember their menu and beers being decent too.
can we get the cal alumni group there instead of busby’s? or do they have a special deal with busby’s, ’cause they do have drink/shit bar food specials?
You should send an email to their alumni address
no bear, no care
by EchoOfSilence on Oct 15, 2011 4:35 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
half the bar is Cal, half is Wisconsin
And they have drink/food specials for Cal fans. I liked it there (when I was watching the Washington game). Haven’t been back yet.
I was also absolutely deflated...
… in Sacramento.
Went to the Blue Cue where the Cal Alumni had a GREAT gamewatch for Oregon/Cal, and what did I see?
Trojans.
EVERYWHERE.
There were two old blues there, one of whom departed as soon as he realized there was a substitute Golden Bear to take his place. That being said, the Trojans were courteous but smug. The remaining Old Blue told me that he had graduated in the mid-60s, and that I have 50+ years of this to look forward to. There is no escape.
Truly depressing.
I find the three major administrative problems on a campus are sex for the students, athletics for the alumni, and parking for the faculty. -- Clark Kerr
The atmosphere was hideously flat thanks to the determined efforts of CAL’s Sales and Marketing to destroy everything great about the CAL football experience; I fear they have almost completed their project.
This implies intent. Do you believe that the Cal Marketing is intentionally doing what you claim? Instead of just potential incompetence.
In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It
This implies intent. Do you believe that the Cal Marketing is intentionally doing what you claim? Instead of justpotentialclearly demonstrated incompetence.
I fixed it for you. I was using hyperbole because it would seem to most observers that it’s been continually been so counterproductive to what most of us would like to see at games there must be come plan behind it.
They must be all Stanford moles, taking us down from the inside!
In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It
It is VERY obvious that they are completely incompetent.
Why the removable bleachers are not the student section, I haven’t a clue . . . the reason given was that the students could not be behind the visiting bench. WELL, THEN MOVE THE CAL BENCH TO THE OTHER SIDE!
Jesus tapdancing Christ, would that be so incredibly difficult? As a matter of fact, if you look at the setup at Memorial Stadium, the Cal bench would be on that side anyway! The camera should be facing the Cal bench and student section and instead (at least for Thursday night) it was facing the USC bench and the USC visiting section. Absolutely unforgivable and I expect a few recruits to look at that and be turned off by Cal because of it. Perhaps if they put the student section and the Cal bench WHERE IT SHOULD BE, the atmosphere wouldn’t be so flat and we could actually pull off a “Hey Alumni GO!”
Sure I am angry about the situation at AT&T for a plethora of reasons, but most of all, it it my f**king senior year and I am stuck standing up in the end zone watching the game on the jumbotron. Thanks athletic department!!
www.LosAngelesRams.org
CALIFORNIA ANGELS . . . ANAHEIM DUCKS . . . CALIFORNIA GOLDEN BEARS
1920 • 1921 • 1922 • 1923 • 1937 • 1947 • 1951 • 1957 • 1959 • 2002 • 2007
Here is the problem
Most of the seats at AT&T suck. A lot of people are having trouble wanting to buy tickets that are not at the 50 yard line. Literally 40% of the AT&T seats are end zone seats, and who wants to watch a football game from there?
The students will come anyway, so you put them in the end zone to maximize ticket sales.
Although I understand why we’re playing here, it’s clear this was going to be a problem from day one.
by Avinash Kunnath on Oct 15, 2011 1:55 PM PDT up reply actions
Sorry man, but you’re wrong.
The fact it’s clear this was going to be a problem from day 1 means it should not have been a problem now.
Most of the seats at AT&T don’t suck?
by Avinash Kunnath on Oct 15, 2011 2:05 PM PDT up reply actions
I don’t know about that. But I do know about the disaster that was pricing Sections A-C. An unmitigated disaster. Putting students in those seats would have been the right decision.
I don’t understand ticket financial plans so well, but if you want to do some research on this and write a fanpost on what a proper AT&T seating plan would’ve looked like, I’m sure most of us would love to read it.
by Avinash Kunnath on Oct 15, 2011 2:15 PM PDT up reply actions
I’ll think about that. Part of this is stuff I’ve discussed with Sandy so I’m not sure what and how much would be appropriate for a public board, but let me see. I actually think it’s very interested.
Seriously, you’ll never see me critiquing blocking schemes, post patterns, footwork etc… because i can’t . This is an area i know and know well. What CAL is doing is marketing malpractice.
This
I understand they hoped the reduced capacity and ‘premium’ amenities would allow them to jack up prices and still fill the place but once it was painfully clear that people weren’t down for $900 sideline bleacher seats in the Spring(I think season ticket renewals were ~ March?) they should have scrapped the original plan entirely. Instead they grudgingly reduced the donation levels but not by nearly enough to fill those seats and then just sat on them to sell as single game tickets.
The fact that many loyal season ticket holders ended up in the view level or down low in the end zones while SC, Utah, OSU and Wazzu fans will end up on the 50 for WAY less $ is going to do far more harm long run than filling AT&T with Cal fans at lower prices.
Agreed
I ponied up for section C, right up front when it was bucks. Then it didn’t sell. I mean REALLY didn’t sell. Best scenario rather than refund part my money would have been to move the dozen schmucks like me to section c and move students into a/b. I payed a ton of money to be surrounded by USC fans who got their tickets on Groupon for probably 1/5 of what I originally payed.
Awesome.
by tmoran3020 on Oct 15, 2011 6:09 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Err
I meant move people into b or whichever one is the center section. Losing it :-(
by tmoran3020 on Oct 15, 2011 6:10 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
ironic
My buddy was told that his alumni seats were going to be on the upper tier down around the 20 yard line and a HUGE fee. When he passed on these seats the Cal Marketing people had the nerve to threaten his 20 years of seniority for future seats at the new stadium. Think about the games at AT&T this year (yes, including Presb.), who would truly want to pay huge fees to be put in nosebleed seats, to see this team play this schedule?
He passed and bought seats on the 50 yard line in the USC section for $85/ea. The seats were great (albeit, you have no legroom at all).
RE: The personal foul after the TD
So it was Keenan, and it was a throat slash gesture? The ref didn’t give a number when he called the penalty and i didn’t see what happened on the replay. Was very curious as to what was done to warrant that penalty.
if Keenan did the throat slash and that is what earned the penalty…look at the fucking scoreboard, dude. C’mon.
I am THE DOOMBRINGER. We Are Cal.
I’m not 100% positive that was it, so I don’t want this to spiral, but I saw him do it and then the little flag icon popped up.
really doesn't matter if that drew the flag or not
a throat slash when you’re still down 2 TD’s, and you weren’t even the one to score, is fucking retarded.
I am THE DOOMBRINGER. We Are Cal.
The fact that they would call a personal foul and not identify the perpetrator not the actual foul committed...
…is one more reason why the rest of the country laughs at our Pop Warner officiating.
And Tedford needs to be grabbing some facemasks over that nonsense if that’s what’s happening. I don’t like the early signs of deteriorating discipline and that needs to be checked QUICK because that stuff destroys teams. And gets coaches fired. And rightly so.
"Well, if that ain't a show, I'll kiss your ass." - Gov. Jim Folsom Sr. (D-AL), 1948-52
by VandyImport on Oct 15, 2011 12:25 PM PDT up reply actions
I’m also not 100%, but when it happened live, I believe the ref that threw the flag was looking at a Cal lineman and a USC defender who had pushed their way all the way back of the endzone (I was sitting above that endzone). I don’t recall who it was, and I didn’t see how they ended up there (since there were more exciting things to be watching, for a moment!). Watching it on the recording, it looks like #65 (Galas) is the only lineman still pushing in that direction when the camera pans over to the celebrating players.
Either way, I will agree that the throat slash is still not necessary or appropriate.
If the penalty was on any of the lineman, it would be Galas. He’s always continuing to drive guys into the ground after the whistle blows. I love his tenacity, but am surprised he hasn’t yet been flagged for it.
"Some people watch adult videos on their computer - I go to YouTube and watch Jahvid Best highlight clips. That’s what gets me going."- Jim Schwartz, Detroit Lions head coach
Galas does get over stimulated still….notice how after he pile drives someone to the ground close to the whistle he always comes up with his hands in the air….LOL…..like, “hey, no foul here baby”…
Yeah, I noticed that. It’s pretty funny to watch him try to bait opponents into committing a personal foul, especially when he does the “who me?” routine with his arms up in the air. The O-line was driving the Stanford defense nuts with little things like that in 2009.
"Some people watch adult videos on their computer - I go to YouTube and watch Jahvid Best highlight clips. That’s what gets me going."- Jim Schwartz, Detroit Lions head coach
All will be forgiven...
If Tedford somehow wins the rest of our games. What sucks about that USC game is not that we lost, but that it sucked a lot of hope out of the fan base.
Lawrence Ross
If that happened, IMO this season would only rank behind
04 and 02 in terms of great Cal seasons during the Tedford era and jobs down Tedford and his staff.
by SDBear on Oct 15, 2011 1:32 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
If that happened, IMO this season would only rank behind
04 and 02 in terms of great Cal seasons during the Tedford era and jobs down Tedford and his staff.
by SDBear on Oct 15, 2011 1:32 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
PUMP PUMP PUMP
n.b. -- This comment does not constitute official chemistry advice.
by sec119 on Oct 15, 2011 11:07 AM PDT reply actions 3 recs
Awesome. It’s satisfying to see the Tedford kool-aid drinkers finally realize what most of us recognized four years ago. We told you it would get worse. It did. Sadly, I don’t have 6.8 million (or whatever it is) to buy this loser out. And before anyone tries to defend Tedford as being an honorable coach, I’ll let you know that I think that’s bullshit. Exhibit A: Zach Maynard-Keenan Allen packaged deal. College football is a dirty sport. If you’re going to do packaged deals, at least win games.
. . . If he brought in Maynard solely for the purpose of bringing in Allen, Maynard would never see the field. There are plenty of other QBs on the roster.
The #1 greatest threat to America: BEARS
http://espn.go.com/blog/sec/post/_/id/8658/alabama-says-no-thanks-to-package-deal
If you refuse to connect the dots then that’s on you.
Yes, it was a "package deal"
And guess what: we needed Allan, and we needed a quarterback. Win-fucking win.
no bear, no care
by EchoOfSilence on Oct 15, 2011 11:48 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
twice in a row!
No rational coach can look at tape of Maynard and feel it is 1) prudent to continue on with him or 2) not figure out a way to fix his most glaring mechanical flaws.
Goodness, we know your opinion, but:
No rational coach can look at tape of Maynard and feel it is 1) prudent to continue on with him or 2) not figure out a way to fix his most glaring mechanical flaws.
I didn’t see many if any “mechanical flaws” I saw some bad decision making, which contributed heavily to the Bears losing.
Am I known as Cugel the Clever for nothing?
At the time it was the best decision possible
no bear, no care
by EchoOfSilence on Oct 15, 2011 11:55 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
so what?
we got a superstar and a good QB. Plus an OLB and a DE and another WR who all look to be great contributors!
And guys like Marvin Jones get screwed over because Zach Maynard wants to throw to his brother 9 out of 10 times. We don’t need KA.
We don’t need KA? Hahahaha…….
no bear, no care
by EchoOfSilence on Oct 15, 2011 11:54 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions
I don't mind taking the package
deal; I just don’t like the idea of playing Maynard. Let Maynard wear the headset and carry around KA’s jock strap or something. There’s no contractual clause in their scholarships that says both have to play…
Really? 35 receptions, 530 yds, 3 TDs and he’s getting screwed over??
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Oct 15, 2011 1:37 PM PDT up reply actions
well, he’s better than anyone else on our roster.
Maynard is the best we got. We have to deal with that.
You can't possible make that claim
even though it is plausible that you are correct. But just like the Broncos have moved onto a terrible QB like Tebow, who is not good, when the incumbent has no future and is not winning games and is not playing well, you make the move. Whether Bridgford or someone else is better — which I think is probable — it is not the question. Maynard is not a freshman (thank goodness!) and good coaches see what most competent fans see and they move on.
Yeah...
because Brock Mansion worked out so well for us last year.
Lawrence Ross
by alpha1906 on Oct 15, 2011 11:58 AM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
I’m not sure that word means what you think it means
In other words, Go Bears!
by royrules22 on Oct 15, 2011 12:37 PM PDT up reply actions 4 recs
Irregardless!
In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It
…now you’re just making stuff up.
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Oct 16, 2011 8:46 AM PDT up reply actions
I would love to see Bridgford too. But then, who knows? If Bridge started against USC and at Oregon, do you think he would have played better than Maynard? Perhaps.
But we don’t know. Tedford knows the players more than we do, and he thinks Maynard has a better chance to lead our team to victory.
I think Maynard is good enough of a QB to get at least an offer from Cal. He is better than Mansion and Sweeney for sure.
I think this is pretty fair.
no bear, no care
by EchoOfSilence on Oct 15, 2011 12:00 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
so are you assuming at this point
that the staff is knowingly playing a QB who is NOT the best on our roster, and does NOT give us the best chance to win? Does that really make sense?
Look, i’m not happy with Maynard at this point either, and it’s still not okay with me if he really is the best QB we have (because that means the staff has utterly failed in developing any of the other QBs). But to suggest that the staff would not play the guy who gives us the best chance to win this season is just silly. Why would they jeopardize their own job security? If you have a good answer to this i’ll gladly hear it.
I am THE DOOMBRINGER. We Are Cal.
not once did I imply
that Tedford is purposefully not playing who he thinks is the best QB on the roster. But if that were the case, which I don’t think it is (I think Tedford is just a bit incompetent at this point), that in itself is grounds for dismissal. It’s essentially sabotage.
It’s essentially sabotage.
And this right here shows how irrational you are. Totally, completely irrationals to suggest Tedford should be fired because in his QB handling he is “sabotaging” the program. I almost said I can’t believe a CAL grad would post this but then I remember…
by fiatlux on Oct 15, 2011 12:14 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
you can only say this if your reading comprehension is not
up to Cal standards. I said IT WOULD BE sabatoge IF Tedford knowingly thought someone else was better than Maynard and still chose to play Maynard, which, as I said, is not what I think, nor is it reasonable to say so without evidence.
No, I understood what you wrote… I like the hedging “which i don’t think it is” …
by fiatlux on Oct 15, 2011 12:22 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Clearly you didn't
In no fair minded view of yours did I ever explicitly, or implicitly, state that I think Tedford is playing the 2nd best QB on the roster. Though it wouldn’t surprise me if Maynard had incriminating photos of Tedford…what is most likely, as I said, is that Tedford is missing the boat on this one
agree on the sabotage
but what i don’t quite get is why you insist there is a better QB on the roster. we don’t know that, you can’t possibly know that. wouldn’t the staff?
or am i misinterpreting and you’re just suggesting that we try out the other guys in games and really throw the season in the tank? how is that not sabotage?
I am THE DOOMBRINGER. We Are Cal.
I don’t have any evidence that Salary_Cap is Lane Kiffen (I mean really hard evidence, like on tv, there may be some circumstantial evidence but I have not said I have it myself, necessarily), and I don’t mean to imply it (in so many words). But if that were the case, which I don’t think it is (I think he just a guy who has something really important to say about Zach Maynard) I think he should use his immense wealth to help buy out the contracts of the entire Cal atheletic department. It’s essentially selfishness to do anything less.
Jason Hafemeister
I think it’s more likely he’s Pat Hill…
by fiatlux on Oct 15, 2011 12:27 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
I'll state this explicitly
If Maynard plays out the rest of the year, and his play doesn’t improve significantly, Tedford should be fired and ZM demoted to practice squad.
Funny, I said the same thing about Fulmer if he ever let Colquitt punt to DeSean.
by Avinash Kunnath on Oct 15, 2011 2:01 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Look at this guy!
"Fuck DOOOOOM. We prefer BOOOOOM!!- alpha1906
by golden oso on Oct 15, 2011 4:47 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
That was such an epic night. I REALLY hope we can get that magic back.
by fiatlux on Oct 15, 2011 4:50 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
and at the end of the game,
the student and young alumni sections chanting “Pac-10 football!”
"Fuck DOOOOOM. We prefer BOOOOOM!!- alpha1906
That game was the crowning moment of Cal football (at home). Sure I liked Oregon ‘06 more but the Tennessee one was just badass "we’re better than you" moment.
Everything from the pumped up Memorial crowd to Follet sack-fumble and Williams TD to DJax’s PR to Best’s thrilling intro to Longshore’s poised game was incredible. And it was a good challenging game to boot unlike the Oregon game last year
In other words, Go Bears!
hey….how come I didn’t get a green highlighted thumbs up?…Brent surely said “he’s going to the end zone”…. is this a slight because I"m a BI guy… pfffttttt…..
Probably needed an exclamation point.
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Oct 17, 2011 9:48 AM PDT up reply actions
You can’t possible [sic] make that claim
even though it is plausible that you are correct.
What is that even supposed to mean? He can’t possibly claim that Maynard’s the best QB on the roster, even though that may be true? Huh?
I blame Twist.
by CalBear81 on Oct 15, 2011 2:06 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Time for a new tradition!!!
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Oct 15, 2011 3:14 PM PDT up reply actions
No doubt Maynard is better than Mansion
Maynard might be best QB on the roster right today.
by SDBear on Oct 15, 2011 1:36 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
There’s a difference between:
1) These players demand to play together, and one isn’t good enough for our team.
and
2) These players demand to play together, and they are both good enough for our team.
Our situation is clearly the latter, even if you think Maynard isn’t a good QB.
The #1 greatest threat to America: BEARS
by norcalnick on Oct 15, 2011 11:56 AM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
I think this is a pathetic outlook on life (where football is considered). You’re saying that four years ago, ie after we won a share of the PAC 10 title you were so fed up with Tedford you wanted him fired?
And let’s say Tedford should get fired and people have now changed their mind… that’s satisfying to you? With all due respect, it’s a pathetic small outlook on life. Your statement would lead me to believe you were hoping things would go bad so you could be proven right. Hell of a fan.
by fiatlux on Oct 15, 2011 11:44 AM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
I don't understand Hombre's
reference to “4 years ago we said it would get worse,” but is it not clear that Maynard is more pathetic than that, and that Tedford, with his irrational commitment to Maynard and incompetency when it comes to picking/fixing QBs, is somewhere in the vacinity of awful as well? That was kind of rhetorical, because I read this post and know you don’t feel Maynard is terrible, but I guess I’m saying guys who call out Cal for good reasons should concern you less than, say, ZMs and Tedford’s joint inadequacy right now.
I don’t think you have a lot of credibility, as previously discussed, when it comes to commenting on Maynard. My two cents.
by fiatlux on Oct 15, 2011 11:57 AM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
I understand that criticism of
Cal players rubs you the wrong way. But your assessment of Maynard is way off by any standard of evidence and observation. You can use your two cents to to dismiss credibility, buy its never been a personal vendetta on Maynard, though I think I do have a vendetta against sucking ass. What Maynard showed us the past two Thursdays is nothing new. USC defenders are laughing at Maynard because they can’t believe a QB at the D-1 level can stare down their targets like he does. Cal football is becoming a walking punchline and you don’t seem to have a problem with that. My 10 cents is that any defense of Maynard as being good, let alone competent, and should be a part of Cal’s future going forward is lacking in credibility.
I think I do have a vendetta against sucking ass.
We’d prefer if you’d keep your criticisms less insulting and more constructive.
The #1 greatest threat to America: BEARS
by norcalnick on Oct 15, 2011 12:09 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
No. What gets me is people who twist and misrepresent things to criticize CAL players. You’ve proven in the past to be disingenuous in the presentation of your facts. You’ve proven in the past to be ridiculously off in your assessment of plays. That’s why I dismiss your credibility. I’m not going to re-litigate that now.
In this regard you are irrational and my experience is irrational sports fans are like conspiracy freaks… (or maybe one and the same).
by fiatlux on Oct 15, 2011 12:12 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
You can point to the announcer
comment ad nauseum because it alleviates you of responsibility to support your wildly irrational assesment of Maynard. To my dismay, my write up on Maynard has been spot-on. If there is anything truly dishonest, it is the constant Cal-goggles evaluation of Cal and its players. Would it help you if someone else started saying Maynard is pathetic? Someone else here did, and you didn’t seem all that receptive to it.
I already pointed out your crazily overly critical analysis. As I said I won’t re-litigate that here.
The announcer thing, whether you simply made it up or actually mis-heard that badly what he said, indicates your predisposition. It was so not remotely connected to fact it shows to what lengths you’ll go to try and bolster your point and how in your mind everything fits the narrative you’re trying to tell.
by fiatlux on Oct 15, 2011 12:25 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I'm not trying to convince you
to take what anybody else says seriously, I’m suggesting that it is worthwhile for you to stop throwing stones from a glass house. It’s only overly-critical cause you can’t look at Cal fairly.
I swear, if you wrote a post on why Cal has shown glimpses as to why they can win the BCS, it would get rec’d to the front page.
Again, the glass house thing shows how binary and irrational you are.
The entire gist of the post was “it wasn’t as bad as it seemed.”
Implicit in that is it was bad. Further, there is an acknowledgement that people who feel differently than I have a point.
Further, in discussing Maynard I first call out how bad the INT was. I also acknowledged that while at the game I wanted Maynard benched. But unlike you, apparently, I have the ability to take a step back and reflect. To question my original analysis, not try and search for every remotely possible thing to reinforce it. Such as you do.
The fact that you can’t read the above without getting it speaks volumes. Misery likes company and you won’t be happy to until your room is packed.
by fiatlux on Oct 15, 2011 12:35 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I agree that misery does like company
It’s the truest thing you’ve ever said. I never let Cal athletics affect my state of being, but I do have this annoying inclination to not fluff my own team. Needless to say, I disagree with the rest. I respect your need to disagree with me so vehemently.
Repeat from above.
Time to walk away, gentlemen.
Just agree to disagree and move on.
Old Toothwrangler
I never let Cal athletics affect my state of being, but I do have this annoying inclination to not fluff my own team.
You show me where the above is fluff, which is apparently what got you so upset as to post, then O.K. because as posted, there’s plenty in my post critical. If you think the post is “fluff” then I think that speaks volumes to the binary nature of your outlook.
by fiatlux on Oct 15, 2011 12:41 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
In this instance, what he wrote is that Cal is on track to meet expectations for the season (7-5) and that he has hope for the future, both for the remainder of the season and for next year.
A sustained argument against the accuracy of his opinion is an exercise in futility; arguing against his hopefulness is just negative.
n.b. -- This comment does not constitute official chemistry advice.
In my opinion, anyone that didn’t question Tedford after the epic 2007 collapse doesn’t understand the game of football.
Huh. In my opinion, anyone who doesn’t understand how losing your starting QB, who the year before had lead you to a share of the conference title, would impact your year doesn’t understand football. Further, anyone who at that point, when the coach in 2 of the previous 3 years had led the team to a top 10 and top 15 finish would think because of that one year he should be fired is, with all due respect, irrational and idiotic.
by fiatlux on Oct 15, 2011 11:54 AM PDT up reply actions 4 recs
That's just a plain stupid statement.
Lawrence Ross
by alpha1906 on Oct 15, 2011 11:59 AM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
And my comment was meant for The Hombre
Lawrence Ross
by alpha1906 on Oct 15, 2011 12:00 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
he was widely questioned after 2007 collapse
but to suggest he should have been fired after that is beyond idiotic.
I am THE DOOMBRINGER. We Are Cal.
I agree, 07 sucked but it was fire worthy at all
Besides, I thought 08 was great bounce back season.
by SDBear on Oct 15, 2011 1:43 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
thank you.
for peopel to suggest that after the run we had from 2002-2006 that Tedford should be on the hot seat for 2007 it’s so ridiculously “what have you done for me lately” short sightedness as to make discussion almost impossible.
by fiatlux on Oct 15, 2011 1:49 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Obviously I meant wasn't! I was trying to post at the gym
Hence the grammar mistakes I made all up and down this post.
by SDBear on Oct 15, 2011 3:43 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Im not going to allow this!
In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It
Apparently you think we are USC or LSU or something
Because you wanted a coach that tied for 1st in Pac-10 one season and then had issues due to QB going down to injury fired
In other words, Go Bears!
I think
JT questioned himself after that one, Hombre!.
You’re a little deluded
no bear, no care
by EchoOfSilence on Oct 15, 2011 11:46 AM PDT via mobile up reply actions 2 recs
How is this “dirty”? I don’t get that at all.
I blame Twist.
by CalBear81 on Oct 15, 2011 2:00 PM PDT up reply actions 3 recs
Because
Tedford offered someone a scholarship to the University of California to entice the young man’s more talented brother to attend the University of California. Tedford is a miscreant! Someone alert the NCAA : we are offering scholarships to people! I feel like I need to take a shower!
. . .
Remember, the enemy's end zone is DOWN!
by GoldBlooded on Oct 15, 2011 4:58 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
you may have beaten twist for trolling!
Remember, the enemy's end zone is DOWN!
by GoldBlooded on Oct 15, 2011 4:59 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
An amateur trolls until he gets it right.
A professional trolls until he can’t get it wrong.
Alright, and after it's all over, you say "Ooh, what a lovely tea party"
by Redonkulous Bear on Oct 15, 2011 5:05 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
in the game of trolls, you either troll or you die
Remember, the enemy's end zone is DOWN!
by GoldBlooded on Oct 15, 2011 5:13 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
TROLL OR DIE MUTHAFUCKA!
Alright, and after it's all over, you say "Ooh, what a lovely tea party"
by Redonkulous Bear on Oct 15, 2011 9:23 PM PDT up reply actions
I LOVE THIS SO MUCH!!
In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It
It's sad that this last game turned us into BI.
no bear, no care
by EchoOfSilence on Oct 15, 2011 12:36 PM PDT via mobile reply actions 2 recs
I don’t think it has. I think it’s just emboldened certain people to come out of the woodwork.
But let me say this, I don’t think there’s anything wrong with people feeling critical or upset. Thursday night was not a good night. Nothing wrong with people expressing that.
by fiatlux on Oct 15, 2011 12:37 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
badness of nite
compounded by too much ’SC colors in stands at wrong places, as OP tell us—emotionally sucky and brings bad mojo out of woodwork.
Thank you and I agree, when you lose 8 straight
Against one of your rivals it tends to cause a lot of frustration, especially after the way we lost on Thursday.
by SDBear on Oct 15, 2011 1:47 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
I posted some where that not all 7-5 seasons are equal. 2003 7-5 was a hugely successful year because we beat both SC and Stanford) and went on to win our bowl game.
Yep and I completely agree with your 7-5 point
We have two of our biggest rivals left to redeem ourselves against and help make this a good season with reasons to be optimistic going into New Memorial next season.
Beat the furd and fucla and people will all of a sudden be a lot happier around here, myself included.
by SDBear on Oct 15, 2011 3:50 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Beating UCLA and Stanford would be great
UCLA I think we have a legit shot at beating but the Stanford game is gonna be bad….really bad. Unless we’re Lucky.
well
it was pretty bad. the fact that SC was so beatable is what is upsetting.
I am THE DOOMBRINGER. We Are Cal.
Hence all the frustration by myself and other posters
Here at CG yesterday.
by SDBear on Oct 15, 2011 1:48 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
Does this mean we can start charging people of CGB Insider status?
Learn what Twist is wearing before anyone else!
Old Toothwrangler
Only if there’s video!!!
no bear, no care
by EchoOfSilence on Oct 15, 2011 12:59 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions
What do I get for...
CGB Insider Platinum? Or the next level: CGB Insider Blue & Gold?
by FromCtoShining(Blue)C on Oct 15, 2011 4:39 PM PDT up reply actions
CGB Insider Platinum: Twist. Fashion. Strobe lights. Slo-mo.
CGB Insider Blue & Gold: No Twist. Highlights of the Play, MikeyMo’s ’09 Int, Jahvid Best, Djax, and Rodgers on an endless loop.
Old Toothwrangler
…why are we punishing our CGB Insider Platinum members so severely like that?
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Oct 16, 2011 8:48 AM PDT up reply actions
To make them upgrade to CGB Insider Blue & Gold.
We’re capitalist pawns!
by FromCtoShining(Blue)C on Oct 16, 2011 8:57 AM PDT up reply actions
For CGB Platinum, HydroTech comes over and cooks you a special dinner!
In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It
I understand that people are frustrated with the team. I’m frustrated with the team.
However, I think that the discussion in the last few days has been fairly reasonable. I can see it got chippy in a few situations, but the Hit Squad has stepped in to try to keep the calm. If you have concerns about a discussion spiralling out of control to a flame war or slap fight, dont hesitate to email a link tot he cokmments to the HIt Squad at cgbmods at gmail dot com. Thanks!
In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It
Here's some sunshine!
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2011/10/14/SPUG1LI4HE.DTL
Zach Kline will save us!
Thank you...
I agree — thanks for a little relief from the howling at BearInsider.
I would say
howling understates the beastly cage over there…
I post there and here..you just have to have a stronger stomach and pick and choose your battles more…but in defense of BI as a whole; I read many other message boards across the spectrum and BI is mild compared to many of them. The old USC site was a profanity laden hate fest, ShaggyBevo would shock most people and should be rated “X”. I’ve seen death threats on other boards and people giving out players phone numbers etc. I mean low down heated vitriolic madness that makes BI seem tame. I’m not saying it isn’t full of more NegaBears or really really unruly folk but seriously, it is a picnic compared to many…..There are actually many good posters over there if you focus on them and turn your filter on….
I’d say as a whole, blogs tend to be more civil than message boards because the content is more regulated….ie: Addicted to Quack WAY more civil than eDuck or their 24/7 board….or Trojan Chronicles much more civil than their new site etc… Just my 2 cents from someone who appreciates both….
by Cal_Fan2 on Oct 15, 2011 2:03 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
First it was Washington, next Oregon and finally it was SC. In all these games we were to see how good we were against okay/great/good teams. From the results we are not quite there yet. Is there reason to have hope? In game Number One we had interceptions, dropped passes, bad centering of the ball, false starts by the Oline, stupid penalties, ineffective run game, and an inexperienced QB making rookie mistakes. In the past three games, hmmm… Now I have hope. In BI’s BearPlay I have picked Cal to lose every game for the rest of the year and I will no longer wear my lucky Green Lantern T-shirt. This will change our fortunes for sure.
My somewhat weird hypothesis of Maynard
I feel like Maynard plays better after he throws an interception. I think it might be because he’s so jittery at the beginning and the pick calms him down. Zach was playing better after that first INT against USC, and I think that could be a reason why he played so horribly at Autzen.
Definitely. He’s a ballsy clutch player with that gotta-win mentality. The problem is that his mechanics and tangibles are crap.
by TheScientist019 on Oct 15, 2011 4:54 PM PDT up reply actions
Fair catch inside the five yard line
These are the situations in which this might be allowed:
1. You are Desean Jackson.
End of list.
Tedford's slide
From November 15 2003 through September 29, 2007 the Bears were 36-9. Since then they are 27-25. Within that first span Cal went to four bowl games and won each of four Big Games and suffered only loss of 14 or more points. In the latter span Cal has split four Big Games, had a losing season and suffered ten losses by more than 14 points.
I’d like to know why I’m supposed to expect that this four year long slide is going to reserve itself and Cal will again by a top 25 team under Jeff Tedford. I have gone from being as big a supporter as he could have to being a total skeptic. Yes, I know that recruiting is getting a huge shot in the arm from the new facilities, but is Tedford capable of developing these high school stars and building a team?
"Dying is not so tough....A lot of people younger than me and older than me have to face up to this sort of thing. I'm nothing special. I'm Joe Roth, a student and a football player." - Joe Roth.
Capable? Sure. Will he? Who knows.
Let’s be honest, the 36-9 was unexpected, as has been the 27-25. So let’s not pretend we know exactly what’s going to happen in the next phase.
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Oct 15, 2011 3:25 PM PDT up reply actions
one other thing. The reason people continually bring up the cumulative record is because it gives more weighted impact to the really bad 2 years (2007 and last year). Otherwise it would be one losing season… and saying a guy has had one losing season doesn’t sound like a reason to fire him.
That’s ‘cause it’s not :)
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Oct 15, 2011 3:37 PM PDT up reply actions
I never said it was
I just introduced some facts. Sorry, will avoid them in the future.
"Dying is not so tough....A lot of people younger than me and older than me have to face up to this sort of thing. I'm nothing special. I'm Joe Roth, a student and a football player." - Joe Roth.
by Oski Disciple on Oct 15, 2011 4:32 PM PDT up reply actions
you introduced facts with no meaningful parameters other than they advance your argument. By the way, I see your point now about “firing Tedford.” I was referring to people in general not you, but i’m not sure why one wouldn’t draw that inclusion when you explicitly ask why you should have any faith in him.
Maybe I asked because I WANT to have faith in him. You read my statements and questions to suit YOUR arguments, don’t you?
"Dying is not so tough....A lot of people younger than me and older than me have to face up to this sort of thing. I'm nothing special. I'm Joe Roth, a student and a football player." - Joe Roth.
by Oski Disciple on Oct 15, 2011 4:56 PM PDT up reply actions
Okay
You’re just typing words now.
"Dying is not so tough....A lot of people younger than me and older than me have to face up to this sort of thing. I'm nothing special. I'm Joe Roth, a student and a football player." - Joe Roth.
by Oski Disciple on Oct 15, 2011 5:16 PM PDT up reply actions
Now that's mean spirited
No sooner do I suggest to some Cal fans that they bookmark and regularly visit this site I come across this kind of sh*t. To accuse someone of trolling is pretty low and i personally resent it. You must be so glad you can make such charges hiding behind this sites anonymity.
"Dying is not so tough....A lot of people younger than me and older than me have to face up to this sort of thing. I'm nothing special. I'm Joe Roth, a student and a football player." - Joe Roth.
by Oski Disciple on Oct 15, 2011 5:42 PM PDT up reply actions
I only know this
You accused me of trolling. That’s a solid hit below the belt. Shame on you.
"Dying is not so tough....A lot of people younger than me and older than me have to face up to this sort of thing. I'm nothing special. I'm Joe Roth, a student and a football player." - Joe Roth.
by Oski Disciple on Oct 15, 2011 5:54 PM PDT up reply actions
Isn't the point of bringing up facts to enhance an argument?
Since when is it wrong to bring up facts to enhance an argument?
Facts without context is just random spewing.
For instance, if I say that Tedford’s teams were 29-22 over four seasons, it may be true, but it means nothing without knowing which 4 seasons. And it says even less if you have no knowledge of what preceded those 4 season and what succeeded those 4 seasons.
"We do not seek men who will bravely lie down to die, but men who will fight valiantly to live."
"Winning is not everything. It is far better to play the game squarely and lose than to win at the sacrifice of an ideal."
-- Andrew Latham Smith
Let me further refute this "slide" stuff
2008. We had a pretty good year in 2008. We were 6-3 in conference. We finished ranked (barely, at 25, but still ranked). Please don’t tell me that was a “bad” year.
2009. Started great. We were ranked in the top 10 and then absolutely tanked it against Oregon and SC. BUT then we got it back and won 5 of our next 6, including at UCLA (first win in LA), at ASU, and thrilling wins over Arizona and Stanford.. That’s pretty good right there. That damn Washington game though changes the whole tenure of the season. ARGH! But Tedford had hardly “lost” it.
Last year sucked. No two ways about it.
But these constant meme about a multi-year slide just isn’t so. Hence the need to lump it all together so the two bad years take on added weight.
by fiatlux on Oct 15, 2011 3:49 PM PDT up reply actions 3 recs
I think another reason the last few seasons “seem” worse is that up until 2 years ago, we only lost a few games by more than 14 points…..then all of a sudden we lost 6-7 games, ( I don’t remember how may and too lazy to look up) by ridiculous scores. A loss is still a loss but the way we lost the last few seasons were way more miserable. Except for 2003, USC has always beat us under JT but we always played them tough (actually beating them but losing in 2004), but we have been demolished as of late. Might not be a fair comparison but the eye test hurt a lot more.
I agree.
Its not that we are losing the games. Its HOW we are losing the games. If wew were losing to USC and to Oregon each year, thats one thing.
But not really scoring a competative TD over a 4 or so year span, thats another thing.
In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It
by TwistNHook on Oct 15, 2011 10:55 PM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
I don’t understand why you’d want to, but not how you can, refute that the Bears have been worse the past four years than they were the previous. Win and loss records don’t lie. We’ve gone from expecting Cal to be a top 15 team to hoping for 7-5. It’s not just one year either. The last half of ‘07 was horrible. The UW and bowl losses in ’09 were horrible. There’s also the FACT that Cal never used to get blown out and now the collapse like a cheap tent repeatedly.
You did nothing to “refute this ‘slide’ stuff” it’s still there. The fact that we had “a pretty good year in 2008” does not mitigate the awfulness of last season or the three straight losses this year. The multi year slide IS relative to Tedford’s previous years. The program has regressed. Period. We haven’t been 0-3 in conference since Holmoe was in charge. That’s just s simple, albeit ugly, fact. It’s a slide. And I never brought up firing him, I’m just making an observation based on facts and some people would rather not look at facts, Sorry I brought them up and I’ll come live with your in Neverland.
"Dying is not so tough....A lot of people younger than me and older than me have to face up to this sort of thing. I'm nothing special. I'm Joe Roth, a student and a football player." - Joe Roth.
by Oski Disciple on Oct 15, 2011 4:23 PM PDT up reply actions
If you're going to argue, argue with what was said
You’re arguing a points I didn’t make..
Let’s start with your last one.
And I never brought up firing him, I’m just making an observation based on facts
1 – who said anything about you saying he should be fired? 2 – you’re skewing your facts to suit your argument.
but not how you can, refute that the Bears have been worse the past four years than they were the previous.
Didn’t say the weren’t. No one would say that. The issue is with characterizing it as a slide.
Do you consider 6-3 in conference and ranked in the top 25 with a bowl win, a slide? If not, then 2008 was not part of any slide. So now we can take that year off the table.
2007 our starting QB, who had led us to a #2 ranking including a win at Autzen got hurt. I know few teams in the country who can maintain when that happens. You think Stanfurd would? But let’s just look at that year. All of a sudden Oregon was ranked #2 and voila their QB gets hurts and they go into the tank too. How about Oklahoma in 2009? Bradford gets hurt at they plummet. So while I don’t think Tedford handled the QB thing as well as I would have liked in 2007, the fact is when your starting QB gets hurt that changes everything.
That brings us to 2009. Started off great. Ranked in the top 10. The the face plants against Oregon and USC and everyone was saying here comes another 2007-esque collapse. But a funny thing happened. We won 5 of our next 6 games including our first win in LA, beating a ranked Arizona team at home, and beating a ranked Stanfurd team in Palo Alto in a thrilling Big Game. Both of those last games coming WITHOUT Jahvid Best. That was some great coaching. We went 5-4 in conference, and I said that damn Washington game just changed everything. So while I will give you that 2009 was disappointing and was not a great year, it also wasn’t an awful year.
So when someone says we’ve been in a slide the last four years and uses a cumulative record to demonstrate it, I think it’s good to take a second look.
You’ve made up your mind. You’re going to look at things in the most negative way (thus the parameters in which you’ve framed these posts). As I said up top, I understand where people are coming from. Doesn’t mean I have to agree with you.
Sad to see that you are mean spirited in your response to me. I don’t how you are but I can tell you that I have been attending Cal football games since I was a lad and Marv Levy was coach. I have not missed a home game since 1989. No one loves the Bears more than I do, though many equally. I did not frame my arguments to be negative. I merely pointed out the very obvious regression that Cal football is experiencing. I find it distressing and thought that others might as well. Maybe I’m wrong and you and others are happy with the current state of affairs. I have not made up my mind. You have made up your mind about me and I greatly resent it. I do not believe that Tedford should be fired. For gods sake man I just introduced some facts to start a discussion. I didn’t think I’d be roasted over the coals for doing so.
If you want to give me reasons that this season will get better or that next season will be great I’d love to hear them. But don’t try to and tell me that two and two don’t really equal four and say that I’m being negative for insisting they do.
"Dying is not so tough....A lot of people younger than me and older than me have to face up to this sort of thing. I'm nothing special. I'm Joe Roth, a student and a football player." - Joe Roth.
by Oski Disciple on Oct 15, 2011 4:52 PM PDT up reply actions
Are you kidding?
Roasted over the coals? Mean Spirited? You want to point out one thing I said to you that was mean spirited?
Your arguments are being roasted over the coals, not you.
You’ve made your point, I’ve made mine.
Seriously?
Telling me “I made up my mind” and accusing me of looking "at things in the most negative way.
When you make up something about someone that casts them in a negative light, that would be considered mean spirited and raking them ,not their arguments, over the coals.
Is that clear enough for you?
"Dying is not so tough....A lot of people younger than me and older than me have to face up to this sort of thing. I'm nothing special. I'm Joe Roth, a student and a football player." - Joe Roth.
by Oski Disciple on Oct 15, 2011 5:05 PM PDT up reply actions
you can’t be serious (and no, that’s not me being mean to you). is that’s what you consider mean, i give up.
As for the latter, it’s exactly what you did. You framed the stats from those years in the most negative light so as to advance your argument, which is what everyone does. Otherwise you wouldn’t have used such an arbitrary start date. Further, for reasons I’ve clearly articulated, i don’t believe people frame the argument that way just by chance.
I already reviewed 2008 and 2009 with you. You stick with your assertion those are part of a slide. Fine. Other readers can draw their own conclusion.
For the last time
I did not frame anything. I presented some facts. You interpreted those as my personal attack on Tedford and went to town from there blowing this whole thing up. If you had presented other facts, fine. But you impugned my motives and you should never do that to a fellow Cal fan.
I had hoped to start a discussion about the future of Cal football but instead you came along and attacked my motives. Jesus wept.
"Dying is not so tough....A lot of people younger than me and older than me have to face up to this sort of thing. I'm nothing special. I'm Joe Roth, a student and a football player." - Joe Roth.
by Oski Disciple on Oct 15, 2011 5:14 PM PDT up reply actions
From November 15 2003 through September 29, 2007 the Bears were 36-9.
You’re right. Those are perfectly normal dates with which to frame a won loss record. Nothing arbitrary about November 15 2003 through September 29, 2007.
I just got trolled. Sorry.
Evidently you're the troll
Yes I should have started and ended with the fiscal year. Silly me trying to establish the point at which a change occurred. Doctor’s never diagnose by asking when you started to feel sick they just want to know how you’ve been in the past 12 months to the day.
(No way this guy went to Cal.)
"Dying is not so tough....A lot of people younger than me and older than me have to face up to this sort of thing. I'm nothing special. I'm Joe Roth, a student and a football player." - Joe Roth.
by Oski Disciple on Oct 15, 2011 5:27 PM PDT up reply actions
"Win and loss records don't lie."
W-L in football is pretty variable. You only play 12 games. While talent will win out in games against the likes of Presbyterian, most of the Pac-10/12 have similar talent levels. Therefore, those games most likely will turn on a couple of decisive plays. Those plays didn’t go our way the last few years. I don’t recall a ton of absolute blowout losses, at least not in 2007 or 2008.
"Campeones." - Andres Torres
Please follow my Twitter
by Murray, Present on Oct 15, 2011 4:44 PM PDT up reply actions
That damn Washington game though changes the whole tenure of the season. ARGH! But Tedford had hardly "lost" it.
I was more troubled by 2009 than you were I guess. That all the losses were by double digits and at least three were completely over by the half was a very bad sign. I think Tedford’s worst loss, pre-2009, was 35-10 to the absolute juggernaut that was the ’05 SC team. It took 6 turnovers and a sub 100 yard passing game from Ayoob for the #1 team in the country to rack up that differential. Now that kind of loss feels routine.
by OskiGoDumb on Oct 15, 2011 4:50 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
You know why I wasn’t – after the season – upset by the back to back losses to Oregon and SC… it’s because what we did after them. Everyone, and I mean everyone, was predicting an implosion ala 2007 for us. And instead we won 5 of our next 6. Including thumping UCLA in Pasadena and the aforementioned back to back wins over incredibly hot Arizona and Stanfurd teams. As I said, the last two without Jahvid Best. That was terrific coaching.
My point on the Washington loss, which was as inexcusable as it was predictable (classic, classic, classic let down game), is had we beaten them the tenor of that whole season is different.
by fiatlux on Oct 15, 2011 4:54 PM PDT up reply actions 3 recs
2009? I was upset about the losses to Oregon & USC – especially USC at home a really good crowd – and a beatable team; if we had bounced back after the 42-3 drubbing, it would have felt mighty good.
Washington? yeah, I agree, classic let-down after epic win at ’furd, but no free pass for not beating Utah (with a freshman QB) when you have time to prepare. That was less than good.
Am I known as Cugel the Clever for nothing?
agree. I don’t look at 2009 as a successful year. I also don’t look at it as a “slide” year either. 2009 PBowl Utah game was terrible. Up 14 and we let it go. But then again, we were down 14 to Stanfurd and came back… That Utah game sucked. Plus I got a totally bogus parking ticket the next morning outside my hotel.
Yeah, we are in accord on this one, although the one thing that bugs me about Tedford regarding 2009 is his statements like “8-5 isn’t so bad” or words to that effect.
Normally, I’m down with people (even coaches) providing some perspective to show that things aren’t all that bad, but this one irks me. I know the details (in retrospect obviously) why we weren’t as successful as we would have liked, but we had the best running back in the country, a legitimate Heisman candidate – we were all expecting some level of greatness, and to have it end with a loss in the Poinsettia Bowl to a Mountain West team just blows.
No way to sugarcoat, and no one should try. Sure it was an 8-5 winning season, but at some point you have to factor in expectations in judging a “successful” season.
Am I known as Cugel the Clever for nothing?
I think you're being intellectually dishonest
I think you’ve tailored your facts to fit your premise that Tedford is not worthy of continuing as Cal’s head coach.
For instance, you chose the period of November 15, 2003 through September 29, 2007. To be honest about that period would mean that you would have to disclose that this period encompasses the last 3 games of the ’03 season (all 3 games were wins including an Insight Bowl win over Virginia Tech), the entirety of the ’04, ’05, and ’06 seasons, plus the first 5 games of the ’07 season (all 5 games, again, were wins including the season opener over Tennessee and the ’07 game against Oregon in which Nate Longshore was injured).
It is also noteworthy that two 10-win seasons occurred in this span, including a Pac-10 Conference co-championship. So yeah, the period after September 29, 2007 will look drab by comparison.
It’s also noteworthy that the program has faced opposition off the field that symbolically began December 2, 2006 with the commencement of the tree-sit. Why don’t you mention that? And what about the effect of that tree-sit on recruiting?
You’re insistent that Tedford show you that he’s capable of reversing the slide since September 29, 2007, but you seemingly ignore that not only has there been a tree-sit which hurt recruiting, there’s also been ongoing opposition within the larger University and Berkeley residential communities (think Panoramic Hill) to the continued presence of the football program and the renovations to the stadium and the building of the SAHPC.
I consider your analysis to be shallow to the point of superficiality and lacking meaningful context. But don’t let me stop you from trumpeting the what-have-you-done-for-me-lately position based entirely on wins and losses. Just don’t forget the 12-11 record that preceded November 15, 2003.
"We do not seek men who will bravely lie down to die, but men who will fight valiantly to live."
"Winning is not everything. It is far better to play the game squarely and lose than to win at the sacrifice of an ideal."
-- Andrew Latham Smith
by FiatSlug on Oct 15, 2011 9:40 PM PDT up reply actions 4 recs
I think you're intellectually deficient
Hence your need to use insults. How about this: losing season last year, 3-3 now with 3 straight losses. Is that intellectually dishonest or a statement of fact? Is that shallow? Or the reality of today’s Cal football.? If I point out that Cal has suffered consecutive blow out losses am I being superficial?
Final question: why on Earth do you have to present.
"Dying is not so tough....A lot of people younger than me and older than me have to face up to this sort of thing. I'm nothing special. I'm Joe Roth, a student and a football player." - Joe Roth.
by Oski Disciple on Oct 15, 2011 10:59 PM PDT up reply actions
You final question confuses me.
In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It
Sorry, was supposed to be...
Why on Earth do you have to lace your arguments with ad hominem attacks.
"Dying is not so tough....A lot of people younger than me and older than me have to face up to this sort of thing. I'm nothing special. I'm Joe Roth, a student and a football player." - Joe Roth.
by Oski Disciple on Oct 15, 2011 11:01 PM PDT up reply actions
I’m personally frustrated by a lot of this thread. I was out all day, so I’m just getting home to it now.
I don’t like that a lot of it has devolved here and there. The Hit Squad is doing a great job trying to keep things from turning into a giant flame war and I’m happy that most of the readers here are staying away from personal attacks. But it frustrates me when I see people talking at each other instead of to each other.
I love it when people want to come here to discuss matters. Thats great! Thats why we are here. Discuss all you want.
But sometimes it becomes obvious that individual subthreads are just an exercise in back and forth volleying. Sometimes if a discussion goes for 3 or 4 or 5 comments back and forth between two readers and nobody is really getting anywhere with it, it might make sense to take a step back and say “I’m not really convincing this guy of anything here. Perhaps it is time to move on.” Just my thought.
In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It
Well said
I looked back on my original post and saw that I was trying to start a discussion on whether I/we should still believe in Tedford given the recent regression of the program. That discussion never really happened. Instead people raised objections to my selective use of facts to illustrate that regression. I felt some of those objections came in the form of attacks, such as the ones accusing me of trolling.
I’ve learned to stay off discussion boards but thought this was one was different. I was wrong and will reserve future discussion and venting and sharing of opinions to conversations to in-person chats.
I’m sorry for my part in this whole mess and especially sorry for wasting so much of my own time on it.
Anyway…Go Bears!
"Dying is not so tough....A lot of people younger than me and older than me have to face up to this sort of thing. I'm nothing special. I'm Joe Roth, a student and a football player." - Joe Roth.
by Oski Disciple on Oct 15, 2011 11:15 PM PDT up reply actions
Oski Disciple, I’m sorry that you felt attacked here. Even if I disagree with you (and I actually do), I would not want you to feel attacked here. As a reminder, you can always email the moderation team aka The Hit Squad if you havce any concerns about personal attacks at cgbmods at gmail dot com.
I think that you can find a valuable experience here at CGB and don’t think you should disappear from our lives forever after this!
In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It
No I won't disappear
I’ll just be extremely careful before commenting. This stuff is just not worth getting into a lather over. This is a great blog and most of the comments are inoffensive and well thought out or quite funny. In fact this is all representative of the Golden Bear experience.
Thanks for your work and Go Bears!
"Dying is not so tough....A lot of people younger than me and older than me have to face up to this sort of thing. I'm nothing special. I'm Joe Roth, a student and a football player." - Joe Roth.
by Oski Disciple on Oct 15, 2011 11:29 PM PDT up reply actions 2 recs
Twist… just because some one “feels” attacked doesn’t mean they were “being” attacked. Saying “you’ve already made your mind up” and “you’ve framed your stats …” is hardly attacking someone, despite OD protestations. We’ve seen this before. People use the “I’m being attacked” meme to stop critical discussion because it always works in the name of keeping board peace.
I appreciate your thoughts, fiatlux. I’m not some sort of referee in this situation here to determine who was attacking whom. My beliefs and opinions carry no weight. I can’t help any person win any argument.
The sole thing I’m trying to do is help refocus this thread on being a fun and delightful discussion (as it started out). I think we can all agree that we come to CGB to have fun. To me, it seems unlikely that anybody could be having this much fun in reply #80 of a subthread where nobody has budged from their original position. Perhaps I am wrong.
In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It
Also, just to help you understand where I am coming from, I agree with you. I agree that nothing is gained when conversation goes from “I believe Maynrd should do this” to “You are attacking me!” Its like when court cases go from “You committed this damage” to “How are we going to pay the attorneys on this one.” It’s gotten away from the substance of the argument and the conversation usually stalls.
My hope is that if we can remind readers (all readers) that they do have access to the Hit Squad at an email’s notice, it will help avoid the “you are attacking me” discussions. Because instead of saying “you are attacking me,” any and all readers can email the hit squad and the hit squad can help resolve the debate and move the conversation forward.
I don’t know if people utilize the Hit Squad enough, frankly. Emailing them is generally not going to lead to bannings etc, unless the situation is severe. Instead, it is more likely to lead to a refocusing on resolving any dispute and a return to substantive discussion. All 5 members of the Hit Squad are very diplomatic and reasonable people and can be relied upon to stay objective and neutral whenever possible. Except for Kodiak. Dudes a fucking lunatic!
In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It
Cant argue here!
In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It
Its like when court cases go from "You committed this damage" to "How are we going to pay the attorneys on this one." It’s gotten away from the substance of the argument and the conversation usually stalls.
Twist, I’m afraid you don’t understand what the substance of the argument IS in court cases.
I blame Twist.
Spoken like a true attorney!
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Oct 16, 2011 11:31 AM PDT up reply actions
the “attacks” you reference were BEFORE the trolling comments, hence those posts generated the trolling comments.
Fiatlux, what is being gained at this point? I think you’ve made your points very clearly. I think Oski Disciple has made his points very clearly. Any reasonable person can choose which ones to believe.
I actually believe you are correct and do not believe Oski Disciple is correct. I’m on your side! But I’m not sure what value is to be gained in continuing this particular discussion.
In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It
I think we’re all frustrated, especially after this week’s game and the way we lost. I understand the basis of your original post, and obviously the last few seasons have not been as good as the first few season of Tedford’s tenure. But if people disagree with some specific aspects of your argument, that’s not necessarily a personal attack. Reading over the thread it seems like you and the others were talking past each other, and then the discussion moved from being about facts and interpretation of those facts, to being about motives. I don’t think you were being personally attacked for the most part, at least at first, but I think both you and some of the other commenters were getting testy after feeling like your points were not being taken in the right way. Sometimes, as much as it feels like you need to convince the other person that your point of view is sensible, you (and I don’t just mean you specifically, Oski Disciple) gotta step back and say, okay, there’s nothing further to be gained. Nobody is being convinced of anything today. I’ve gotten sucked into that vortex plenty of times myself.
Anyway, sorry you felt ganged up on. Being accused of trolling isn’t fun but I don’t think it’s as big of a personal attack as you maybe feel it is. I do think people are getting kind of quick to throw that accusation out there though when people are actually arguing in good faith. Calling someone “intellectually deficient” isn’t the answer either, though, and I suspect you’d probably take that one back upon reflection.
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Oct 16, 2011 9:46 AM PDT up reply actions
so we can call people
trolls all we like!? Twist’s dream has come true! If trolling — someone who purposefully posts inflammatory/incendiary/rude comments to rile people up — is not personal than calling Twist a [expletive here] [epithet here] [expletive here]… is not as personal of an attack as he thinks it is.
Dude, now you’re just trolling. :-P
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Oct 16, 2011 9:53 AM PDT up reply actions
Sadly, he is not trolling. I really am a [expletive here]. I just don’t like to admit it
In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It
Even if its true, personal attacks is still trolling! People should never tell you that you’re a degenerative bastard on these threads……they should send you a personal email for that!
If someone is confused as to whether you are arguing in good faith, you should be able to set them straight pretty quickly, easily, and politely.
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Oct 16, 2011 10:03 AM PDT up reply actions
The 3-3 with 3 straight losses isn’t very good, to be sure, but we lost to Washington (who is now 5-1 and looking like a legitimate contender for the division title, and will certainly be ranked as of tonight) and a national top-10 team in Oregon. We should have beaten USC, but they’re no pushover, and turnovers made it a much more lopsided margin. What if we win the next few games, though? Does that change “the reality of today’s Cal football”?
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Oct 16, 2011 9:32 AM PDT up reply actions 1 recs
Not if the offense continues to look anemic
and ZM still looks like he’s playing in HS from time to time. I fear that some cheap wins to reach 5/6 wins and possibly reach a bowl game may be detrimental to the program long term. It may have to get worse before it gets better. This fucking sucks to say. But a few wins against UCLA/OSU/WSU/Utah don’t, in itself, mean a whole lot. I think more depends on how they play in those games, particularly the offense and Tedford’s boy ZM. If Cal hits 6 wins and reaches a bowl game despite horrible losses to both good and some bad teams, Tedford/ZM/Cal apologists will see that as sufficient to give Tedford another year or two, which means ZM will probably get another year or two. I just puked in my mouth.
First of all, he can’t get "another year or two, I don’t think. Next year will be his senior year.
Secondly, how is he “Tedford’s boy”? Unless you know any better, he fell into our laps when we were getting Keenan Allen and the other NC kids. Now that Riley is gone though, Mansion turned out to be a bust, and Sweeney transferred, Maynard won the starting job by being the top performer in spring camp and fall camp and beating out the other QBs on the roster. Obviously Maynard has a lot of issues to work through, and I must say his performance against USC had me a lot more pessimistic about his chances for making that improvement, but if he doesn’t improve, hopefully Bridgford will be ready soon enough to take over.
What if Cal beats UCLA, WSU, OSU, Utah, and is at least competitive with ASU?
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Oct 16, 2011 10:02 AM PDT up reply actions
That scenario would
certainly do the trick, particularly if the offense wasn’t just “lucky” to win them. Do I see that happening? No, and not simply because they’re 3-3, which is a reasonable record at this point.
I don’t think our offense is terrible across the board. I think the problem is that it’s extremely inconsistent.
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Oct 16, 2011 10:51 AM PDT up reply actions
And you forgot a key point, as much as I hate to admit it...
But our biggest opposition during that time from 2003-2007 was because of Pete Carroll’s USC trojans, who, as much as I hate to admit it, will go down as one of the greatest teams in all of college football history.
Point taken
And I realized that same point a few minutes after my post. But I felt that I had made my point with enough evidence that I didn’t have to add on the USC thing.
The life of a Cal fan is never easy.
"We do not seek men who will bravely lie down to die, but men who will fight valiantly to live."
"Winning is not everything. It is far better to play the game squarely and lose than to win at the sacrifice of an ideal."
-- Andrew Latham Smith
I’d like to know why I’m supposed to expect that this four year long slide is going to reserve itself..is Tedford capable of developing these high school stars and building a team?
Isn’t this what Teddy did when he came in after Holmoe and led us to those fabulous winning years? So, he’s probably capable.
Fire Starkey. You... complete me.
Sorry I mean I do understand why you’d want to but don’t how you can in the first sentence. I should probably proofread before posting.
"Dying is not so tough....A lot of people younger than me and older than me have to face up to this sort of thing. I'm nothing special. I'm Joe Roth, a student and a football player." - Joe Roth.
Tedford deserves a chance to recruit and coach with the new facilities (which Cal only got because of his good work). How soon we forget that we went from locally hidden shame to national joke under Holmoe. He has turned around a terrible team before, he should be given the opportunity to do it again.
"Campeones." - Andres Torres
Please follow my Twitter
by Murray, Present on Oct 15, 2011 4:48 PM PDT reply actions
That's a valid argument
Thanks for mentioning that. A strong case should be made that Tedford should get at least two years with the new facilities to right the ship.
"Dying is not so tough....A lot of people younger than me and older than me have to face up to this sort of thing. I'm nothing special. I'm Joe Roth, a student and a football player." - Joe Roth.
by Oski Disciple on Oct 15, 2011 4:54 PM PDT up reply actions
I’ve seen this sentiment a lot, but I’ve got a question about it. Do people really expect a turn-around after a year or two in the new facilities? From what I understand (which could be completely off), the biggest benefit of the new facilities is to help recruiting, but that has been one of the aspects where we’ve been doing well.
by TheScientist019 on Oct 15, 2011 5:04 PM PDT up reply actions
we’ve been doing well in recruiting the last two years. The previous years were not good.
This surprises people, but I am not of the belief that Tedford is owed a year or two in the new facilities. I hope he gets them, but if he doesn’t deliver on the field, then Sandy needs to make a decision.
the '08, '09 recruiting thing...
we’ve been doing well in recruiting the last two years. The previous years were not good.
The 2008 and 2009 classes were ranked 32 and 34 respectively by Scout. It’s not like we were pulling in WAC level talent those years. And ’07, ’10 and ’11 have all been top 20-25 classes. By pretty much any standard we have underperformed our talent since 2006.
thanks english 101 teacher. Im with my friends watching football drinking beer…i could care less about “homophones” right now..
Im just calling it like it is….i’m not in class or writing TERM papers.
im calling people morons…who impress me by putting there HEAD 3 feet into SAND.
I was unaware “calling it like it is” and not making basic grammar mistakes and looking like a raving lunatic were mutually exclusive.
by TheScientist019 on Oct 15, 2011 5:12 PM PDT up reply actions
it’s “their” – it’s confusing, but once you read enough, you’ll get the hang of it
Remember, the enemy's end zone is DOWN!
Actually
On most other message boards his comments would seem quite articulate and relatively coherently presented. This, of course, is Cal, however.
"Dying is not so tough....A lot of people younger than me and older than me have to face up to this sort of thing. I'm nothing special. I'm Joe Roth, a student and a football player." - Joe Roth.
by Oski Disciple on Oct 15, 2011 5:20 PM PDT up reply actions
What do you do with all the magazines after you’ve cut the individual letters out of them?
In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It
This is the type of thread that really cried out for some TwistNHook-style levity to release some of the tension. It’s getting really intense in certain places and that is not what I had hoped for. I hope for people to come here and have a fun time with reasonable and intelligent discourse.
In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It
The volleyball team beat Washington State in three sets! We’re 18-2, 8-2 in the Pac-12, and will probably move up to #3 nationally. Go Bears!
I blame Twist.
Thats great.
I went to the SAHPC today. I went to the WBB Open Practice. I went to the baseball exhibition. And I attempted to go, but was uanble to attend the big water polo match. It was SOLD OUT! Fuck! Anyway, we won. So, yay! I’ll have posts on this in the upcoming week.
I know that football is sucky right now. No denying that. However, the simple solution is to look at the other 26 (!) sports at Cal, many of which are doing amazing!!!!!
In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It
Wow…my grammar makes me a LUNATIC? ok…good to know.
I didn’t know that poor grammar makes points INVALID? (I have been drinking since noon, grammar is not at the TOP of my list right now)….i guess grammar is more important than actual POINTS. Good to know.
Ok…I will admit I was out of line with the name calling or whatever you wanna call it. I’m just tired of being embarrassed with the QUALITY of football I have witnessed from Cal the last 3 years or so…haha cal fan2…that looks just like me lol..
have a nice day.
Friend, you’ve clearly enjoyed a great number of cold beverages today.
Why don’t you go have some more fun and take a break from the message boards.
If you decide to come back, please remember that discussions between Cal fans should not involve name calling or personal attacks.
Old Toothwrangler
(I have been drinking since noon, grammar is not at the TOP of my list right now)
Nor is intelligent discussion apparently.
I blame Twist.
CB81, are we going to have to ask you to stay after class writing on the blackboard again?
Old Toothwrangler
it’s easy to blame alcohol. FWIW, your points were silly too!
Remember, the enemy's end zone is DOWN!
Y’know, it might not be fair to judge until we put ourselves in a similar state. After five hours of drinking, this might read like Shakespeare.
Challenge accepted?
Old Toothwrangler
Kodiak is Lord Humungous?
Alright, and after it's all over, you say "Ooh, what a lovely tea party"
by Redonkulous Bear on Oct 15, 2011 6:02 PM PDT up reply actions
Marshall, it wasn't your points: it was your delivery
Believe it or not, there are a lot of people on CGB (as far as I can tell) who are dissatisfied with the direction of the program and who feel it might be time to consider a change of head coach. But when you decide to make your points by calling people “MORONS” and “TARDS,” it detracts from your message. Frankly, it can tend to make some people think you’re more interested in the name-calling than the discussion. And if you’re going to use epithets like “MORONS” and “TARDS”, people aren’t going to give you a pass on such things as grammar foibles.
Including the Original Poster Who Wrote
I’ve said this before, but I do not believe Tedford is owed anything more than to be treated fairly, as we all should be. That means if for some reason (and I don’t think this will happen) we were to absolutely tank this season, then Sandy would be absolutely in her right to make a change. We cannot afford to have a depressed and apathetic fan base next year… or for the next 15 years!
You’re right…sorry fiatlux I just got carried away. OBVIOUSLY.
Calling people morons and tards is not going to get people to listen.
by Marshall Ward on Oct 15, 2011 6:10 PM PDT up reply actions
click reply.
Number one fan of Justin Bieber being the number one fan of the Dodgers, and not the [2010 World Series Champion] Giants.
by Spazzy Mcgee on Oct 15, 2011 8:08 PM PDT up reply actions 3 recs
Does anyone know where i can find defensive stats for the year
I can find collective offensive stats, but not defensive stats
I support the NBA player's union.
which defensive stats do you need?
Alright, and after it's all over, you say "Ooh, what a lovely tea party"
by Redonkulous Bear on Oct 15, 2011 5:55 PM PDT up reply actions
Collegefootballstats.com I think
In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It
Would ya look at that?
Auburn changes QBs to start the second half.
"Fuck DOOOOOM. We prefer BOOOOOM!!- alpha1906
Hugely Disappointed
Wow, I’ve been a huge supporter of Coach Tedford, but I’m getting tired of the excuses now. There is no reason we should have [yet another] quarterback that is not prepared to play in the Pac12. This is a “quarterback’s” coach who has had disappointment after disappointment at that position and I’m starting to doubt either the recruiting skills or the coaching skills.
I don’t buy keeping Maynard in after 3 INTs. Bench him and give another guy a shot. Let ZM think about his mistakes for a bit, but for heaven’s sake punish him for a little bit. Just like missing a practice, there should be rules – you throw that many INT’s you’re going to be sitting down, period.
I’m terribly upset with our lack of innovation. Look at what Oregon has done on both sides of the ball. Look at how LSU has changed their defense and practice style to improve conditioning and speed. What have we done? Implemented a partial spread? Really?
Lastly, I see so little adaptability throughout a game. We stick to too many conservative concepts such as: keeping a struggling QB in the game; maintaining a balanced 50/50 attack when we’re behind by 3 touchdowns in the 4th; keeping a pro-I formation when we’re deep in our own redzone in the 4th quarter – ughhhhhhh!
This is a Pac12 program. This was once a great coach whom I want to see succeed. But to me, he’s lost a lot of confidence and the innovation and drive that he once had.
I see too many freshman doing great work on other teams (e.g., Oregon), that I don’t accept any of these excuses anymore. Everything needs to improve – better recruiting, better playcalling, more innovation, more aggressiveness, and more wins in big games.
Frustrated!
by Lucky1715 on Oct 15, 2011 10:40 PM PDT reply actions 1 recs
Is Oregon’s offense innovative? I thought the offense was incredibly basic with not that many plays, but just executed really well.
The criticism that I often hear of the TEdford offense is that it is almost too innovative with too many complex plays to learn.
I understand your frustartion. I think we all share it and I think it is something that will ONLY go away with winning.
In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It
I actually do think it’s fairly innovative…from the sense that they can have an awesome offense year in and year out by getting enough quality players and enough “moneyball guys” that might not fit into the other 117 offenses in the country. Additionally, they look so good running their offense, which is something Cal hasn’t been able to say for a long time.
"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark
Appreciated
Hey TNH,
Big fan of your reviews, so thanks for your response. I do believe that Tedford’s offense is complicated, but no innovative anymore. I feel it is the same offense he’s been running for years now with very few new wrinkles. So, complex does not equate to innovative.
Oregon’s innovation (IMHO) comes in it’s speed, it’s innovative use of placards, it’s evolution of the spread, etc. I truly believe they have innovated, without over-complicating so that they can introduce more players into their schema a little easier. Plus, that have a lot of depth as we saw against ASU.
Nevertheless, I do respect the opinions of yours and Nickle’s greatly. Thank you.
It's not.
It’s the same play tweaked in certain areas backed by extremely talented players.
It’s effective, yes, but innovative? Hardly.
"Today's weather, excessively violent with a chance of dismemberment. Tune in later for our 5-day forecast!"
~ Three Dog - Fallout 3
Tedford was throwing out everything on offense in this game
Tedford’s playcalling on offensive strategy was, dare I say it? brilliant I thought. He used so many different looks and mixed it up throughout the entire game. Execution was a different story. But man was I pretty impressed with what he threw out there (and I was NOT happy about the game at all).
Like Twist said, Oregon actually hasn’t changed their offense much in the past…almost decade now. They actually utilize their RB’s more in their formation with less reliance in their WR which they normally use in open space. If anything, it’s more conservative football and less of an “innovation” in the way you’re implying “innovation.” We implemented a partial spread about 3-4 years ago with Ludwig so the only thing that might be “new,” although Tedford is criticized in not using it much, are QB rollouts outside the pocket, along with some zone reads mixed in with QB keepers to utilize Maynard’s speed.
Also, this isn’t the preseason. You put the QB in that gives you the best shot of winning the game. If that happens to be the qb that is struggling in the game with 3 INT’s…then that’s who you take to the end. You don’t train your QB or make a statement that he needs to work harder while playing the actual game. Do you realize how demoralizing that would be to the player and to the rest of the team to see a coach doing that in the middle of the game?
And I don’t want to kill it any further, but the time we went away from the 50/50 attack and had Maynard chuck the ball around is when we got picked off and buried in the scoreboard. A 50/50 attack is NOT a bad thing, especially early in the 4th. And you do a pro-I formation because you need those few yards to make the space more manageable when you’re close to your endzone. It’s just common football sense. Those points are NOT conservative concepts…they’re just reasonable football strategies that MOST coaches stick to.
I understand and probably might be even more frustration than you, but really, none of the things you pointed out are what, in my opinion, are valid reasons about why you should be pissed off at Tedford. There’s a gazillion other reasons out there, but I’ve been noticing people bringing up ANYTHING to call out Tedford these days. I think it just reflects how bad people are disappointed and upset at Tedford at this point in our football program. And for what it’s worth, I’m in the same boat as you are…I’m pretty damn pissed off at Tedford these days.
Like nickle said, you need to maintain your quarterback’s confidence and pulling him just to punish him is a bad idea (however, if you think the back-up would do significantly better that night against that defense, then go for it).
Also, I think making your struggling starting quarterback sit out practice is a terrible idea. He needs to practice to get better! A better punishment would be to make him do sprints in Furd gear or something.
by TheScientist019 on Oct 16, 2011 11:46 AM PDT up reply actions
I didn't go through all the comments but...
Special Teams play
Almost all of it was sound. The blocked extra point was just a good play by the defense (a 6’7 guy at that). The punts were decent. The coverage was good. Field goals were good. GT even kicked one to the end zone… BUT… how can we call for another fair catch inside the 10. Everyone is fully justified in being upset at that.
I’m sorry, but I couldn’t take your post seriously after reading that.
- You don’t miss PATs, especially when you’ve been missing them all season since now you know you really shouldn’t be missing PATs. It’s a PAT. A “good play by the defense” means you completely failed on special teams.
- Bigelow got caught inside the 20 at least twice from what I remember. That’s not good field position.
- A fair catch inside your own 5? Completely idiotic.
The above points are meant to show that special teams was OK for the night since they’re forgivable. But the reason I wanted to post this was to point out the brilliant fake punt we attempted and gloriously failed on our half of the field. It was the worst fake punt I’ve seen in my life, and this includes all the crazy attempts I’ve seen in Madden and NCAA.
I knew the game was over at that point. Just complete FAIL for our special teams in my opinion. I thought that call by the ST coach was enough justification to get him fired the next day to be honest, especially because Tedford clearly looked like he had no idea what just happened. As much as Tedford’s become a bit more aggressive than his super conservative self in the past, the decision made to go for the fake punt is something only those crazy SEC coaches would even attempt to try in that situation.
To be fair on the missed PAT
The USC guy is 6’7’’ and jumped really, really, really high.
by FromCtoShining(Blue)C on Oct 16, 2011 9:01 AM PDT up reply actions
I think he leads the nation in blocked kicks.
"Ain't no tuition for having no ambition." -Brandon Carswell
And I have trouble getting by your Bigelow concerns, since it's completely off
I’m sorry you couldn’t take the post seriously because you have a difference of opinion with that section. I’ll get to Bigelow in a second… but first.
It wasn’t a missed PAT it was a blocked PAT by a 6’7 guy who has 5 blocked PATs. Should it happen? No. But it wasn’t like the line collapsed or GT kicked it too low. The other guy made a good play. It happens.
The fair catch I addressed. It was ridiculous.
Your concern with Bigelow is, to me, way off base and shows people looking at the glass 1/4 empty instead of 3/4 full.
First of all, Bigelow only caught inside the twenty once. That’s it. Once. Let’s look at what he did fielding kickoffs and punts.
The first time he fielded the ball at the 2 and got out to the 15 or so.
The second time he fielded it at the 9 and got out to the 30.
The third time he fielded it at the 10 and got out to the 30
The fourth time he fielded it at the 5 and got out to the 30
The fifth time he fielded it at the 12 and got out to the 30
Four of his five returns resulted in CAL having starting field possession on the 30. He averaged about 20 yards per return. I’ll take that.
This is what gets me about people. Read the first sentence of my post. I H-A-T-E-D Thursday night. I hate the game. But when I went back and watched again, there were signs to be encouraged (hard given we had just lost our 8th in a row to SC).
Frankly, had I not gone back and reviewed the game I would have shared your irritation at special teams… that’s why I went back and reviewed it, so I would have my facts right.
my bad I believe you
I’m not enough of a man to rewatch the game so I’ll take your word.
But like I said, I just wanted to point out the failed fake punt as the reason why ST was a fail this game. I think that got lost in the rest of the long post.
no worries...
here’s why watching the game was important for me. Because being there it seemed atrocious. Going back and watching gave me some hope.
As for believing me, all you have to do is check the box score.
I gotta tell you, the fake punt wouldn’t have been my choice (it almost never is). But aside from the fair catch on the 4 and that, special teams were actually pretty solid, which is why I wrote “sound.”
Maybe you can finish reading the rest of what I wrote now ;-)
Time shift your area of focus to the now and let go of the past....
G-BEARS, your existential exercise for the week is to release your attachment to sting of disappointment and refrain from the distorted fusion of self and outcomes. UTAH is on their way to the Bay and I couldn’t more excited about it! While I’m sorry about your loss, I would have loved to see you beat the Trojans, it’s time to focus on that little O’ team that could from beehive state.
My take: If the O doesn’t give the game away via turnovers and we put up 21+ points UTAH wins. The War Dance is in full swing my bay-area brothers and the sacred bear is in our sights.
Should be a good one!
I am a Utah Man sir... I will be till I die.
We’re sacred??
In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It
omg a ute troll...so how does it feel to be rejected by a bunch of mormons?
Remember, the enemy's end zone is DOWN!
by GoldBlooded on Oct 16, 2011 10:07 AM PDT up reply actions
gee, goldblooded, way to stay classy and throw religion into the mix.
i'm here to clean your pool but i don't have a pool *bowchica bowow*
But you just took what a Utah fan said on the internet personally … its as if when someone shits on Cal football, you take it as a personal knock on you. I think, in clinical terms, that’s called an unhealthy emotional attachment that requires a personal and financial commitment on your part to fix.
Yeah, completely unnecessary. Please don’t do that.
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Oct 16, 2011 10:52 AM PDT up reply actions
You know it’s not about “bowing down” to any opposing fans. Just leave race/religion/etc…. out of it. You’re clever enough to write a witty response without resorting to that.
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Oct 16, 2011 1:14 PM PDT up reply actions
you’re right, utah is a joke of a state anyways. i’m only getting in the way
Remember, the enemy's end zone is DOWN!
See, that’s much better.
California Golden Bears: 2nd place is nothing to sneeze at!
by atomsareenough on Oct 16, 2011 2:12 PM PDT up reply actions
you’ve equated the act of refraining from using a rather weak, generic Mormon reference (how easy is that? We all know how crazy ALL faiths are) in the childish attempt to pick up your damaged sense of self with “bowing down to any visiting fan.” Excuse my French, but what’s your deal?
Is there no spectrum here? Is it bow down to visiting fan or completely antagonizing them?
In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It
i’m certain that you of all people understand the use of hyperbole. i think it’s obnoxious when visiting fans come over, post shit, and we’re supposed to be cordial back. i got fed up with every pac-10 opponent fanbase a long time ago, and it looks like the two new ugly kids on the block are almost there too for me.
Remember, the enemy's end zone is DOWN!
He posted in good faith. Minimal shit-talking. Why not be good hosts? And there’s a difference between joshing somebody back based on school/sporting lines and then also adding real world considerations. I think our experience with Mr. Warren showed that.
In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It
I fully support GB in his quest to treat an opponent like an opponent.
Number one fan of Justin Bieber being the number one fan of the Dodgers, and not the [2010 World Series Champion] Giants.
by Spazzy Mcgee on Oct 16, 2011 11:31 PM PDT up reply actions
I have no doubt that you do.
In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It
we do tend to over-recap games, losses in particular, but that’s because previewing games a) isn’t that easy, b) everyone in their mother does that and c)Tedford closes off practice so al we get from our local beat guy, more or less, is the generic coach speak (“everyone looks good, flying around the ball, and we’re working on that”) and our reporter even starts off columns with “not much is new” occasionally.
"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark
UTE 95
thanks for the diplomatic way of pointing out our offense blows.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
GoldenBlogs' FAQ and Community Guidelines
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 |
