Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: Blake Griffin Slam Dunks: NBA Jam Style

Where Have You Gone Jeff Tedford?

Technically, this space is supposed to be This Week In The Pac-12.  But be honest - do you really want to read about how Stanford is one upset away from controlling their own National Title destiny?  Do you really care that Oregon and Arizona St. blew out crummy teams?  If anybody truly does miss it I'll write it up later, but for now there are more pressing issues on everybody's minds.

I remember chanting 'We love Tedford' at the Big Game bonfire rally, feebly hoping that the passion of the chant would help convince coach to never consider taking another job away from Berkeley.

I remember finding a Cal blog called 'Tedford is God' and not batting an eye or thinking that the title was stupid or hyperbolic.

I remember reading a Tedford profile on one of the most well-respected, intelligent team blogs on the internets. It was a profile on potential head coaches for their nationally prominent program.  They referred to Tedford as 'ass kicking savior guy' and tentatively named him as their preference in the upcoming coaching search.

I remember when Jeff Tedford led easily the best stretch of Cal football in 50 years, was widely recognized as an offensive mastermind, and was the only person considered capable of competing with the USC juggernaut.

What happened to that coach?  Since Cal's most recent no-show against USC, the same question keeps running through my head:

Star-divide

From 2002 until halfway through the 2007 season, Jeff Tedford compiled a record of 46-20, a win percentage of 70% (It went up to 75% from 2004-2006, after the rebuild was complete).  His teams were confident and intelligent.  They didn't make many mistakes.  They typically got better both within games and within seasons.  In those 66 games, there were only three games that could be considered blowouts (vs. a top 10 Kansas St. in 2003, vs. #1 USC in 2005, and at Tennessee in 2006).

From the 2nd half of 2007 up til now, Jeff Tedford has compiled a record of 28-26.  Quarterback play has become erratic.  Execution has gotten significantly worse.  The team no longer improves within games or within seasons.  Blowout losses have become common.  The Bears frequently beat themselves.

Why?  What happened?  What changed?  How can a coach so empirically awesome become so empirically mediocre, even bad?  How does that make any sense?

I've tried to rack my brains for an example of a coach that performed so well for a 5 year span, only to have everything positive that characterized his teams suddenly change.  Greg Schiano?  Nah, he just had an 11-2 aberration from his usual 7-5, 8-4 meh Big East teams.  Phil Fulmer?  No, dude was just a victim of the cutthroat SEC - he went 10-4 in his second to last year!  The closest example I can think of is Kirk Ferentz, who built Iowa into a back-to-back-to-back 10 win team in just four years, then regressed with three straight seasons of 6 or 7 wins, before winning 11 games two seasons ago.  Still, few if any Cal fans feel like Tedford is on the cusp of a 10 or 11 win season.

If this sudden loss of coaching ability is as unusual as I think it is, I'm still left grasping for an explanation.  For all of the criticisms Tedford has received over the last few years, I can't imagine Cal fans have an issue with his willingness to make changes.  He's tried changing his role and focus as a head coach.  He's parted ways with offensive coordinators, defensive coordinators, special teams coordinators and position coaches.  He's changes the strength and conditioning coach, for God's sake.  He's tried to shake up the practice schedule.  Every year I feel like we read stories about how he's changing how the team tries to prepare from an emotional and mental standpoint.

And finally, this year, his solution was one that many Cal fans embraced: We're going to go back to doing things like we did them from 2002-2006.  That meant bringing back two position coaches universally regarded as excellent coaches, and it meant a return to Tedford controlling the offense.

And yet the same results.

If you read the question I posed both in the title and body of this post, here is where I must disappoint you.  I don't know why things have changed so radically.  As I've learned more and more about football over the last few years I've always tried to analyze things logically and dispassionately.  What little skills I've developed are failing me now.  If any of you have a plausible theory I'd love to hear it.  Barring a Michael Silver investigative novel we may never get a good explanation.

So now what?  I personally have no desire to either publicly advocate for Tedford's termination, nor do I want to publicly go to bat for him.  If Sandy Barbour decides that, for the good of Cal's athletic department, Cal needs a new coach, then I'll support that decision.  If she decides that Tedford's performance warrants one more year then I'll be buying season tickets at new Memorial and showing up each week hoping and praying that 2002-2006 Tedford returns in all his awesomeness.  I'm a fan of the Bears, I'll do my best to support this program and its players, and that won't change.

But mostly, I'll just be sad.  Sad because the promise that I wholeheartedly believed in is gone.  Sad because somebody who was instrumental in some of my best memories has become a punch line and a punching bag.  Sad because a good man, someone who understands Berkeley, who ran every non-football aspect of the program almost exactly as I'd want, may be forced to leave, and not on his own terms.

Call me a sap, call me an idiot, call me a nostalgic fool - but there's still a part of me who believes that Tedford will recapture that magic that made all of us believers.  Do you remember how we all felt in 2004?  How could that have been wrong?!

If you're given the chance - please coach, prove that part of me right.

Comment 475 comments  |  28 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Rec'd

Fantastic post as it captures EXACTLY how I currently feel. Do I love Tedford for what he’s done for Cal? HELL YES.

I also don’t think it’ll be horrible for both parties to move on, but I also WANT Coach Tedford to succeed here. To finally benefit from all the work he’s put into rebuilding this program over the past 10 years.

Tony Gonzalez? University of California?

by ikoolykedat on Oct 31, 2011 10:37 AM PDT reply actions  

Yup.

rec’d

WE ARE ZOONEWS

by zoonews on Oct 31, 2011 10:38 AM PDT reply actions  

Oh boy, I can’t wait to read the comments to this post!

My own feeling is that Tedford’s decline (for lack of a better term) is directly tied to his choice to stop being a coach and start being a manager.

It’s bigger than just his going hands off. It has to do with the attitude change that accompanies it. Being a coach means getting in there and taking some risks, playing hunches, and listening to your gut. Being a manager means analyzing stats, siding with conventional wisdom and playing it safer in an attempt to ameliorate disaster.

The Coach Tedford would pull a QB who is clearly having a horrible day and undermining any chance the team has to win. The Manager Tedford leaves that QB in the game because he has had the most practice, and therefore gives the team “the best chance” to win.

After last year Tedford seemed to announce that he was retiring Manager Tedford and bringing back Coach Tedford. Perhaps it will take a bit more time for that guy to show up again.

Far from clamoring for his head or starting some stupid online movement to affect change, I think we give Coach Tedford a chance to fully return. Hopefully sooner than later.

Being an Old Blue means never accepting success.

by SoCal Oski on Oct 31, 2011 10:40 AM PDT reply actions  

i think he sleeps more now

Maybe those first few years were just too hard on him and family

by fuzzywuzzy on Oct 31, 2011 2:32 PM PDT up reply actions  

But he’s still got a bed in his new SAHPC office…

by TheScientist019 on Oct 31, 2011 3:03 PM PDT up reply actions  

Really? geezes. He’s gained some weight too. Good thing he doesn’t tummy flash like harblagh.

by fuzzywuzzy on Oct 31, 2011 3:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

i’m honestly concerned about his health

whose domicile? our domicile!

by hardtobecalfan on Oct 31, 2011 3:21 PM PDT up reply actions  

Still, few if any Cal fans feel like Tedford is on the cusp of a 10 or 11 win season.

Maybe I’m suffering from PTSD, but favorable home schedule (UW, Oregon, Stanford) with moderate improvements to D and serviceable QB would put us on the cusp. Obviously we’d need a serviceable QB, but there’s gotta be at least one, out of the 4 on the bench. Right? Right?!?!!????!!

n.b. -- This comment does not constitute official chemistry advice.

by sec119 on Oct 31, 2011 10:51 AM PDT reply actions  

I think firing Tedford before returning to Memorial Stadium, after he (with a lot of other people) worked hard to get the facilities updated, would be cruel. If this ends up Tedford’s second straight bowl-less season, fine. Three on the cusp of four, probably time to get things checked out, but he’s given Cal way more good years than bad, and I think much of this reaction is emotional because Cal’s badness is coinciding with a great Stanford team and USC not missing much of a beat despite sanctions.

by Josie Becker on Oct 31, 2011 10:53 AM PDT reply actions  

Firing Tedford after this season

Would not only be cruel, it would lack institutional integrity. It’s also not practical from a financial standpoint, because he has no buyout clause.

But I think if he posts a losing record this year, and follows it with 6-6 or worse next year, fire him.

by ginfizzbear on Oct 31, 2011 10:58 AM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah

I’m willing to give him 1-2 years to turn it around. Last year was really bad with Mansion, but this year… Ugh.

by puresilence on Oct 31, 2011 11:00 AM PDT up reply actions  

True on one level but i"m done laying my happiness at the foot of the failure of others…..Furd have won 16 games in a row…that is not luck, it is Luck, and a whole bunch of other successful things….Ugh..!!!!

by Cal_Fan2 on Oct 31, 2011 11:19 AM PDT up reply actions  

What part of Chip Kelly at Oregon has been questionable?

You guys paid Willie Lyles, just like we did. So I’m assuming it’s not that.

Is it the rash of player transgressions off the field? Because those have been dealt with pretty harshly.

Cliff Harris has been suspended 2 games and counting this year for traffic tickets. Traffic f’ing tickets. He has barely managed to get on the field in games because the coaches want him to prepare better and practice better. He’s by faaaar our best CB still, so it’s not that he’s lacking in talent.

Our Rose Bowl QB was kicked off the team for what he did. What more do you want?

Last year he suspended a kid for the season because of a DUI.

Are you thinking of Blount? Because he was suspended for about 9/10 games of his SENIOR season and has been able to go on to have successful NFL career because of the way he was treated by Kelly and rehabilitated instead of being kicked to the curb or coddled.

Kelly can’t go out and hold every players hand while they are off the field, but if they screw up they are punished significantly harsher than just about any other school I’ve seen.

by KitIsh on Oct 31, 2011 11:33 AM PDT up reply actions  

You guys paid Willie Lyles, just like we did. So I’m assuming it’s not that.

Haha, pretty funny, maybe it’s because Oregon is under a NCAA investigation and we’re not?

Am I known as Cugel the Clever for nothing?

by Cugel on Oct 31, 2011 11:35 AM PDT up reply actions  

And also, be serious, it’s not that Chippy doesn’t discipline his players after they misbehave, it’s that they are misbehaving in a spectacular and frequent manner.

Most Cal fans would not be happy with that. Oregon fans? Well hard to say, some seem ok with it. Others, less so.

Am I known as Cugel the Clever for nothing?

by Cugel on Oct 31, 2011 11:38 AM PDT up reply actions  

Your list of criminal infractions by players is long and elaborate. I don’t expect someone to need hand-holding to know it is wrong to steal laptops or drive 105 mph under the influence.

by paleodan on Oct 31, 2011 12:33 PM PDT up reply actions  

What part of Chip Kelly at Oregon has been questionable?

A huge payoff to a street agent, and personalized, hand-written thank you notes from your coach to that agent leap to mind.

Being an Old Blue means never accepting success.

by SoCal Oski on Oct 31, 2011 12:40 PM PDT up reply actions  

I lol’d. and then I :(

In other words, Go Bears!

by royrules22 on Oct 31, 2011 12:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

You offend me the Good.

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 31, 2011 12:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

Four words, lack of institutional control.

by iheartmonty on Oct 31, 2011 1:21 PM PDT up reply actions  

Three Words, a Numeral And A Semi-Colon: RoboDuck II: Duck Harder

In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It

by TwistNHook on Oct 31, 2011 1:23 PM PDT up reply actions  

I don’t find the whole “we do it with integrity” thing that compelling. If we had to opportunity to pay the next $Cam Newton phenom out of a CC 180K to get us a shot at the national championship, then sign me up to pitch in the 50 cents I can afford to pitch in (2cents seemed to obvious).
Integrity and College Football do not go together and never have. Didn’t we even get caught fixing grades when we were really terrible! We’re just doing it all wrong (by which I mean doing it too right).

by YleeXOtee on Oct 31, 2011 2:23 PM PDT up reply actions  

out of curiosity

are you a Cal grad?

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by CBKWit on Oct 31, 2011 2:26 PM PDT up reply actions  

I suspect he isn't

The first commandment is to do nothing to embarrass the university, which is far bigger than the athletic department. In time the win at all costs mentality usually leads to disaster in other areas (business, politics, etc.) as well as in sports.

by sacman701 on Nov 1, 2011 12:45 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'm not trying to pick on the guy

I’ve just noticed that non alums are much, much more likely to take this attitude than alumni are. And that makes sense, because our priorities are different than those who are simply Cal football fans.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by CBKWit on Nov 1, 2011 3:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

PUT THE SIDELINE ISOLATION TANKS WHERE THAT DIRTY OLD BENCH USED TO BE

WE ARE ZOONEWS

by zoonews on Oct 31, 2011 2:34 PM PDT up reply actions  

“If winning isn’t everything, why do they keep score?"
― Vince Lombardi

Inspiring and completing since1997 since2010!

by Fire Starkey on Oct 31, 2011 2:35 PM PDT up reply actions  

“HONK!”

-Twistian N. Hook

Deposed (and recently graduated!) #1 Indian

by boomtho on Oct 31, 2011 2:36 PM PDT up reply actions  

In the NFL winning is everything. In college, it should not be.

I blame Twist.

by CalBear81 on Oct 31, 2011 2:37 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

I think that attitude ended for D1 football in approximately 1926

Inspiring and completing since1997 since2010!

by Fire Starkey on Oct 31, 2011 2:42 PM PDT up reply actions  

So the Mike White years didn’t put you off? The Todd Bozeman era and the laughable concept that Jason Kidd actually attended class? Other periods where Cal has blatantly cheated over the years? We’re no SEC school but please don’t pretend to think that Cal hasn’t done some dirty, dirty stuff over the years.

I was being somewhat sarcastic but to a point, I think my statement has some kernel of truth. College football (and basketball) has always been filthy and to think otherwise is impossible.

Inspiring and completing since1997 since2010!

by Fire Starkey on Oct 31, 2011 3:01 PM PDT up reply actions  

I can’t imagine why that fan would follow college football instead of the NFL, especially in an area where there are two local NFL teams.

I think this bears far more attention, in general, than given.

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 31, 2011 4:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

my thoughts exactly

This seperates the real Cal fans from the johnny come lately’s, especially after 2002. Where was the fans during Holme’s last few years, 2000-2001? I was a transfer student -attending Cal from 1973-1975, then a season ticket holder since 1977, 34 consecutive years and counting. There’s the many excellent young men who wore the Cal uniform. The fantastic plays and Big Games – especially “The Play – 1982”. There’s the BG 1974 – Carol Doda leading the stanfurd band onto the Cal field. “G” rated of course. Standing in the Cal student section in 1975 watching the water ballons sailing overhead onto the field againest usc. Your seating neighbors – that shared the highs and lows of Cal football, and the different college teams appearing at Memorial Stadium. Big, bad Miami – 1990. Texas A&M was interesting. But most of all, witnessing Cal football tradition and history unfold each year.

by rare bear on Oct 31, 2011 8:38 PM PDT up reply actions  

Meh

Much ado about nothing.

Plenty of programs are successful without rampant cheating or compromising academics. It pains me to say it but see Stanfurd.

by freshfunk on Oct 31, 2011 3:02 PM PDT up reply actions  

I’m not sure what you are saying. FS was saying that the only thing that matters for college football is winning and it would be okay if Cal openly cheated as long as we win. I was saying that I disagree.

I blame Twist.

by CalBear81 on Oct 31, 2011 3:07 PM PDT up reply actions  

I would rather have a clean 8-4 team than an 11-0 Rose bowl champ team…from this vantage point. But boy, would it be tempting…

I think (hope) the NCAA will be looking more deeply at teams, if at all possible, and the cheating stuff becomes more of a hindrance than a help. I doubt there will ever be complete parity in college football, however.

by fuzzywuzzy on Oct 31, 2011 3:13 PM PDT up reply actions  

Not sure… Auburn and OSU not getting much punishment doesn’t give me hope for that…

by puresilence on Oct 31, 2011 3:14 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah, I know. I think they came out with shotguns, and switched to water cannons at some point. Now they’ve switched to addressing the “root cause”, although I don’t think $2000 stipends would in any way kept players out of Shaprio’s babe-n-boob fests.

by fuzzywuzzy on Oct 31, 2011 3:18 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah I saw

but it’s something of a false dilemma since it implies that we need to cheat to be good.

We don’t.
Of course it’s not worth cheating.

End of story IMO.

by freshfunk on Oct 31, 2011 4:41 PM PDT up reply actions  

One coaching skill is not to get caught

especially when faking injuries…

I do, however, believe Tedford can put a hat in his cap for not having had any other issues. Until proven otherwise, I’ll believe that Cal Footblal (okay, the furd too) are class acts that don’t tolerate “filthiness”.
Can’t say the same for Holmoe.

by fuzzywuzzy on Oct 31, 2011 3:07 PM PDT up reply actions  

Other than the alleged rampant steroid use*

*alleged by me.

"Let me tell you a story. I was a political prisoner for two years. The instant I was released I ran to McDonald's. I had a Big Mac and a Coke.

It was fantastic."
-Toyama Koichi, US Presidential candidate from Japan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGZqOkeYbB0

by AERose on Oct 31, 2011 5:48 PM PDT up reply actions  

Absolutely well said CB81, I couldn’t agree more.

[Cal is] a fabulous university with a football program that typically has precious few and very fleeting brushes with success but a great many unions with failure.
--Monte Poole, Oakland Tribune, 11-30-2010

by SonofCalifornia on Nov 1, 2011 12:42 PM PDT up reply actions  

I agree, but I am fearful.

no bear, no care

by EchoOfSilence on Oct 31, 2011 1:03 PM PDT up reply actions  

I agree with this completely

Also, Cal has shown that it is loyal to its head coach. Tedford has been given 10 seasons despite not getting Cal to a BCS bowl or winning an outright conference title. So as long as a coach can produce winning seasons and competitive teams he will have decent job security.

by SDBear on Oct 31, 2011 1:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

Running a “clean program” is critical here as well. But yeah.

WE ARE ZOONEWS

by zoonews on Oct 31, 2011 1:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

You are right that running a clean program is also important.

by SDBear on Oct 31, 2011 1:13 PM PDT up reply actions  

This is a great point-counterpoint. I think you’re both “correct” in the sense that you’re using evidence and analysis to back up your positions, and I think many people would agree with both of you.

/nosarcasm

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 31, 2011 1:10 PM PDT up reply actions  

BUT HOW DOES THE COLD SODA COME OUT?!

Remember, the enemy's end zone is DOWN!

by GoldBlooded on Oct 31, 2011 4:14 PM PDT up reply actions  

can’t explain that!

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 31, 2011 4:35 PM PDT up reply actions  

I agree with you completely, except for one key point
There is zero reason why we can’t attract a highly qualified football coach to come to Cal. We have a new stadium, new facilities, new pac-12 money, a supportive AD and university, and Cal has already shown that its a recruiting destination. Why shouldn’t we be able to attract a head coach?

I agree with the point of your post, which is that Tedford has brought us to a level that wasn’t there before. The job is definitely attractive, and it really will be easy to attract a good coach.

Now here is where the problem is. The hiring of a “good coach” or a better coach than Tedford would be easy if we can just base it on numbers. Or the new coach’s success in previous programs. Or something that correlates to guaranteed future success.

But lots of football programs hire a “truly spectacular head coach” and get terrible results all the time. Previous success might be a good indicator for future success. Or it may not. New coaches can easily bring a program down further than where it was before they were hired. Nothing is guaranteed. I really don’t have time to think of all the examples of once highly respected “hot” coaches that came with super high expectations that failed miserably. There’s a ton out there. I’ll name only a few from recent years off the top of my head. Charlie Weis at Notre Dame. Rich Rodriguez at Michigan. Even within the Pac-10 there’s Slick Rick Neuheisel (w/ Norm Chow I might add, who many attributed to USC’s success during their Pete Carroll years). What about Tyrone Willingham at Washington?

(To be fair, there are plenty of other good coaches that were hired based on their potential to be great who did indeed go on to do great things. Urban Meyer comes to mind as THE example of a recent hot coach that really worked out well. My point is the same: you just don’t know how things will turn out.)

In the simple world, great coach hire = more football wins which = everyone being happy. It’s too bad this is not the case and this is my point. The hiring of a new coach, no matter how great the hire might be, really is a shot in the dark. And I don’t think most people get that. Sure, we can always hope things will be good and turn out for the best. But there should be equal realistic expectations that it can possibility get equally bad. In a perfect world we can just get the best coach out there and aggressively hire, go to the Rose Bowl and everything will be fine. It’s just not that simple and I just want to make the case that firing Tedford doesn’t magically make us more competitive. It might, or it might not.

by nickle on Oct 31, 2011 1:23 PM PDT up reply actions  

This.

So much this.

Cal Football: I loved them once and they broke my heart. Let that be a lesson to you. Never love anything.

by CalBandGreat on Oct 31, 2011 1:25 PM PDT up reply actions  

It’s just not that simple and I just want to make the case that firing Tedford doesn’t magically make us more competitive. It might, or it might not.

I totally agree with you on this point. It’s why you need to make SURE that your current coach doesn’t have it before you make a change. Just a few bad games won’t do it.

IMO, we’re at that point with Tedford.

by sycasey on Oct 31, 2011 1:26 PM PDT up reply actions  

Ron Zook. Steve Spurrier.

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 31, 2011 1:27 PM PDT up reply actions  

I know what you’re saying, but following your logic, you’d have to wait for a coach to go 1-10 before firing them. Of course there is risk. There is risk with everything. And I think there are several Cal fans who are absolutely willing to take that risk.

by ryandrew on Oct 31, 2011 1:39 PM PDT up reply actions  

Bring forth a candidate and we’ve got a discussion. Sandy’s probably operating that way regardless of popular opinion; she has the ability to think a few moves ahead. Firing Tedford and then forming a search committee would be a brainless thing right now, but if someone wow becomes available we’d probably be pushing our numbers and doing some homework.

WE ARE ZOONEWS

by zoonews on Oct 31, 2011 1:43 PM PDT up reply actions  

AVAST BERKELEY

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 31, 2011 1:45 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

dude cmon….cmon….work with me here…

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 31, 2011 1:47 PM PDT up reply actions  

Too late. The bn kids covet the pirate, and they simply will not tolerate someone else taking their toys

Being an Old Blue means never accepting success.

by SoCal Oski on Oct 31, 2011 1:47 PM PDT up reply actions  

if UCLA gets Mike Leach I will be really, really unhappy.

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 31, 2011 1:48 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

It's OK, they won't.

For a number of reasons. Dan Guerrero already said “lol, no” to Leach in 2007, before he was embroiled in a very public scandal and lawsuit against his former employers. Plus Leach is legendary for not giving a flying fuck about the alumni/boosters, who UCLA need right now desperately.

"Let me tell you a story. I was a political prisoner for two years. The instant I was released I ran to McDonald's. I had a Big Mac and a Coke.

It was fantastic."
-Toyama Koichi, US Presidential candidate from Japan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGZqOkeYbB0

by AERose on Oct 31, 2011 5:53 PM PDT up reply actions  

lol at kevin prince running the run n’ shoot

Deposed (and recently graduated!) #1 Indian

by boomtho on Oct 31, 2011 1:48 PM PDT up reply actions  

Needs more evidence behind argument before I rec you.

"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark

by carp on Nov 1, 2011 7:49 AM PDT up reply actions  

I honestly don't get the attraction to a coach whose teams historically

don’t play defense. We’re going to need to succeed in all three phases to win the Pac-12, and I doubt Leach is going to be convinced that he needs to spend more time on defensive practice.

"Let me tell you a story. I was a political prisoner for two years. The instant I was released I ran to McDonald's. I had a Big Mac and a Coke.

It was fantastic."
-Toyama Koichi, US Presidential candidate from Japan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGZqOkeYbB0

by AERose on Nov 1, 2011 8:23 AM PDT up reply actions  

eh

I don’t think that’s a fair point. People said that about Braun, and she got Monty. Nobody was talking about Monty, but she got him. Just because us CGB dickheads don’t know anything about a coaching search does not mean we shouldn’t fire Tedford, nor does it mean that there wouldn’t be a good replacement, even one completely off our radar.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by CBKWit on Oct 31, 2011 1:45 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

Fair, shmair. We saying that Tedford isn’t gonna get fired this season unless there is a big plump candidate available for all to point at and say wtf Sandy. Or there’s a big fuck up off the field.

WE ARE ZOONEWS

by zoonews on Oct 31, 2011 1:51 PM PDT up reply actions  

I don’t think Tedford should be fired right now, and I think he’s probably safe if he can get to 6 wins (maybe even 5). But saying Cal shouldn’t fire him because WE don’t know who his replacement would be is a terrible argument, one that was disproved by the Braun firing/Monty hiring.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by CBKWit on Oct 31, 2011 1:54 PM PDT up reply actions  

Well good thing that isn’t what we are saying!

WE ARE ZOONEWS

by zoonews on Oct 31, 2011 1:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

tony la russa for cal coach! qb changes every possession!

Deposed (and recently graduated!) #1 Indian

by boomtho on Oct 31, 2011 1:56 PM PDT up reply actions  

Bring forth a candidate and we’ve got a discussion

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by CBKWit on Oct 31, 2011 1:59 PM PDT up reply actions  

See below, bro.

WE ARE ZOONEWS

by zoonews on Oct 31, 2011 2:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

I think the point is not “we the fans don’t know”, the point is, whoever the replacement is, it’s also a risk-laden proposition, and not a guarantee of success or even improvement over Tedford.

"i, for one, welcome our new atomic overlords" - GoldBlooded

by atomsareenough on Oct 31, 2011 3:50 PM PDT up reply actions  

I also think THAT is a faulty argument

It’s akin to the leave Maynard in on Saturday argument – yes, his replacement could be worse, but when you throw 4INTs, it doesn’t really matter, because that person is not doing a competent job. Maybe our next coach will be “worse” than Tedford, but if we’re going to have another losing season, and if we accept that that performance is unacceptable, you have make a change regardless. You can’t just accept mediocrity and lack of achievement out of fear.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by CBKWit on Oct 31, 2011 4:14 PM PDT up reply actions  

I don’t think we disagree. I’m not saying “never make a change”, I’m just saying that the risks that that change will not work out also need to be factored into the decision, that’s all. If you’re replacing 1-10 Holmoe, then sure, the next person almost certainly can’t be worse and that risk is low. Tedford is not Holmoe, and so the risk/reward proposition is different.

"i, for one, welcome our new atomic overlords" - GoldBlooded

by atomsareenough on Oct 31, 2011 4:31 PM PDT up reply actions  

yeah

but again, I think the premise should be, if the current coach/player/administrator/whatever is not meeting the current standards, you make a change. And if that person also does not meet certain standards, you make another change.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by CBKWit on Oct 31, 2011 4:38 PM PDT up reply actions  

alls I know is last year we went from maybe making a bowl with Riley to DEFINITELY NEVER MAKING A BOWL, MAYBE CANCEL THE TEAM with Mansion. We should be careful what we wish for.

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 31, 2011 4:36 PM PDT up reply actions  

Booya—>Levy

Robertson—>Rogers

"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark

by carp on Nov 1, 2011 7:50 AM PDT up reply actions  

Both good points, but I think we can agree Rogers was a once in a lifetime talent, and the 2005 team surrounding Levy was STACKED….

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 Nov 1, 2011 8:50 AM PDT up reply actions  

*Rodgers

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 Nov 1, 2011 8:50 AM PDT up reply actions  

Maynard is playing much worse than Riley ever did.

by sycasey on Nov 1, 2011 9:26 AM PDT up reply actions  

It’s not the fans’ job to find out who is available, it’s the AD’s job. Part of that is because we as fans do not and cannot know who would be interested in the job, or at what kind of money.

Since we cannot know that, does it logically follow that we cannot ask that the current coach be replaced? No, it doesn’t.

by sycasey on Oct 31, 2011 1:56 PM PDT up reply actions  

1. ryanandrew: ~“there are cal fans willing to take that risk” (agree, and maybe we’re one of them)
2. zoonews: ~“bring forth a candidate and we’ve got a discussion” (in that now it would be interesting for many of us to discuss alternatives, not that it is a fucking requirement to any conversation)
3. zoonews: ~“sandy’s probably already operating that way” (as she should be as AD)
4. cbkwit & sycasey have braunian flashbacks.

WE ARE ZOONEWS

by zoonews on Oct 31, 2011 2:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

To this point, we are all kinds of disappointed with everything right now but things are just entering Braunian territory. Should be fired or shouldn’t be fired, interesting but it’s pretty much a given in our mind that he won’t be fired. We suspect next season will be the pivotal one: new home, that promise fulfilled, no excuses, what u got?

WE ARE ZOONEWS

by zoonews on Oct 31, 2011 2:14 PM PDT up reply actions  

I hate the comparison to Braun, in no way is this fair to what Tedford has accomplished. It really isn’t. Argue (not you, zoonews, but anyone) that Tedford should be fired, but can we quit this Braun business?

Am I known as Cugel the Clever for nothing?

by Cugel on Oct 31, 2011 2:36 PM PDT up reply actions  

We’ll know we’ve entered the “Braun zone” where our players literally have no idea what to do on offense, and end up just standing around and staring at each other while someone sacks Zach Maynard.

Deposed (and recently graduated!) #1 Indian

by boomtho on Oct 31, 2011 2:37 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

I think we got a little closer to that with Saturdays loss to ucla.

by SDBear on Oct 31, 2011 2:54 PM PDT up reply actions  

I didn’t think so – no interceptions, we win.

Am I known as Cugel the Clever for nothing?

by Cugel on Oct 31, 2011 2:58 PM PDT up reply actions  

Eh, I don’t know. Even when we weren’t throwing interceptions our offense looked pretty bad. As Hydro pointed out, our offense didn’t drive past the 50 yard line until the 3rd quarter! We couldn’t really run the ball against ucla or sustain any drives.

Obviously, without the picks the game is closer but we weren’t doing much of anything on offense to make me believe we win the game without the picks.

by SDBear on Oct 31, 2011 3:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

Hard to drive when you’re turning the ball over before the drive gets going.

"i, for one, welcome our new atomic overlords" - GoldBlooded

by atomsareenough on Oct 31, 2011 3:58 PM PDT up reply actions  

Fair enough. But the complaints are often the same: We are middling. We get good recruits then blah. The team is regressing. The best is behind him. …

WE ARE ZOONEWS

by zoonews on Oct 31, 2011 2:41 PM PDT up reply actions  

Obviously it should be Pete Carroll when he fails out of the NFL. He’s already coaching so many Cal players already with Seattle.

by puresilence on Oct 31, 2011 1:49 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yes. I’m not sure he could win if he had to follow the rules. This is always going to make being a Cal coach more challenging than at some other institutions.

I blame Twist.

by CalBear81 on Oct 31, 2011 2:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

also

loose. I AM FUCKSTUPID

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by CBKWit on Oct 31, 2011 2:14 PM PDT up reply actions  

Bob Ladouceur

De La Salle is basically an FCS college program and it’s time somebody promoted that guy.

Cal Football: I loved them once and they broke my heart. Let that be a lesson to you. Never love anything.

by CalBandGreat on Oct 31, 2011 2:13 PM PDT up reply actions  

Hes turned down amny many many many many many many many offers. Would he accept Cal’s?

In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It

by TwistNHook on Oct 31, 2011 2:17 PM PDT up reply actions  

Sandy got Monty. I believe she can be very persuasive.

Cal Football: I loved them once and they broke my heart. Let that be a lesson to you. Never love anything.

by CalBandGreat on Oct 31, 2011 2:22 PM PDT up reply actions  

Won't happen

I played football there, Bob hated the recruiting process; his talent rests at the high school level. Plus, he teaches religion classes there, along with Eidson

by fuzzywuzzy on Oct 31, 2011 2:41 PM PDT up reply actions  

Dang.

Oh well, I’m out of ideas then.

Cal Football: I loved them once and they broke my heart. Let that be a lesson to you. Never love anything.

by CalBandGreat on Oct 31, 2011 2:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

FIRE CALBANDGREAT!

Deposed (and recently graduated!) #1 Indian

by boomtho on Oct 31, 2011 2:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

It was a good idea!

WE ARE ZOONEWS

by zoonews on Oct 31, 2011 2:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

Hiring high school coaches to lead college programs is like hiring NFL coaches

You’re very, very rarely going to regret you decision to not hire them. The success rate of hopping from one league to another is not even a little bit encouraging.

I think about this kind of thing all the time for reasons I can’t quite explain, but I like the idea of hiring a highly successful D1AA head coach. There’s precedent for that being a good decision (Paul Johnson, Brian Kelly, Jim Tressel), and you could probably find one with significant West Coast ties (which I assign not insignificant importance to).

Either that or hire Justin Wilcox. (We could convince him to make Tosh his DC and keep Ron Gould! Tedford coaching tree!)

"Let me tell you a story. I was a political prisoner for two years. The instant I was released I ran to McDonald's. I had a Big Mac and a Coke.

It was fantastic."
-Toyama Koichi, US Presidential candidate from Japan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGZqOkeYbB0

by AERose on Oct 31, 2011 6:03 PM PDT up reply actions  

Or a good Military academy coach

If they can do well there…they certainly know how to work with constraints to the program, as well as compete with some bigger schools. And the academies are rarely a final stop, and I’ve never heard of an alum coaching there. Plus, I would think their salaries come from our tax dollars as well. TEA PARTY!

by fuzzywuzzy on Oct 31, 2011 6:27 PM PDT up reply actions  

Troy Calhoun at Air Force is an AFA alumn.

I’m not big on the idea of a service academy coach because their situation is so unlike anything else in college football. Calhoun and Nuimatolo (I’m going to assume that’s how it’s spelled) have objectively succeeded at making the most of what they’ve been given, but it’s such a specialized niche that I’m not confident in how their success will translate.

Also despite my “no such thing as a gimmick offense” rant downthread, I don’t like the flexbone option as a base package in BCS football. Paul Johnson has had some great results, but when the offense isn’t working it just grinds to a complete halt (Also I’m not big on an offense that reduces that reduces the passing game to FUCK IT I’M GOING DEEP). Might just be bias on my part though.

"Let me tell you a story. I was a political prisoner for two years. The instant I was released I ran to McDonald's. I had a Big Mac and a Coke.

It was fantastic."
-Toyama Koichi, US Presidential candidate from Japan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGZqOkeYbB0

by AERose on Oct 31, 2011 6:50 PM PDT up reply actions  

But Gerry Faust was such a great success at Notre Dame!

I blame Twist.

by CalBear81 on Oct 31, 2011 6:33 PM PDT up reply actions  

Jim Tressel can thank Ohio State’s cordial relations with the NCAA for the fact that he’s not going into the tOSU annals as the man who nuked their program with penalties. I mean, I know you all like to go on about how Pete Carrol was ethically challenged but to the best of my knowledge he didn’t conceal evidence from a federal investigation which would have shown that he knew they were ineligible all season.

Brian Kelly is such a superstar that he nearly had a player revolt on his hands last week. And he just got out coached by Kiffin.

Point being, you can find downsides to anyone, even if they look competent, clean, and cheap in FCS.

"When the seagulls follow the trawler, it's because they think sardines will be thrown into the sea"

by DC Trojan on Oct 31, 2011 8:32 PM PDT up reply actions  

Point being, you can find downsides to anyone,

Coulda just stopped there. Obviously if/when Barbour decides to replace Tedford, she’ll have her own metric for deciding who is right for the job, but I just wanted to try to identify a possible high-percentage play.

(Oh yeah, add Harbaugh to the list of coaches who jumped from D1AA.)

"Let me tell you a story. I was a political prisoner for two years. The instant I was released I ran to McDonald's. I had a Big Mac and a Coke.

It was fantastic."
-Toyama Koichi, US Presidential candidate from Japan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGZqOkeYbB0

by AERose on Oct 31, 2011 9:02 PM PDT up reply actions  

(Wilcox hasn't made any progress at Tennessee for the record, but that's the kind of thing I'm willing to overlook in my inane speculation.)

"Let me tell you a story. I was a political prisoner for two years. The instant I was released I ran to McDonald's. I had a Big Mac and a Coke.

It was fantastic."
-Toyama Koichi, US Presidential candidate from Japan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGZqOkeYbB0

by AERose on Oct 31, 2011 9:08 PM PDT up reply actions  

Steve Sarkesian

"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark

by carp on Nov 1, 2011 7:53 AM PDT up reply actions  

Paul Johnson

"We lose to Stanford in many sports, but if you want to make a Cal team quit, bring a weapon."
--Coach Clark

by carp on Nov 1, 2011 7:55 AM PDT up reply actions  

Dude hired Al Groh to be his defensive coordinator. Fuck. That. Shit.

Chip Kelly would eat him alive if he tried to bring that weak sauce to Autzen.

"Let me tell you a story. I was a political prisoner for two years. The instant I was released I ran to McDonald's. I had a Big Mac and a Coke.

It was fantastic."
-Toyama Koichi, US Presidential candidate from Japan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGZqOkeYbB0

by AERose on Nov 1, 2011 8:25 AM PDT up reply actions  

If any of you have a plausible theory I’d love to hear it.
From the 2nd half of 2007 up til now, Jeff Tedford has compiled a record of 28-26.

This is cherry-picking a little, and related to my plausible theory, which is that injuries to a starting QB are pretty horrendous for most teams. Last year, for example, Cal wasn’t gonna be a NC contender, but the parting impression was also exacerbated by QB injuries.

As for why QB play is so erratic this year … I got nothing.

n.b. -- This comment does not constitute official chemistry advice.

by sec119 on Oct 31, 2011 10:57 AM PDT reply actions  

Maynard was the best we had

but obviously had issues. He had a connection with Allen, which can’t be overlooked, but he had, like 15 interceptions in a weaker, slower conference. Mansion? Way too much work needed. Bridgford? Just had shoulder surgery; that could have a permanent impact, and he’s not as fast as Maynard. IF the OL line wasn’t looking as strong this year, go with the mobile guy and try and teach him about confusing coverages that he’s never seen before, but…nothing works as well as experience. Just ask Boller and Palmer.

I think in the past three weeks I’ve watched my teams QB’s throw at least thirteen interceptions.

by fuzzywuzzy on Oct 31, 2011 11:20 AM PDT up reply actions  

Let's just use all of 2007

It still only makes us 33-26. Yeah, it’s not terrible, but it’s a far cry from the 43-20 from 2002 to 2006.

by Ohio Bear on Oct 31, 2011 12:20 PM PDT up reply actions  

Well, there may be signs of internal strife

(or player frustration, at least)

CJAndersonRB9

CjAndersonRB9 C.J. Anderson
@DavidERod I feel you but if u knew the inside up here and the politics ull see y we be losing

If true, that would definitely be on Tedford one way or another. I didn’t think I was going to be able to get even sadder.

no bear, no care

by EchoOfSilence on Oct 31, 2011 11:08 AM PDT reply actions  

oh boy, locker-room insurrection? sigh

by the federer express on Oct 31, 2011 11:11 AM PDT up reply actions  

4. Profits!

Seriously though, this use of Twitter shouldn’t be tolerated by the coaches. Its conduct detrimental to the team.

Drinking the Kool-Aid. Pumping the sunshine. Livin' the dream. Go Bears!

by dballisloose on Oct 31, 2011 1:26 PM PDT up reply actions  

It is, but he’s already sent a corrective tweet of sorts so maybe we’ll all learn something from this and win Big Game together lalalalalalalalaMUSHROOMS

WE ARE ZOONEWS

by zoonews on Oct 31, 2011 1:29 PM PDT up reply actions  

Corrective Tweet?

Not sure about that. I checked out that thread and it seems very shady. Not posting anything here because I don’t want to stir the pot, but the rumor of dissent seems to have some merit.

Being an Old Blue means never accepting success.

by SoCal Oski on Oct 31, 2011 1:44 PM PDT up reply actions  

The last two tweets now deflect from Maynard and challenge tweetsters (presumably piling on Maynard) to criticize C.J.’s own play.

WE ARE ZOONEWS

by zoonews on Oct 31, 2011 2:05 PM PDT up reply actions  

I saw those. But even those don’t really do anything to asuage the thought of some sort of internal strife. Particularly when there is a comment about not being able to discuss it via twittering.

Ugh. Even if this is just an honest misunderstanding or a classic case of misinterpretation, it just isn’t good. Particularly now.

Being an Old Blue means never accepting success.

by SoCal Oski on Oct 31, 2011 2:11 PM PDT up reply actions  

We aren’t saying it’s good. It’s not good.

WE ARE ZOONEWS

by zoonews on Oct 31, 2011 2:16 PM PDT up reply actions  

This sounds like 2007 when the team was divided. I have my suspicions which I won’t elaborate on but like I’ve posted in another thread, I think the psychology of this team is not healthy……something is amiss and I’m not sure if JT realizes it or is at the center of it; but if C.J. is concerned, I’m concerned.

by Cal_Fan2 on Oct 31, 2011 11:16 AM PDT up reply actions  

Yuck. I hope this isn’t the case. But I fear that if the fans are questioning the coaching, the players may also be following the same suit.

I hope Tedford can nip this soon.

by slaphancock on Oct 31, 2011 11:20 AM PDT up reply actions  

Another thread… on CGB? or elsewhere?

"i, for one, welcome our new atomic overlords" - GoldBlooded

by atomsareenough on Oct 31, 2011 4:17 PM PDT up reply actions  

Father of player on another team who knows the full staff …..and many of the kids.

by Cal_Fan2 on Oct 31, 2011 4:19 PM PDT up reply actions  

My cousin’s sister’s roommate’s housekeeper said the same thing!

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 31, 2011 4:36 PM PDT up reply actions  

Wow, this is a very concerning comment and I am worried.

by SDBear on Oct 31, 2011 11:55 AM PDT up reply actions  

very very bad

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by CBKWit on Oct 31, 2011 12:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

There's nothing good about this tweet

If CJ is accurate, we have internal strife. Obviously not good. If CJ is not accurate, he’s displaying either poor judgment or lack of discipline. I don’t like either possibility.

by Ohio Bear on Oct 31, 2011 12:07 PM PDT up reply actions  

Over/Under on number of hours before JT bans player Tweets: 24.5

Inspiring and completing since1997 since2010!

by Fire Starkey on Oct 31, 2011 12:11 PM PDT up reply actions  

My thoughts exactly.

no bear, no care

by EchoOfSilence on Oct 31, 2011 12:13 PM PDT up reply actions  

I"m going out on a limb here and everyone can disagree with me wholeheartedly but I think JT is playing favorites and many on the team don’t like it one bit….I’ll even venture to say that the North Carolina contingent is dividing the locker room, maybe not on purpose, but dividing it all the same. JT covets them and sides with them causing other players to look unfavorably upon other players and are losing confidence….JT has lost the team and is clueless because his self awareness is lacking and his intentions while understandable are bringing down the team….

This might sound harsh and yes, it is total speculation on my part so if I’m wrong, I’ll stand corrected. The reason I say this is that in 2007, a similar thing happened. Some thought it was all about DeSean, but from what I heard, it was a NorCal vs SoCal divide. I don’t mean to offend anyone with my opinion but it is what I feel….

by Cal_Fan2 on Oct 31, 2011 12:25 PM PDT up reply actions  

Those perceptions of favoritism can wreak havoc – different school and situation, but that was true also during the last year or two that Carroll was at SC.

"When the seagulls follow the trawler, it's because they think sardines will be thrown into the sea"

by DC Trojan on Oct 31, 2011 12:29 PM PDT up reply actions  

Really? Care to say more?

no bear, no care

by EchoOfSilence on Oct 31, 2011 12:29 PM PDT up reply actions  

I don’t remember all of the soap-opera details, but Carroll’s insistence on using Barkley all the time even when he was struggling, and at the expense of getting game time for Mustain or… the kid who transferred to Richmond, who was thrown under the bus in a very unpleasant manner, comes to mind. Also the insistence on trying to turn Joe McKnight into the next Reggie Bush – the fact that McKnight has overcome persistent injury issues and apparently become a useful member on special teams for the Jets suggests that he was coachable into a role, assuming it was the right one.

Hell, for that matter, Carroll was completely open about using game plans to get Bush into Heisman contention in 2005. LenDale White may not have been as media-friendly, but if he had been the main back that season, he would have obliterated teams. (Mind you, White also came unstuck in the pros, so it’s not like Carroll didn’t have motivational skills.)

"When the seagulls follow the trawler, it's because they think sardines will be thrown into the sea"

by DC Trojan on Oct 31, 2011 12:39 PM PDT up reply actions  

To be fair Aaron Corp got his shot and was terrible.

"Let me tell you a story. I was a political prisoner for two years. The instant I was released I ran to McDonald's. I had a Big Mac and a Coke.

It was fantastic."
-Toyama Koichi, US Presidential candidate from Japan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGZqOkeYbB0

by AERose on Oct 31, 2011 6:07 PM PDT up reply actions  

He was dreadful, and his excuses after the Washington debacle were a bit much… But that doesn’t change anything about him being of limited interest to the coaching staff unit it was an emergency.

"When the seagulls follow the trawler, it's because they think sardines will be thrown into the sea"

by DC Trojan on Oct 31, 2011 8:34 PM PDT up reply actions  

Nor cal- So Cal?

Geez…whatever happened to West coast – East coast? I can live with that. I understand SoCal has issues, but that’s really only Orange county and the superficial snobs there. But the East coast is 3000 miles away, it’s cold and snowy, their small towns have inadequate sewage systems, and it’s hard to find hummus.

NorCal- SoCal? Good gawd, soon it will be East Bay-South Bay.

by fuzzywuzzy on Oct 31, 2011 12:39 PM PDT up reply actions  

Sacramento!

I blame Twist.

by CalBear81 on Oct 31, 2011 12:40 PM PDT up reply actions  

Central Valley!

Though I make fun of the NorCal and SoCal issue I really hope that this dissension is resolved soon.

by Anonymous IV at Mono Lake on Oct 31, 2011 1:41 PM PDT up reply actions  

Soon, it will be Contra Costa County – Alameda County!

In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It

by TwistNHook on Oct 31, 2011 1:17 PM PDT up reply actions  

contra costa county isn’t the east bay!!! it’s all inland and shit.

by j.lee on Oct 31, 2011 10:36 PM PDT up reply actions  

Rec'd

"Fuck DOOOOOM. We prefer BOOOOOM!! - alpha1906

by golden oso on Oct 31, 2011 11:45 PM PDT up reply actions  

Northside vs Southside!

Oh wait…

no bear, no care

by EchoOfSilence on Oct 31, 2011 1:21 PM PDT up reply actions  

Not sure why you guys are making light of the dissension in the locker room in 2007. I was being honest about NorCal vs SoCal divide and competing locker room loyalties based on geography.. I was told this by the father whose son plays for Oregon and he knows all the staff at Cal since his son was recruited by us…..lots of people blamed DeSean and his dad for this but it went a lot further than that…..

by Cal_Fan2 on Oct 31, 2011 1:27 PM PDT up reply actions  

I knew all those people from LA were bringing Cal down! DAMN THEM!

I will not tolerate a single LA reader on CGB! We must rid CGB of readers from LA! Unless they bring us Diddy Reise. Then, thats cool. Im down with that.

In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It

by TwistNHook on Oct 31, 2011 1:32 PM PDT up reply actions  

we have CREAM now, we don’t need their socal cookies!

Deposed (and recently graduated!) #1 Indian

by boomtho on Oct 31, 2011 1:35 PM PDT up reply actions  

Cash Cookies Rule Everything Around Me

Deposed (and recently graduated!) #1 Indian

by boomtho on Oct 31, 2011 1:44 PM PDT up reply actions  

You in the red light district?

no bear, no care

by EchoOfSilence on Oct 31, 2011 1:48 PM PDT up reply actions  

[Telegraph and Channing]

n.b. -- This comment does not constitute official chemistry advice.

by sec119 on Oct 31, 2011 1:56 PM PDT up reply actions  

no

Eric Clapton, Jack Bruce, and Ginger Baker.

by sacman701 on Nov 1, 2011 12:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

That was not the point Twist….the point was that JT has lost the locker room before, and it would not be impossible to think it can’t happen again. I know I’m being serious on this point but this kind of thing can snowball…..plus, I didn’t say it was L.A. people bringing Cal down, I said there were some geographical rivalries…..

by Cal_Fan2 on Oct 31, 2011 1:37 PM PDT up reply actions  

Its always those LA people bringing us NorCal people down! They need to bring us down some delicious ice cream cookies!

In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It

by TwistNHook on Oct 31, 2011 1:45 PM PDT up reply actions  

ok….I get it..I’m trying to be somewhat serious here but looks like everyone else is in the comedy mood.. I’ll slink back to that other message board ………

by Cal_Fan2 on Oct 31, 2011 1:48 PM PDT up reply actions  

Cal_Fan2, I’m sorry if I’ve upset you with some jokes. I wasn’t trying to.

You are probably right about the divide, but I genuinely have nothing of value to offer on the topic. It could be the case, it could not. I don’t know.

From the tweet here, it seems like something is brewing in the Cal locker room and its prolly bad.

In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It

by TwistNHook on Oct 31, 2011 1:49 PM PDT up reply actions  

I"m only serious because I’ve seen what this can do, especially if a cancer is brewing… it wasn’t just C.J. but Bridgford came out with some remarks about “not losing a game like that”.. . this kind of stuff is similar to what my Masters Thesis was about for I/O Psychology so it is probably more important to me than others…..the only thing that bugs me is I get called on speculating but half the posts on most threads are speculation

by Cal_Fan2 on Oct 31, 2011 1:54 PM PDT up reply actions  

I think you misunderstood me… I wasn’t calling you out for speculation. Hell, the whole board is speculation! :)

My point was, there is nearly no evidence about this stuff… so it’s more difficult to talk about than say, “MAYNARD SUX!!”, where there seems to be a lot of evidence.

Deposed (and recently graduated!) #1 Indian

by boomtho on Oct 31, 2011 1:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

Noted.

So what’s the best way to fix/counteract the behavior?

no bear, no care

by EchoOfSilence on Oct 31, 2011 1:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

leadership and communication

by Cal_Fan2 on Oct 31, 2011 1:57 PM PDT up reply actions  

i love buzzwords too!

/goes back to creating deck about synergies

Deposed (and recently graduated!) #1 Indian

by boomtho on Oct 31, 2011 1:58 PM PDT up reply actions  

wow, magic reference

no bear, no care

by EchoOfSilence on Oct 31, 2011 2:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

also, consulting. hmmm, we may be on to something here.

n.b. -- This comment does not constitute official chemistry advice.

by sec119 on Oct 31, 2011 2:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

You consider “leadership” and “communication” buzzwords?…or did you expect me to put an operational synopsis together?

by Cal_Fan2 on Oct 31, 2011 2:01 PM PDT up reply actions  

dude, much like Twist, i am rarely serious. sorry to disappoint!

Deposed (and recently graduated!) #1 Indian

by boomtho on Oct 31, 2011 2:25 PM PDT up reply actions  

NO worries….I’m not either but on this subject, it hits close to home….

by Cal_Fan2 on Oct 31, 2011 2:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

but to be serious… I’m somewhat one of those “stat geeks” that people claim are ruining the NBA. As such, I love to see stuff that can be quantified. Leadership/communication, however, really can’t be (as Missing Barry has said countless times). Which is why I don’t put too much stock in stuff like that, as long as our team isn’t out committing felonies en masse or brawling on the field

Deposed (and recently graduated!) #1 Indian

by boomtho on Oct 31, 2011 2:33 PM PDT up reply actions  

Actually leadership and communication can be quantified to the extent you can list the appropriate behaviors one demonstrates in that regard…the hard part is defining it according to the situation at hand and I certainly can’t quantify it on a blog……haha…. Look at accomplished military men and leadership is probably as important as tactics and strategy on the long run…

by Cal_Fan2 on Oct 31, 2011 2:45 PM PDT up reply actions  

To be serious, concepts of “leadership” and “communication” are very important. But they very often are thrown around as little more than buzzwords.

I blame Twist.

by CalBear81 on Oct 31, 2011 2:34 PM PDT up reply actions  

…..and I wasn’t doing that (not saying you said I was)….I was merely answering a question about how to stop this type of locker room dissension and it usually come from the top…..players who know where they stand, and why they are there usually don’t dissent. Coupled with proper rewards AND punishment, this usually works… It usually doesn’t when you have a caner in the locker room like Terrell Owens who will ruin a team every time..(not saying we have one here)

by Cal_Fan2 on Oct 31, 2011 2:42 PM PDT up reply actions  

cancer…not caner

by Cal_Fan2 on Oct 31, 2011 2:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

It would be a better discussion if there was more than one tweet to discuss as “facts”.

Am I known as Cugel the Clever for nothing?

by Cugel on Oct 31, 2011 2:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

If you had read all my posts, I also included Bridgfords quotes to the press about “not losing games like this”….either way, as I mentioned before, I’m reading between the lines and looking at more behaviors on and off the field and looking for answers.. I don’t take a single aspect and form a conclusion….

by Cal_Fan2 on Oct 31, 2011 2:49 PM PDT up reply actions  

I’m reading between the lines

Oh I know, I just don’t see this as a useful discussion. What can anyone intelligently say about this topic?

Nothing really.

Am I known as Cugel the Clever for nothing?

by Cugel on Oct 31, 2011 2:51 PM PDT up reply actions  

Mike_Calvin11 Micheal Calvin
 by TheBridgman16
If your a cal fan then you have to always have our back. We don’t need doubters. We need your support

Old Toothwrangler

by Kodiak on Oct 31, 2011 2:54 PM PDT up reply actions  

Did Michael Calvin misspell his own name, or is it actually “Micheal”?

"i, for one, welcome our new atomic overlords" - GoldBlooded

by atomsareenough on Oct 31, 2011 4:36 PM PDT up reply actions  

Which?

"i, for one, welcome our new atomic overlords" - GoldBlooded

by atomsareenough on Oct 31, 2011 4:45 PM PDT up reply actions  

Exactly!

I blame Twist.

by CalBear81 on Oct 31, 2011 4:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

Inexactly, actually.

"i, for one, welcome our new atomic overlords" - GoldBlooded

by atomsareenough on Oct 31, 2011 4:52 PM PDT up reply actions  

I understand….it is important to me…besides, half the posts here are pure joking with no intelligent discourse at all except to get laughs….

by Cal_Fan2 on Oct 31, 2011 2:54 PM PDT up reply actions  

It’s actually somewhat interesting to me as a topic simply because I’m a small business owner who has read or listened to many, many hours of material on leadership.

Listening, accountability, fairness, consistency, and clear communication are all important.

I’m not sure how much you can run a football program like a business, but some of the principles do apply.

In this case, it might be a bit premature to speculate that there’s internal strife or some type of divide.

I suspect the media led Bridgford a little to stir up the QB controversy angle. CJ’s tweet is more concerning, definitely irresponsible, but could mean anything, everything, or nothing.

I guess we’ll see how the team responds next week.

Old Toothwrangler

by Kodiak on Oct 31, 2011 3:02 PM PDT up reply actions  

Understood….I probably wouldn’t have brought it up except for the fact that it has happened before in this locker room….it is disconcerting nonetheless.

by Cal_Fan2 on Oct 31, 2011 3:08 PM PDT up reply actions  

Agreed, definitely disconcerting. Let’s hope this is a situation where “winning is the best deodorant.”

Oh. And that winning thing. We should try that. Soon.

Old Toothwrangler

by Kodiak on Oct 31, 2011 3:13 PM PDT up reply actions  

okay, fine, so, “fact.”

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 31, 2011 2:54 PM PDT up reply actions  

Me?

Am I known as Cugel the Clever for nothing?

by Cugel on Oct 31, 2011 2:58 PM PDT up reply actions  

I hear you brother

the 99% are with you. Down with Twist’s inanity!

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by CBKWit on Oct 31, 2011 1:56 PM PDT up reply actions  

Twist is the 1%? Now I finally know what’s wrong with this country!

I blame Twist.

by CalBear81 on Oct 31, 2011 2:08 PM PDT up reply actions  

I wasnt calling you out for speculation. I was mostly just rambling about ice cream cookies.

In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It

by TwistNHook on Oct 31, 2011 2:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

so odd that someone taking this seriously would get frustrated by your repeated inanity!

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by CBKWit on Oct 31, 2011 2:12 PM PDT up reply actions  

Hey, I shared a moment with Cal_Fan2 in the prior thread. We have a special bond now. You cant understand it!

In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It

by TwistNHook on Oct 31, 2011 2:13 PM PDT up reply actions  

You can call me CF2, everyone else does……

by Cal_Fan2 on Oct 31, 2011 2:15 PM PDT up reply actions  

I always thought I was special in your eyes, Cal_Fan2! We have a special relationship that’s totally different from everyone else’s!

In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It

by TwistNHook on Oct 31, 2011 2:17 PM PDT up reply actions  

That’s what my ex-wife keeps saying….LOL

by Cal_Fan2 on Oct 31, 2011 2:19 PM PDT up reply actions  

We just showed CBKWit!

In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It

by TwistNHook on Oct 31, 2011 2:21 PM PDT up reply actions  

it’s a difficult thing to speculate about, because no one on this board has a clue about whether Tedford has lost the locker room. so why speculate?

Deposed (and recently graduated!) #1 Indian

by boomtho on Oct 31, 2011 1:49 PM PDT up reply actions  

People speculate on whether Bridgford is better than Maynard on this board all the time….and speculate on whether this team is better then that team…..since they have no clue either, should we ban speculation altogether or just on subjects that some don’t want to think about?

by Cal_Fan2 on Oct 31, 2011 1:51 PM PDT up reply actions  

I don’t think discussion on the subject is being banned, it’s probably just to nip possible hearsay in the bud.

It’s all possible, and the saddening thing is that we’ll probably never really know what’s going on, if anything.

no bear, no care

by EchoOfSilence on Oct 31, 2011 1:53 PM PDT up reply actions  

you can speculate on whatever you please, i just don’t think people have much to say about this subject.

with maynard/bridgeord, you at least have practice reports, maynard’s game performance, perceived strengths/weaknesses, etc. some amount of (circumstantial) evidence.

what evidence do you have for the locker room divide? 1 tweet?

or at least that’s why i feel no need to speculate.

Deposed (and recently graduated!) #1 Indian

by boomtho on Oct 31, 2011 1:53 PM PDT up reply actions  

more than one tweet….Bridgford had some words that could be construed similarly… when I start to see multiple behaviors around a core issue, it concerns me

by Cal_Fan2 on Oct 31, 2011 1:56 PM PDT up reply actions  

The Bridgeford one could have been a poor choice of phrase, tho. It isn’t necessarily pointed. Is it?

WE ARE ZOONEWS

by zoonews on Oct 31, 2011 1:57 PM PDT up reply actions  

I’m reading between the lines….probably because I used to do this….not a lot of info I grant you but considering the on field results and such, I’m trying to piece things together, not unlike what many posters and mods do…

by Cal_Fan2 on Oct 31, 2011 1:59 PM PDT up reply actions  

Fair enough!

WE ARE ZOONEWS

by zoonews on Oct 31, 2011 2:01 PM PDT up reply actions  

Seriously, I think CF2 has an idea here. I can’t get my head around the favoritism thing from Tedford because he is a better people manager than that (ergo a Head Coach). BUT, my own opinion is that this is misplaced loyalty or a doggedness to stick to earlier decisions. I’m sure we’ve been through all this with Longshore/Riley, but it feels like the same issue. I think Tedford is misconstruing his loyalty and commitment to a starter decision beyond what seems reasonable to the fans, and likely the team.

There is zero chance that Tedford starts (“favors”) Maynard over another player who is better at this position. (The key assumption being that Tedford has evaluated the QB talent in an honest manner in his head, which could be different than the team sees it. However, because its Tedfords honest evaluation, he is being true to his moral standards for deciding starters)

by YleeXOtee on Oct 31, 2011 4:17 PM PDT up reply actions  

right

you hit on the assumption – that Tedford’s assessment is impartially correct. Obviously, Tedford knows a hell of a lot more than any of us about football. But that does not mean he is not incorrect from time to time, or perhaps quite frequently!

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by CBKWit on Oct 31, 2011 4:22 PM PDT up reply actions  

zero chance

Really? I think the evidence suggests that the chance is far greater than zero

by Yogi Bear on Nov 1, 2011 12:14 AM PDT up reply actions  

No, I stick by zero chance.
 I’m saying zero chance that Tedford KNOWS someone else is better, but plays a favorite guy instead.
(this is different from zero chance that someone else IS better, because that is of course, not zero)

by YleeXOtee on Nov 1, 2011 9:25 AM PDT up reply actions  

If Bridgford had made more of his meaningful snaps against Oregon, there might be something to this.

by cal85 on Nov 1, 2011 11:14 AM PDT up reply actions  

Considering that one guy has had a way disproproportionate amount of practice time

perhaps you should consider the possibility that with all the advantages of more practice time with the 1’s and being basically given the #1 spot on the depth chart from day one (and when else has that ever happened on a Tedford team, the fact that Bridgford looked at worst to be on par with Maynard as a passer says that perhaps Bridgford deserves a week practicing with the 1’s and a start to show what he has.

By the time Bridgford came in, he basically had to throw downfield on every down against flooded zones. I don’t know that it’s necessarily a fair judgment that he didn’t lead us to a bunch of scores given that handicap.

by Yogi Bear on Nov 1, 2011 11:59 AM PDT up reply actions  

Not to mention he had at least 2 TD passes that were plain dropped by the receivers.

"i, for one, welcome our new atomic overlords" - GoldBlooded

by atomsareenough on Nov 1, 2011 2:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

And a few interceptions that were just plain dropped by the defensive backs.

"Let me tell you a story. I was a political prisoner for two years. The instant I was released I ran to McDonald's. I had a Big Mac and a Coke.

It was fantastic."
-Toyama Koichi, US Presidential candidate from Japan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGZqOkeYbB0

by AERose on Nov 1, 2011 11:38 PM PDT up reply actions  

And I stick by my position that is he playing Maynard

for reasons other than because he thinks he’s the best QB we have

by Yogi Bear on Nov 1, 2011 11:54 AM PDT up reply actions  

That’s just crazy talk.

Am I known as Cugel the Clever for nothing?

by Cugel on Nov 1, 2011 6:25 PM PDT up reply actions  

Cugel, you have to realize that between the time he spends on the grassy knoll, and all those trips to Roswell, Coach Tedford has no time to waste on things like evaluating quarterbacks.

I blame Twist.

by CalBear81 on Nov 1, 2011 6:42 PM PDT up reply actions  

You know Scut Farkus, right?

A Christmas Story, terroizes the other kids?

When you make posts like that, you are like the guy on the right.

Anyone who doesn’t at least open themselves up to the possibility that Maynard didn’t win the starting job on merit in spring camp when he had never practiced with the team before after the game action we’ve seen to this point is not paying a lot of attention to what’s going on.

Feel free to have the last word.

by Yogi Bear on Nov 2, 2011 3:51 PM PDT up reply actions  

sadly, I agree with you again

not sure I buy your argument, but I think it’s unfair to just dismiss it out of hand.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by CBKWit on Nov 2, 2011 10:40 PM PDT up reply actions  

The topic has entered the memesphere because the locker room/DeSean thing got discussed to death back then, as did Longshore vs Riley lolz. No offense intended by anyone here, just absent new facts there isn’t much more to say that won’t spark a smelly old poop fight.

WE ARE ZOONEWS

by zoonews on Oct 31, 2011 1:33 PM PDT up reply actions  

I didn’t post that to bring up that point again…I posted it because JT lost the team, and he might be losing it again….

by Cal_Fan2 on Oct 31, 2011 1:38 PM PDT up reply actions  

That is your speculation, and it is plausible, yes. All good?

WE ARE ZOONEWS

by zoonews on Oct 31, 2011 1:38 PM PDT up reply actions  

No, it isn’t all good…

by Cal_Fan2 on Oct 31, 2011 1:40 PM PDT up reply actions  

EchoOfSilence reporting from the ’hood, here. It is indeed all good.

Up the street on Telegraph, however…

no bear, no care

by EchoOfSilence on Oct 31, 2011 1:42 PM PDT up reply actions  

Hey!

We’re not all superficial snobs from Orang County! See what you’re doing, you are creating a divide here at CGB!! Haha.

www.LosAngelesRams.org

CALIFORNIA ANGELS . . . ANAHEIM DUCKS . . . CALIFORNIA GOLDEN BEARS
1920 • 1921 • 1922 • 1923 • 1937 • 1947 • 1951 • 1957 • 1959 • 2002 • 2007

by AndyHogan14 on Oct 31, 2011 1:49 PM PDT via iPhone app up reply actions  

Only if you surrender some Berkeley Dogs to the LA area!

no bear, no care

by EchoOfSilence on Oct 31, 2011 1:50 PM PDT up reply actions  

Where are you superficial snobs from, then? Beverly Hills? Malibu? Where?

I blame Twist.

by CalBear81 on Oct 31, 2011 2:11 PM PDT up reply actions  

Santa Barbara

Drinking the Kool-Aid. Pumping the sunshine. Livin' the dream. Go Bears!

by dballisloose on Oct 31, 2011 2:17 PM PDT up reply actions  

Where aren’t we from?

"When the seagulls follow the trawler, it's because they think sardines will be thrown into the sea"

by DC Trojan on Oct 31, 2011 8:36 PM PDT up reply actions  

Sigh – this seems like the kind of issue that best not to discuss, because it’s so nebulous, and even discussing it is corrosive.

And sounds a lot like speculation. Unless you’re a player on both this year’s team and 2007.

Am I known as Cugel the Clever for nothing?

by Cugel on Oct 31, 2011 12:40 PM PDT up reply actions  

yes, it is speculative but my info on the 2007 team came from the father of a player….and even if it is corrosive, C.J. Anderson tweeted what he tweeted and Bridgford stated “he would never lose a game”….like it or not, there seems to be some dissension and if it is not addressed, it will only get worse

by Cal_Fan2 on Oct 31, 2011 12:44 PM PDT up reply actions  

I agree that Tedford needs to hop on this PDQ, but us discussing it (in the absence of hard facts) is corrosive, and a bad idea.

Am I known as Cugel the Clever for nothing?

by Cugel on Oct 31, 2011 12:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

ull see y we be losing

I’m more concerned about his terrible grammar.

Cal Football: I loved them once and they broke my heart. Let that be a lesson to you. Never love anything.

by CalBandGreat on Oct 31, 2011 12:44 PM PDT up reply actions  

it's a tweet

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by CBKWit on Oct 31, 2011 12:44 PM PDT up reply actions  

You’re a tweet!

Cal Football: I loved them once and they broke my heart. Let that be a lesson to you. Never love anything.

by CalBandGreat on Oct 31, 2011 12:47 PM PDT up reply actions  

Nicely played.

Cal Football: I loved them once and they broke my heart. Let that be a lesson to you. Never love anything.

by CalBandGreat on Oct 31, 2011 1:19 PM PDT up reply actions  

Grammar doesn’t count on Twitter.

by sycasey on Oct 31, 2011 12:44 PM PDT up reply actions  

Twitter and texting are killing grammar.

by SDBear on Oct 31, 2011 12:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

This.

Cal Football: I loved them once and they broke my heart. Let that be a lesson to you. Never love anything.

by CalBandGreat on Oct 31, 2011 12:47 PM PDT up reply actions  

Corrected:

Ths.

Drinking the Kool-Aid. Pumping the sunshine. Livin' the dream. Go Bears!

by dballisloose on Oct 31, 2011 2:04 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

People used to use terrible grammar in their speech,

now they use terrible grammar in their speech and their writing. Not sure if this actually constitutes a substantive change.

"Let me tell you a story. I was a political prisoner for two years. The instant I was released I ran to McDonald's. I had a Big Mac and a Coke.

It was fantastic."
-Toyama Koichi, US Presidential candidate from Japan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGZqOkeYbB0

by AERose on Oct 31, 2011 6:14 PM PDT up reply actions  

Kids these days tweet like this.

(oh god I’m acting old)

In other words, Go Bears!

by royrules22 on Oct 31, 2011 12:48 PM PDT up reply actions  

I know. I was half-joking, but it still kind of bugs me.

Cal Football: I loved them once and they broke my heart. Let that be a lesson to you. Never love anything.

by CalBandGreat on Oct 31, 2011 12:49 PM PDT up reply actions  

Me too. I bet atoms is going nuts.

In other words, Go Bears!

by royrules22 on Oct 31, 2011 12:52 PM PDT up reply actions  

I’m concerned that Maynard might be Dan Quayle.

"i, for one, welcome our new atomic overlords" - GoldBlooded

by atomsareenough on Oct 31, 2011 4:39 PM PDT up reply actions  

SHIT

In other words, Go Bears!

by royrules22 on Oct 31, 2011 12:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

yeah, man.

no bear, no care

by EchoOfSilence on Oct 31, 2011 12:49 PM PDT up reply actions  

To paraphrase someone, at some time:

“This is all we fucking need.”

Being an Old Blue means never accepting success.

by SoCal Oski on Oct 31, 2011 12:49 PM PDT up reply actions  

Or, put another way...

Cal Football: I loved them once and they broke my heart. Let that be a lesson to you. Never love anything.

by CalBandGreat on Oct 31, 2011 1:21 PM PDT up reply actions  

Roy, is that you?

I nearly said to my wife that something was “boring and therefore sucks” this weekend – which wouldn’t have been too far out of character, but the rueful chuckling afterwards would have puzzled her.

"When the seagulls follow the trawler, it's because they think sardines will be thrown into the sea"

by DC Trojan on Oct 31, 2011 1:59 PM PDT up reply actions  

That guy is way too white to be me

In other words, Go Bears!

by royrules22 on Oct 31, 2011 2:07 PM PDT up reply actions  

Does your wife have any idea how much more time you spend with us than you do with her?

I blame Twist.

by CalBear81 on Oct 31, 2011 2:12 PM PDT up reply actions  

I think she suspects, but most of it is at work (given that my job is to be interrupted) or after she is abed, so she can’t say for sure.

"When the seagulls follow the trawler, it's because they think sardines will be thrown into the sea"

by DC Trojan on Oct 31, 2011 8:38 PM PDT up reply actions  

Gotta look at more?

Gotta look at the conference strength as well when comparisons are made…

And a lot of other coaches have had down years – including traditional powerhouses like Penn State, Georgia, and even the Dark Lord of the Southwest (texas).

We got lucky finding Rodgers, and that made a big difference – has Tedford thought “1st round pick” while watching the first film, about any of the other Cal QB’s? The QB position is huge. I spoke to Terry Edison of De La Salle (my alma mater) before this season, and the only thing he mentioned was “gotta find a QB”. I doesn’t seem like we’ve been able to get the best recruits at that position, even with Tedford’s history…it’s not like we didn’t go after Price and some others.

Gotta take the entire body of work into perspective – especially what Tedford’s done with the academics – and look at the cost of living, lack of facilities, rise of other schools in our conference, ect.

by fuzzywuzzy on Oct 31, 2011 11:14 AM PDT reply actions  

Pac 10-now 12 head coaches

have inproved drastically since JT’s early years. My apologies in advance for the spelling…

Harbaugh/Shaw > Harris
Kelly > Belotti
Wulf = ____
Erickson > Koetter
Mike RIley > _
Nuehaisel = Dorrell?
Kiffin < Carroll
Stoops = _
Sarkesian > Willingham

From my count, I see 5 schools improving their head coaches, 3 schools staying the same, and 1 school worsen.

by truelements on Oct 31, 2011 11:16 AM PDT reply actions  

To complete the blanks

Wulf > Doba, but < Price (WSU has had 3 coaches since Tedford’s been at Cal)

Mike Riley > or = Dennis Erickson (but Cal only faced Erickson-led OSU once during the Tedford era (2002))

Stoops > Mackovic (so UA did improve, just not by a whole heckuva lot)

by Ohio Bear on Oct 31, 2011 12:12 PM PDT up reply actions  

Not a historian, but....

Pappy Waldorf went 29-28-4 after his three straight Rose Bowls. Even the most legendary can eventually fall.

by cal85 on Oct 31, 2011 11:27 AM PDT reply actions  

Pappy Waldorf’s first five years (1948-1952): 44-8-1
Pappy Waldorf’s last four years (1953-1956): 14-23-3

One reason, though, is that the NCAA changed the rules in 1953 to ban unlimited player substitutions (and thus go back to the pre-World War II rules). This undermined Waldorf’s entire system.

I blame Twist.

by CalBear81 on Oct 31, 2011 12:23 PM PDT up reply actions  

I honestly don’t know why the NCAA changed the substitution rules so dramatically in 1953 to go back to the old, very limited substitution rules. It seems strange. And I’m sure it affected a lot of coaches. But a coach like Waldorf, who had figured out how to use unlimited substitutions to such great success, suffered more than most.

I blame Twist.

by CalBear81 on Oct 31, 2011 12:34 PM PDT up reply actions  

Oops, I omitted 1947. So it’s even more dramatic:

Waldorf’s first six years (1947-1952): 53-9-1
Pappy Waldorf’s last four years (1953-1956): 14-23-3

I blame Twist.

by CalBear81 on Oct 31, 2011 12:38 PM PDT up reply actions  

Great Post

I remember being in Sproul Plaza in 03 and people selling tye-die t-shirts that read “Tedhead” with a picture of Tedford and being so excited for the future and grateful to have Tedford as our HC.

I miss that sort of excitement around Cal football and Jeff Tedford.

by SDBear on Oct 31, 2011 11:34 AM PDT reply actions  

I still see those shirts at games.

"Fuck DOOOOOM. We prefer BOOOOOM!! - alpha1906

by golden oso on Oct 31, 2011 12:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

Really? I haven’t seen those shirts in a long while. That or I have selective memory.

by puresilence on Oct 31, 2011 12:47 PM PDT up reply actions  

Here and there and maybe only one- but I do see them.

"Fuck DOOOOOM. We prefer BOOOOOM!! - alpha1906

by golden oso on Oct 31, 2011 12:55 PM PDT up reply actions  

Ive seen them, too

In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It

by TwistNHook on Oct 31, 2011 1:19 PM PDT up reply actions  

Senior Leadership?

Here’s a theory. . . could the down years be correlated with a lack of senior leadership? I posted this on another thread, but it doesn’t seem like there’s much leadership in our current crop (perhaps due to the fact that our best athletes tend to be younger players).

by slaphancock on Oct 31, 2011 11:40 AM PDT reply actions  

This has been an issue for many years. In addition to the QB situation in 2007, that was the same year that fans started calling out the players for lack of player leadership on and off the field.

Drinking the Kool-Aid. Pumping the sunshine. Livin' the dream. Go Bears!

by dballisloose on Oct 31, 2011 2:07 PM PDT up reply actions  

Maybe this is automatically the case when your QB is not very good. Without decent performance on the field, the QB can’t be a decent leader because he has no base of strength to stand on.

by YleeXOtee on Oct 31, 2011 6:05 PM PDT up reply actions  

Also see a developing bunker mentality?

No, I do not expect Tedford to dump on his players, and undermine their confidence in public. However one of the things we have always given him credit for, is his integity, and the integrity of our school. I could not help seeing this game in the context of the recent data on graduation rates that put us 11/12. Right after, I e-mailed the athletic department for an explanation, and so far nothing but silence both for me and in the release of something for public consumption. Maybe it does not make sense to most, but the performances of the last few years become even more intollerable if we are not at least maintaining our status as the World’s #1 Public University, even for its football players. We deserve a response on both issues, and although I will continue to support both the program and the University, a little openness would help me with my current sense of doom.

by GoldenBear 77 on Oct 31, 2011 11:40 AM PDT reply actions  

I always remember a comparison of Tedford to...

Utah’s Ron McBride. He took them so far, became their winningest coach, but then stepped aside for Urban Meyer.

Lawrence Ross

by alpha1906 on Oct 31, 2011 11:41 AM PDT reply actions  

Or....

….Ben Braun. Or Dan Hawkins at Boise State.

by ososdeoro on Oct 31, 2011 1:38 PM PDT up reply actions  

Tedford Quote

“I have no idea before the game if they (the team) are ready or not,” Tedford said. “I’ve given up on that because sometimes you think they are really ready and they’re not. And other times they’re quiet and you think, ‘These guys got to get ready!’ And they play great.”

Did Tedford always feel this way? Is this a really really bad quote to hear from your head coach, or does every coach actually feel this way before a game?

My friends and I used to start Tedford chants in the stands during ‘02, ’03, ’04…how far we’ve come.

by TJDJ on Oct 31, 2011 11:41 AM PDT reply actions  

As far as examples of coaches having early success only to regress I would add Ralph Fr

2001

10–2

2002
 
11–3
 
2003
 
10–3

2004
 
5–6

2005
 
5–6
 
2006
 
9–4
 
2007
 
6–7

2008
 
8–5

2009
 
2–10
 
2010
 
9–4

by SDBear on Oct 31, 2011 11:42 AM PDT reply actions  

This was Ralph Friedgens record at Maryland

Like Tedford he had a lot of early success and then hit a slump but was able to somewhat right the ship before he was forced out.

by SDBear on Oct 31, 2011 11:43 AM PDT up reply actions  

And now w/out Fridge they are terrible. Lots of unhappy folks in College Park.

by dcblue on Oct 31, 2011 12:02 PM PDT up reply actions  

True, Maryland is not very good this year but you can’t really judge a new coach by his first season. Was Randy Edsall the right hire? We will know in a another couple of years.

by SDBear on Oct 31, 2011 12:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

I still think that there’s a natural ceiling for football at Maryland, and perhaps their Athletic Department will reach that conclusion eventually. It’s not that there aren’t decent players in what I’d call the “backyard” area – Maryland, DC, and northern VA – but that they have better choices not just in the ACC but further afield as well.

"When the seagulls follow the trawler, it's because they think sardines will be thrown into the sea"

by DC Trojan on Oct 31, 2011 12:32 PM PDT up reply actions  

It's not you, it's me.

For all that Tedford says about changing things each year, we haven’t changed much. Sure, we have different position coaches and whatnot, but we still run a pro-style offense and a 3-4 defense (that may have been 4-3 in 2003-05; i can’t remember).

The Pac-12 and college football in general has changed. Look at the top of the conference. Back in 03-05, it was USC, running a pro-style offense with the best talent at each position. Now, it’s Oregon, running the spread to perfection with good, but not necessarily great, talent at each position. We ran a similar system to USC with good players and were able to compete. But we can’t compete with the spread and pistol and other gimmicky offenses.

by Oski4Heisman on Oct 31, 2011 11:58 AM PDT reply actions  

kind of like the quote: “the more things change, the more they stay the same”……..

by Cal_Fan2 on Oct 31, 2011 12:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

I don’t think the scheme is the problem. You can win with a pro style if you play it well. The problem is that Tedford clearly isn’t getting his guys to play to that level anymore.

by sycasey on Oct 31, 2011 12:18 PM PDT up reply actions  

Insightful.

Drinking the Kool-Aid. Pumping the sunshine. Livin' the dream. Go Bears!

by dballisloose on Oct 31, 2011 2:09 PM PDT up reply actions  

You can win with pro style

See Stanf*rd Cardinal.

See, also, Cal 2004.

Thing is, I think we CAN, theoretically, compete with “gimmicky” offenses. In fact, I have thought being a pro-style offense is a good recruiting tool.

by Ohio Bear on Oct 31, 2011 12:23 PM PDT up reply actions  

no resemblance

between Stanfurd’s “pro-style” and Cal’s. When is the last time you saw 7 down linemen for Cal?

Furd plays straight-ahead run-oriented smashmouth. Cal plays a multiple-look interception-oriented mushmouth.

by slaphancock on Oct 31, 2011 12:43 PM PDT up reply actions  

Do not forget

That we played that way before they did.

no bear, no care

by EchoOfSilence on Oct 31, 2011 12:44 PM PDT up reply actions  

Regardless

The point isn’t whether our pro style is the same as theirs. I was just responding the point that we needed to go pistol or spread to succeed. I don’t think we do.

by Ohio Bear on Oct 31, 2011 4:23 PM PDT up reply actions  

I see your point, and mine is only that we’ve already made the switch, or are somewhere in the middle of making it. We “incorporated” elements of the spread when Dunbar came. He left, yet we’ve still got a spread look. We’ve run the pistol several times this year.

I totally agree that we don’t need to go pistol or spread. In fact, I think that it is our half-hearted attempts to do so that have ruined what used to be a pro-style offense.

by slaphancock on Nov 1, 2011 10:57 AM PDT up reply actions  

So what?

They do it better than we did. Lots of team played pro style before us – would they like a cookie for it?

by Yogi Bear on Nov 1, 2011 12:17 AM PDT up reply actions  

yeah....

….Furd’s O is more like Snyder’s.

by ososdeoro on Oct 31, 2011 1:43 PM PDT up reply actions  

Cal plays a multiple-look interception-oriented mushmouth.

I LOL’d

Drinking the Kool-Aid. Pumping the sunshine. Livin' the dream. Go Bears!

by dballisloose on Oct 31, 2011 2:12 PM PDT up reply actions  

In fact, I have thought being a pro-style offense is a good recruiting tool.

100% agree, we have shown that you can play your way into the pros at Cal, and this is a big part of it.

Am I known as Cugel the Clever for nothing?

by Cugel on Oct 31, 2011 12:44 PM PDT up reply actions  

We switched to 3-4 in 2008. It was a big deal and worked out great for us (I believe only 2 teams really scored against us: Mich St and OSU)

In other words, Go Bears!

by royrules22 on Oct 31, 2011 12:50 PM PDT up reply actions  

Take out OSU (two ST touchdowns) and add Maryland and Arizona.

"Let me tell you a story. I was a political prisoner for two years. The instant I was released I ran to McDonald's. I had a Big Mac and a Coke.

It was fantastic."
-Toyama Koichi, US Presidential candidate from Japan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGZqOkeYbB0

by AERose on Oct 31, 2011 6:27 PM PDT up reply actions  

Whoops I forgot those two games. With good reason

In other words, Go Bears!

by royrules22 on Oct 31, 2011 10:41 PM PDT up reply actions  

Seriously in hindsight I am amazed that ALAMAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAR didn't get fired for that OSU game.

"Let me tell you a story. I was a political prisoner for two years. The instant I was released I ran to McDonald's. I had a Big Mac and a Coke.

It was fantastic."
-Toyama Koichi, US Presidential candidate from Japan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGZqOkeYbB0

by AERose on Oct 31, 2011 11:32 PM PDT up reply actions  

THERE IS NO SUCH THING AS A GIMMICK OFFENSE.

Holy shit I hate that talking point. The I-formation was a gimmick offense 50 years ago, but hey, it’s all any of the sportswriters and pundits of today have ever known so everything else must be a gimmick huh!?

I am yet to hear or read a single convincing explanation as to why one offense is “gimmicky” and another is “traditional.”

"Let me tell you a story. I was a political prisoner for two years. The instant I was released I ran to McDonald's. I had a Big Mac and a Coke.

It was fantastic."
-Toyama Koichi, US Presidential candidate from Japan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGZqOkeYbB0

by AERose on Oct 31, 2011 6:26 PM PDT up reply actions  

How about "pro-style’?

Am I known as Cugel the Clever for nothing?

by Cugel on Oct 31, 2011 6:48 PM PDT up reply actions  

What about it?

"Let me tell you a story. I was a political prisoner for two years. The instant I was released I ran to McDonald's. I had a Big Mac and a Coke.

It was fantastic."
-Toyama Koichi, US Presidential candidate from Japan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGZqOkeYbB0

by AERose on Oct 31, 2011 6:56 PM PDT up reply actions  

I think that’s what they mean when they say Traditional, gimmicky is everything else.

Am I known as Cugel the Clever for nothing?

by Cugel on Oct 31, 2011 6:58 PM PDT up reply actions  

I'm like, 99% certain Pappy Waldorf would look at any of this stuff and think to himself

“what the fuck is this shit?” So, you know, perspective.

"Let me tell you a story. I was a political prisoner for two years. The instant I was released I ran to McDonald's. I had a Big Mac and a Coke.

It was fantastic."
-Toyama Koichi, US Presidential candidate from Japan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGZqOkeYbB0

by AERose on Oct 31, 2011 7:04 PM PDT up reply actions  

Garrett Cochran would be appalled at the spectacle of players throwing the ball forward. Quoth Coach Cochran: “WTF is that?!?!” The reply from Charles Pringle? “LOL.”

I blame Twist.

by CalBear81 on Oct 31, 2011 7:14 PM PDT up reply actions  

ANDY SMITH DOES NOT APPROVE OF THIS OFFENSIVE RECKLESSNESS

Besides, a real man can get to 70 points just by kicking and waiting for the breaks.

"Let me tell you a story. I was a political prisoner for two years. The instant I was released I ran to McDonald's. I had a Big Mac and a Coke.

It was fantastic."
-Toyama Koichi, US Presidential candidate from Japan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGZqOkeYbB0

by AERose on Oct 31, 2011 7:21 PM PDT up reply actions  

Obviously you have to consider context

Yes, the forward pass was “gimmicky” at one point. And no, I’m not talking about what was conventional vs. gimmicky in 1949.

by Oski4Heisman on Nov 1, 2011 1:30 PM PDT up reply actions  

The context is "I have made an arbitrary decision that this offense is platonically ideal and this offense is a gimmick."

That’s the context.

Shit, I wonder how all those wishbone option teams of the 60s-80s won all those national championships with such gimmick offenses? Texas, Oklahoma, and Notre Dame fans must have been just ashamed to see their coaches reduced to such tricks.

"Let me tell you a story. I was a political prisoner for two years. The instant I was released I ran to McDonald's. I had a Big Mac and a Coke.

It was fantastic."
-Toyama Koichi, US Presidential candidate from Japan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGZqOkeYbB0

by AERose on Nov 1, 2011 1:40 PM PDT up reply actions  

George Cortez?

He left after 2006, and he was the OC and QB coach.
Notice what problems we have had since then?

Not saying Tedford shouldn’t get any blame, he allowed everything to slide since then. But I’m just saying Tedford by himself maybe isn’t the offensive mastermind we all think he is when he has coordinators that don’t click, and it looks like we have not had one since at least Frank Cignetti in 2008, where we still did at least decent enough to get 8 regular season wins.

"Today's weather, excessively violent with a chance of dismemberment. Tune in later for our 5-day forecast!"
~ Three Dog - Fallout 3

by Swamphunter on Oct 31, 2011 12:04 PM PDT reply actions  

The Cortez years

Tedford was also the primary (if not only) play caller during those years and was very hands-on with coaching the quarterbacks.

by Ohio Bear on Oct 31, 2011 12:16 PM PDT up reply actions  

I thought he might be getting back to that this year, but lately it seems maybe not?

by sycasey on Oct 31, 2011 12:19 PM PDT up reply actions  

And here we are in 2011 with Tedford essentially by himself with the offense. Coach M should stay with just the o-line, because his coordination on offense has not improved anything.

"Today's weather, excessively violent with a chance of dismemberment. Tune in later for our 5-day forecast!"
~ Three Dog - Fallout 3

by Swamphunter on Oct 31, 2011 12:22 PM PDT via mobile up reply actions  

Tedford is by himself? I thought it was more of a committee thing with Tedford, Kiesau, and Michalczik?

"i, for one, welcome our new atomic overlords" - GoldBlooded

by atomsareenough on Oct 31, 2011 4:51 PM PDT up reply actions  

A “committee” makes it sound even worse.

"Today's weather, excessively violent with a chance of dismemberment. Tune in later for our 5-day forecast!"
~ Three Dog - Fallout 3

by Swamphunter on Oct 31, 2011 11:25 PM PDT up reply actions  

Perhaps it is worse.

"i, for one, welcome our new atomic overlords" - GoldBlooded

by atomsareenough on Nov 1, 2011 2:31 PM PDT up reply actions  

No bowl game please

The feeling I had after the UCLA loss was pretty much how I felt after Washington last year. A decent performance…hell…even a mediocre performance at QB and we win easily. I had no stomach last year to go to the post-season and embarass ourselves. Last year our season ended with a quiet little disaster at Berkeley that nobody paid attention to. It spared us from getting blown out by Nebraska in the 2010 Holiday Bowl. So…lets say we barely beat both OSU and Wazzu (which is not even a greater than 50 percent change IMO), we go on to get shellacked by some team on national tv.

Though I am a bitter Tedford supporter, I suppose the fact that I don’t want to even be in a bowl speaks to something I can’t bear to acknowledge.

by Glanko on Oct 31, 2011 12:15 PM PDT reply actions  

A bowl game means 15 extra practice days, something this team desperately needs for 2012.

Inspiring and completing since1997 since2010!

by Fire Starkey on Oct 31, 2011 12:19 PM PDT up reply actions  

Not to mention the added $$$.

no bear, no care

by EchoOfSilence on Oct 31, 2011 12:37 PM PDT up reply actions  

A low level bowl isn't going to earn Cal much additional money and

A low level bowl isn’t going to earn Cal much additional money, in fact it might end up costing Cal money.

A bowl game is a nice vacation/reward for the players, especially the seniors and additional practice for the younger guys.

by SDBear on Oct 31, 2011 12:45 PM PDT up reply actions  

Bowls are really important for practices and recruiting

Cal set up almost all of their recruiting visits during bowl practices

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by CBKWit on Oct 31, 2011 1:31 PM PDT up reply actions  

oops

Can you guys come to Big Game instead? DOUBLE OOPS

WE ARE ZOONEWS

by zoonews on Oct 31, 2011 1:33 PM PDT up reply actions  

I agree that it is important for practices

I didn’t think about the recruiting but you are right that Cal does set up recruiting visits during bowl practice.

I was just trying to make a point that a low level bowl game isn’t going to get you much, if any money at all.

by SDBear on Oct 31, 2011 1:48 PM PDT up reply actions  

i think it will likely lose you money

Deposed (and recently graduated!) #1 Indian

by boomtho on Oct 31, 2011 1:49 PM PDT up reply actions  

The Pac-12 pools the bowl money, I believe, so it doesn’t actually lose anyone money.

by sycasey on Oct 31, 2011 1:59 PM PDT up reply actions  

There is some baseline expectation of selling seats that must be covered by the school if it is not met, iirc.

n.b. -- This comment does not constitute official chemistry advice.

by sec119 on Oct 31, 2011 2:02 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yup, usually schools are required to purchase a block of tickets that they then resell to their fans. However, the per-ticket price for those blocks is usually much higher than the stubhub prices… which means that (often) much of those blocks go unsold.

Plus, there’s travel expenses (not insignificant), coaching bonuses, and other misc. ones that can really add up — UConn lost something like $1.8M on their BCS bowl

Deposed (and recently graduated!) #1 Indian

by boomtho on Oct 31, 2011 2:28 PM PDT up reply actions  

what if we go to emerald kraft fight emerald hunger emerald bowl?

Remember, the enemy's end zone is DOWN!

by GoldBlooded on Oct 31, 2011 4:19 PM PDT up reply actions  

That would be odd – but would probably sell well, I’d know I’d go.

Am I known as Cugel the Clever for nothing?

by Cugel on Oct 31, 2011 4:21 PM PDT up reply actions  

would we lose money? i figure we might draw better there, i am asking for opinions

Remember, the enemy's end zone is DOWN!

by GoldBlooded on Oct 31, 2011 4:22 PM PDT up reply actions  

We would make money I’m fairly certain it’d be a sell-out.

Am I known as Cugel the Clever for nothing?

by Cugel on Oct 31, 2011 4:23 PM PDT up reply actions  

Also: no travel expenses.

I blame Twist.

by CalBear81 on Oct 31, 2011 4:27 PM PDT up reply actions  

totes mcgotes

Remember, the enemy's end zone is DOWN!

by GoldBlooded on Oct 31, 2011 4:28 PM PDT up reply actions  

Cal is playing UCLA in hoops at Haas that day. I’d rather watch that to be honest.

by Avinash Kunnath on Oct 31, 2011 8:45 PM PDT up reply actions  

Not based on the results this year

Practicing more doesn’t seem to be helping much

by Yogi Bear on Nov 1, 2011 12:20 AM PDT up reply actions  

I don’t get it. I thought we didn’t go to a bowl game last year and therefore didn’t get those 15 extra days of practice.

n.b. -- This comment does not constitute official chemistry advice.

by sec119 on Nov 1, 2011 9:25 AM PDT up reply actions  

I agree with the post as well.

Interestingly, you can pinpoint when the exact moment when the program turned — 13th of August, 2007, against OSU, when Riley, well meaningly, ran the clock out when he should have thrown the ball away. Cal football still has not recovered. I still wonder if the program would be totally different today if he just threw the ball out of bounds.
In another post, they were talking about bringing in a psychologist. ABSOLUTELY! There is some issue with this team about winning. What happened? Clearly in 2007 we had talent out the wazoo, but we managed to lose almost all the remaining games! There is some kind of diabolical self sabotage here. It continues to this day, I believe.

I love Tedford for all he has done. It’s hard for me to want him to leave. I’m hoping he can some how turn it around, at least next season, and win 8 or 9 games…. But, if he can’t, after next season, it’s getting to be time to look around at other coaches…

by minical on Oct 31, 2011 12:30 PM PDT reply actions  

That’s also the moment that Tedford first lost it and threw his headset. I’ve seen his headset on the ground several times THIS year!

Tedford needs to get back his zen.

by slaphancock on Oct 31, 2011 12:45 PM PDT up reply actions  

I am relatively certain we did not play a football game on the 13th of August, 2007.

by Scootie on Oct 31, 2011 7:36 PM PDT up reply actions  

It was one of those that was played in secret.

I blame Twist.

by CalBear81 on Oct 31, 2011 7:45 PM PDT up reply actions  

I believe that I have a possible answer to the question posed in the original post.

The answer is: Aaron Rodgers and Desean Jackson (and to a lesser extent Marshawn Lynch).

All three are once in a generation (possibly once in a lifetime) college players. One could soon enter the discussion of best QB’s EVER in the history of football (with a couple more SB wins). The other is easily one of the top 5 WR’s in the league. When you have talent like that, maybe the question isn’t ‘why isn’t tedford good anymore." Maybe the question really should be, “was Tedford EVER actually any good?”

by ryandrew on Oct 31, 2011 12:37 PM PDT reply actions  

What Tedford was able to accomplish his first two seasons with Holmoes players

as well as what he accomplished as the OC at Oregon proves that Tedford was in fact a very good coach.

by SDBear on Oct 31, 2011 12:40 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

I’m not saying you’re wrong. However, to be fair, all you have proven is that Tedford is a better coach than Holmoe. Its not like Tedford had nothing to work with. Boller and Namdi were both 1st rounders.

Also he was a good OC at Oregon, which only proves is a good OC. Doesn’t show he was ever a good head coach.

While I don’t believe that Holmoe could have led the 2004 team to anything. I think its possible that a mediocre head coach (lets say Paul Wulff) could have had 10 wins with the 2004 team as well.

by ryandrew on Oct 31, 2011 1:04 PM PDT up reply actions  

Boller was a first rounder because of Tedford, without Tedford he might have been a late round pick

No doubt Boller had first round talent and arm strength but he was as inconsistent as Maynard is now. However, under Tedfords coaching he blossomed.

I am sorry but Wulff hasn’t shown any signs that he could have won 10 games with the 04 squad. Tedford was a great head coach at Cal during that four year run.

A mediocre coach would have lost at least two more games in 04 and would not have been 10 yards away from beating SC.

Don’t let Tedfords current failures cloud your judgement he was a very good coach and offensive mind during his early years at Cal.

by SDBear on Oct 31, 2011 1:11 PM PDT up reply actions  

Yeah, we shouldn’t forget how terrible Boller was from 1999 to 2001. He was no Aaron Rodgers in 2002, but he was light years better than he’d been the rest of his career.

by Ohio Bear on Oct 31, 2011 4:26 PM PDT up reply actions  

I met a manager at work who went to Cal during Boller's time.

His exact quote: “Before Tedford, Boller was so bad that we would kick him out of our parties”

The dude was a forestry major.

Deposed (and recently graduated!) #1 Indian

by boomtho on Oct 31, 2011 4:28 PM PDT up reply actions  

nothing wrong with being a forestry major. that means he loves chopping down trees.

Remember, the enemy's end zone is DOWN!

by GoldBlooded on Oct 31, 2011 4:29 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

Thank you.

In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It

by TwistNHook on Oct 31, 2011 1:22 PM PDT up reply actions  

Maybe the question really should be, "was Tedford EVER actually any good?"

This does not strike me as a reasonable question.

In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It

by TwistNHook on Oct 31, 2011 1:22 PM PDT up reply actions  

I think you have to define “good coach.” In my book, I think a “good coach” is someone who extracts more wins than expected from the available talent. An example is Coach Montgomery, who has proven he’s a good coach. For every year he’s been here, I believe that he’s extracted more wins than expected from the available talent. Especially last year. But what year could you say that Tedford had a similar year to Coach montgomery? 2004? no way, not when you have AR. 2006? you still have a ton of talent on that year’s team. A team that, you could argue, a better head coach could have taken to a rose bowl. 2008? no. the closest season is 2003, and that’s only because expectations were already super low (but the talent level was probably actually pretty high that year).

so really, how many years has tedford actually exceeded his talent level, and how many years as he performed worse than his talent level.

by ryandrew on Oct 31, 2011 1:50 PM PDT up reply actions  

All I know is this. If peple are going to state that the buck stops with Tedford (which it does) and thus the execution errors on the field are transmuted up to him (which I agree they do), then conversly the execution successes on the field should be transmuted up to him.

When we go 5-7, Tedford is a bad coach. I get that. But when we go 11-2 or whatever, thus, TEdford is a good coach. Thats my approach at least. Simplistic, perhaps, but Im a simplistic person

In the Game of Trolls, you either troll or you die.
CaliforniaGoldenBlogs: Read It | Follow It | Like It | Wear It

by TwistNHook on Oct 31, 2011 1:59 PM PDT up reply actions  

I don’t necessarily agree with that. I’m sure there are a lot of people who just look at the Wins and losses and say that Tedford sucks. however, I look at how much “supposed” talent the team has, whether we are improving or regressing, how many stupid mistakes we make, are we making in-game adjustments, how is the gameplan, etc. And I think with all those points, Tedford is disappointing.

Lets look at Montgomery again. He had, what many would possibly see, as a down year last year. You could probably argue that an NIT bid is equivalent to a minor bowl. But, I would argue, and I believe Montgomery himself said this, but last year was one of the best coaching jobs he has done in his entire career. So not all Cal fans are stupid. We don’t just all look at wins and losses. Montgomery only got to the NIT last year, but that was one of my favorite basketball teams of all time. Last year’s team didn’t have a ton of talent, but gave maximum effort and didn’t make stupid mistakes. thats reflective of coaching. the same cannot be said for this year’s football team.

so to answer your question, I don’t think Tedford is a bad coach because of his record. I think you can have a pretty mediocre record and still be a good coach. But there are other things wrong with the program than just the win-loss record.

by ryandrew on Oct 31, 2011 2:07 PM PDT up reply actions  

but gave maximum effort and didn’t make stupid mistakes

Gary Franklin just bricked a contested 30 footer :)

Deposed (and recently graduated!) #1 Indian

by boomtho on Oct 31, 2011 2:29 PM PDT up reply actions  

…for Baylor! :)

"i, for one, welcome our new atomic overlords" - GoldBlooded

by atomsareenough on Oct 31, 2011 5:00 PM PDT up reply actions  

AR 2011 >>>>>> AR 2004. Sure, he was talented, but it’s not really the best comparison.

n.b. -- This comment does not constitute official chemistry advice.

by sec119 on Oct 31, 2011 2:03 PM PDT up reply actions  

AR would have never accomplished anything in the league if he hadn't improved after college.

No successful pro football player maxes out in college.

"Let me tell you a story. I was a political prisoner for two years. The instant I was released I ran to McDonald's. I had a Big Mac and a Coke.

It was fantastic."
-Toyama Koichi, US Presidential candidate from Japan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGZqOkeYbB0

by AERose on Oct 31, 2011 6:31 PM PDT up reply actions  

How many times

do people say that the coach is also responsible for RECRUITING and DEVELOPING talent? JT recruited Rodgers. He recruited Marshawn Lynch and DeSean Jackson and most of the other awesome players from the glory years. Therefore, he gets credit for the W-L records of those teams REGARDLESS of talent level. It makes no sense to discount the good years because Tedford brought in more talented players in order to achieve those good years. The measure of a head coach is the total package, not some slice of it.

That said, it is also true that Tedford exceeded expectations with the given talent level as soon as he arrived, so even by that (very limited) measure you’d have to admit that he was once good.

by sycasey on Oct 31, 2011 2:04 PM PDT up reply actions  

I would agree that Tedford did a great job recruiting those players. But just relying on recruiting elite players is not a sustainable model. If Tedford was able to bring in that type of talent every year, then I’d be all for Tedford remaining as head coach. But what happens when the recruits aren’t quite that good (like in 2007?) Well, 2011 happens.

Lavin was an elite recruiter as well. He went to numerous sweet sixteens. I don’t think anyone argued he was a good coach.

by ryandrew on Oct 31, 2011 2:13 PM PDT up reply actions  

If Tedford produces years like 2004 and 2006, I don’t care if he got them by recruiting or coaching up bad players or whatever. What he did was working.

The problem now is that it isn’t working, regardless of the method. I just think it’s silly to say that he wasn’t doing a good job before because “the players were too good.” Maybe he helped make them good, like a coach is supposed to do?

by sycasey on Oct 31, 2011 4:10 PM PDT up reply actions  

exactly right
How many times

do people say that the coach is also responsible for RECRUITING and DEVELOPING talent? JT recruited Rodgers. He recruited Marshawn Lynch and DeSean Jackson and most of the other awesome players from the glory years. Therefore, he gets credit for the W-L records of those teams REGARDLESS of talent level. It makes no sense to discount the good years because Tedford brought in more talented players in order to achieve those good years. The measure of a head coach is the total package, not some slice of it.

It is coaching AND recruiting. Monty is good at the “coaching” part of it (great at it!) but our recruiting has been shitty. It is not fair to commend him for getting 3rd in the PAC because the players HE RECRUITS are not nearly as talented as many other teams in the league. It’s the total package, not just one side or the other.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by CBKWit on Oct 31, 2011 2:21 PM PDT up reply actions  

I agree with that. coaching and recruiting are both important. and in a perfect world, you have a coach who excels at both. but if I were to choose between one or the other, I chose the coach who can coach and not the coach who can recruit. for one, i think recruiting can be cyclical. two, recruiting can be pure luck (AR). but if you got a coach who can coach and develop players (like montgomery) at the very least, year in and year out you’re going to be competitive. and even without elite talent, you can win the league (like montgomery has a chance to do this year). and what happens when Montgomery gets truly elite talent (which i think is only a matter of time). bottom line is that i don’t think there’s any question is who is the better coach between montgomery and tedford (despite montgomery’s apparent recruiting deficiencies)

by ryandrew on Oct 31, 2011 2:38 PM PDT up reply actions  

I’d argue that one facet of his recruiting deficiencies is his reluctance to chase the “one and done” guys. He wants guys who will stick around in the program, which necessarily leads to a lower caliber of recruit. On the other hand… those guys as 3rd/4th years should be more effective than the latest, greatest one and done.

Or so we hope!

Deposed (and recently graduated!) #1 Indian

by boomtho on Oct 31, 2011 2:39 PM PDT up reply actions  

I think the model is similar to Duke, as opposed to Kentucky

Am I known as Cugel the Clever for nothing?

by Cugel on Oct 31, 2011 2:48 PM PDT up reply actions  

which I love btw… I love getting to watch our players develop and get better over time, I love watching them learn how to play “Monty basketball.”

In Monty I trust.

Deposed (and recently graduated!) #1 Indian

by boomtho on Oct 31, 2011 2:49 PM PDT up reply actions  

completely agree

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by CBKWit on Oct 31, 2011 4:17 PM PDT up reply actions  

I agree with you

but again, he gets assessed on how his teams do, not how they do relative to their talent. If we’re stuck in 4th or 5th place year in and year out (when Braun would have been in 9th or 10th), that is still not good enough. I hope our bball program will consistently challenge for the conference title, and if they do, I don’t really care who Monty recruits. But if he doesn’t achieve those results, he should be held accountable.

www.californiagoldenblogs.com

by CBKWit on Oct 31, 2011 4:20 PM PDT up reply actions  

In basketball, I choose the guy who can coach, because the top recruits tend to leave for the NBA in one-two years anyway. You can coach and develop average recruits in two-three years in college into solid college players.

In football, I choose the guy who can recruit. Mack is probably one of the least innovative coaches in the country, but he’s the greatest recruiter amongst them all who owns the greatest recruiting state of them all, and it keeps Texas winning 8-10 games a year.

It’s why while the current situation sucks at Cal, it isn’t untenable because recruiting looks good. Probably the best it’s ever been.

by Avinash Kunnath on Oct 31, 2011 8:51 PM PDT up reply actions  

But what year could you say that Tedford had a similar year to Coach montgomery?

2002, 2003, and 2008.

by Ohio Bear on Oct 31, 2011 4:27 PM PDT up reply actions  

It’s an interesting metric to calculate wins over or below expected talent. It seems particular relevant for basketball with 5 guy on the court at any time. However, I think its less knowable for football. I believe you could have some considerable talent on defense, and still have a team that can not be expected to win much. You could have talent at some positions on offense, and still have a team not expected to win much. The QB is too important. The QB play raises and lowers all the “talent” of the other players. Auburn had talent, but no Natty if they don’t have $Cam Newtwon.

by YleeXOtee on Oct 31, 2011 8:39 PM PDT up reply actions  

I was mad last season, and probably the season before, but it’s reached the point where sadness is the predominate feeling. After ruminating on the situation a bit over the weekend, the closest analogy I could think of is that it’s like watching a parent or grandparent you love start to show their age and appear less coherent. You have fond memories of them from your childhood, but the stark reality of their decline keeps staring you in the face. Where the analogy breaks down is that Tedford and Co can still turn things around, but they’re running out of time.

by minesweeper on Oct 31, 2011 11:21 PM PDT up reply actions  

This is exactly why I'm hesitant to blame Tedford
But mostly, I’ll just be sad. Sad because the promise that I wholeheartedly believed in is gone. Sad because somebody who was instrumental in some of my best memories has become a punch line and a punching bag. Sad because a good man, someone who understands Berkeley, who ran every non-football aspect of the program almost exactly as I’d want, may be forced to leave, and not on his own terms.

In other words, Go Bears!

by royrules22 on Oct 31, 2011 12:44 PM PDT reply actions  

yes on this. the non-football aspect of the program is, in my book, the most important aspect.

I really don’t care if we have losing seasons (though I don’t prefer that), as long as we have institutional integrity and that the team represents our school well. Hell, I’d be fine losing all our scholarships, competing in the Ivy League, and losing yearly to Yale as long as we could say we had smart, tough, proud athletes.

Tedford has mostly steered the program the right way. I just worry that in the past few years, more pressure has been put on winning and out-recruiting rather than maintaining a stable of successful student-athletes who are benefiting from Cal’s academics. That stat about graduation rate is scary and dispiriting. What happened to “our domecile”?

by slaphancock on Oct 31, 2011 1:07 PM PDT up reply actions  

That recently publicized stat was of one class: 2004 entrants. So, while disappointing, it is only one data point. Unless you are referring to something else. In which case, oh noes.

WE ARE ZOONEWS

by zoonews on Oct 31, 2011 1:12 PM PDT up reply actions  

I hadn’t realized that. So it’s an anomaly? I hope so!

by slaphancock on Oct 31, 2011 1:31 PM PDT up reply actions  

Ya, we all are. Someone had a number for the following class and it was much more middle-of-the-Pac, iwrc. Which still, yeah, but not bottom end of the nation like that number was.

WE ARE ZOONEWS

by zoonews on Oct 31, 2011 1:35 PM PDT up reply actions  

Cupboard

We have barely anyone from 2009 playing right now. 2008 isn’t considered the best class, but its servicable to a point. Our best players/play makers are 2010 and 2011 entries. Hopefully, momentum for our 2012 class doesn’t suffer too much. But the face plants of 2008 and 2009 in terms of recruiting are killing us at the moment. 2007 is our last decent class, and we’re at the end of the line for those guys – the next two years will be rough, but it will be fantastic if the recruiting picks up like it has.

by Shadwhand on Oct 31, 2011 1:41 PM PDT reply actions  

totally this.

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 31, 2011 1:46 PM PDT up reply actions  

Expanding further on it – I blame Tedford having the shitty classes in 2008 and 2009. Talent acquisition and evaluation is something he needs to be doing. And it seems like he’s turned it around and made sure we’ve managed to be in the face of/grab some of the top talent around.

Its why even though we’ve sucked it up on gamedays, there’s a distinct reason why we sometimes look out-talented, even by “bad teams”. Recruiting rankings are a farce in some ways, but they still indicate something. It just seemed like a huge problem for those years. I justified us not getting great classes by thinking that Tedford could coach them up, but its obvious that talent and attitude are requireed before you can really coach up players into great ones.

by Shadwhand on Oct 31, 2011 1:56 PM PDT up reply actions  

… treesitters didn’t really help.

n.b. -- This comment does not constitute official chemistry advice.

by sec119 on Oct 31, 2011 2:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

Especially Dumpster Muffin.

by oskiwow on Oct 31, 2011 2:10 PM PDT up reply actions  

You’re right, I always forget about the treesitters.

by Shadwhand on Oct 31, 2011 2:12 PM PDT up reply actions  

Saturday's a'comin'

Meanwhile, Wazzou is hiding in the weeds, ready to pounce.

by manus on Oct 31, 2011 1:45 PM PDT reply actions  

ok I chuckled.

no bear, no care

by EchoOfSilence on Oct 31, 2011 2:02 PM PDT up reply actions  

lolol

n.b. -- This comment does not constitute official chemistry advice.

by sec119 on Oct 31, 2011 2:08 PM PDT up reply actions  

pringle

Being an Old Blue means never accepting success.

by SoCal Oski on Oct 31, 2011 2:12 PM PDT up reply actions  

“The bear is barely alive and on dialysis.”

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 31, 2011 2:17 PM PDT up reply actions  

Oh wow, we put that in our Starkey translator and it said TOUCHDOWN BEARS!!! YAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAYAY!!!!!

WE ARE ZOONEWS

by zoonews on Oct 31, 2011 2:18 PM PDT up reply actions  

In the later Kapp years it was: “The Bear is in hibernation.”

I blame Twist.

by CalBear81 on Oct 31, 2011 2:36 PM PDT up reply actions  

The Bear Will Not Quit Unless Asked Politely.

The Bear Will Probably Die.

by slaphancock on Oct 31, 2011 2:20 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

Also for consideration: “Sometimes even Bears get tired and they are mortal, after all”

by oskiwow on Oct 31, 2011 2:21 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

The Bear will valar morghulis

"Let me tell you a story. I was a political prisoner for two years. The instant I was released I ran to McDonald's. I had a Big Mac and a Coke.

It was fantastic."
-Toyama Koichi, US Presidential candidate from Japan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGZqOkeYbB0

by AERose on Oct 31, 2011 6:33 PM PDT up reply actions  

“The fourth quarter is probably, by all indications, going to be a major disappointment.”

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 31, 2011 2:26 PM PDT up reply actions   1 recs

“The fourth quarter is ours unless you ask politely”

In other words, Go Bears!

by royrules22 on Oct 31, 2011 2:41 PM PDT up reply actions  

“the fourth quarter can be shared equally among us”

by slaphancock on Oct 31, 2011 2:48 PM PDT up reply actions  

How Berkeley.

"i, for one, welcome our new atomic overlords" - GoldBlooded

by atomsareenough on Oct 31, 2011 5:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

The fourth quarter will be baseless because 99% of Cal games (especially this season) are decided by the end of the third. Yet I will remain to see if Bridgford can do any better.

by fuzzywuzzy on Oct 31, 2011 6:11 PM PDT up reply actions  

We are the 99%

"i, for one, welcome our new atomic overlords" - GoldBlooded

by atomsareenough on Oct 31, 2011 7:17 PM PDT up reply actions  

“The Fourth Quarter’s Ours” is still my least favorite remnant of the Mariucci Era. Don’t declare that it’s going to be ours – show it. If nothing else, it’s a clear violation of the Woofing Theorem:

http://homepages.cae.wisc.edu/~dwilson/rsfc/Woof.html

by dpassage on Oct 31, 2011 4:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

Negatory woofing

I wonder if we can assist our wobbly GB’s by creating a negative woof-wave. Like, predicting doom rather quietly, so that the players don’t actually hear it, but it’s there. Much less visible than putting a bag over my face.

by fuzzywuzzy on Oct 31, 2011 6:15 PM PDT up reply actions  

it won't work!

From the FAQ:


No. Reverse woofing will never work. First of all, the Gods of
Woofing, being All-Knowing, know which teams every sports fans likes,
loves, hates, despises, or doesn’t care about. Second, reverse woofing
is extremely offensive to the Gods of Woofing for two reasons. One,
it insults their intelligence when a mere mortal presumes that he can
fool them, and two, they are offended by such deviousness. As a
result, reverse woofing is the most serious type of woofing possible,
and a reverse-woofer DOOMS his/her team to an embarrassing loss.

by dpassage on Oct 31, 2011 6:20 PM PDT up reply actions  

No, it's negative woofing

Reverse woofing is woofing for the OTHER TEAM. Negatory woofing is directed at your own team, but in the opposite direction, for example:

3rd and Six, ball on our own twenty-two yd line:

“We’re better off punting! Here comes a pick six, I just know it”.

by fuzzywuzzy on Oct 31, 2011 7:04 PM PDT up reply actions  

That needs to be posted the next time someone says that Cal is DOOOOOOOMED

"i, for one, welcome our new atomic overlords" - GoldBlooded

by atomsareenough on Oct 31, 2011 7:18 PM PDT up reply actions  

But what if we really are doomed? What then, atoms?

I blame Twist.

by CalBear81 on Oct 31, 2011 7:19 PM PDT up reply actions  

According to the theory, it can be blamed on the doomsayers!!

"i, for one, welcome our new atomic overlords" - GoldBlooded

by atomsareenough on Oct 31, 2011 7:58 PM PDT up reply actions  

I actually would love for this to become a thing

In other words, Go Bears!

by royrules22 on Oct 31, 2011 2:08 PM PDT up reply actions  

“Who’s house?”
“It’s a rental condo. Owners are real nice. Live in Albany…”

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 31, 2011 2:18 PM PDT up reply actions  

Rec’d

Cal Football: I loved them once and they broke my heart. Let that be a lesson to you. Never love anything.

by CalBandGreat on Oct 31, 2011 2:19 PM PDT up reply actions  

LULZ

"i, for one, welcome our new atomic overlords" - GoldBlooded

by atomsareenough on Oct 31, 2011 5:06 PM PDT up reply actions  

lo-fuckin-l.

Deposed (and recently graduated!) #1 Indian

by boomtho on Oct 31, 2011 2:29 PM PDT up reply actions  

“First and ten, try your best to replicate your success, Bears!”

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 31, 2011 2:53 PM PDT up reply actions  

I shouldn’t endorse this kind of negativity.

But you guys did so damn well…

by TheScientist019 on Oct 31, 2011 3:03 PM PDT up reply actions  

Reply fail. Meant that for zoonews.

by oskiwow on Oct 31, 2011 2:28 PM PDT up reply actions  

You fail just like Cal

In other words, Go Bears!

by royrules22 on Oct 31, 2011 2:41 PM PDT up reply actions  

Tears + despondent head nod.

by oskiwow on Oct 31, 2011 2:44 PM PDT up reply actions  

That’s a decent comp and worth exploring in more depth if I ever get the chance. It might be a long off season . . .

The #1 greatest threat to America: BEARS

by norcalnick on Oct 31, 2011 6:29 PM PDT up reply actions  

Transfer of power.

The change of results came because Paterno became a figurehead and representative and ceded most of the control of the team to DC Tom Bradley.

"Let me tell you a story. I was a political prisoner for two years. The instant I was released I ran to McDonald's. I had a Big Mac and a Coke.

It was fantastic."
-Toyama Koichi, US Presidential candidate from Japan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGZqOkeYbB0

by AERose on Oct 31, 2011 6:36 PM PDT up reply actions  

I heart this article

This really reflects a lot of my feelings about the Bears – joy when they do well, sadness when they don’t, faith that the folks running the program have the university’s – not just the program’s – best interests at heart.

I have a longer post about how I learned to be a Cal fan kicking around in my head – I grew up in Denver and didn’t realize John Elway was a whiny brat until 1989 – but I think this post, more than many other on this blog, reflects how I try to think about rooting for the Bears.

by dpassage on Oct 31, 2011 4:21 PM PDT reply actions  

I’ve tried to rack my brains for an example of a coach that performed so well for a 5 year span, only to have everything positive that characterized his teams suddenly change.

Would it be crazy to mention Joe Paterno here?

2000: 5-7
2001: 5-6
2002: 9-4
2003: 3-9
2004: 4-7

by hunger on Oct 31, 2011 5:53 PM PDT reply actions  

Ah crap, I browsed through the read but somehow missed the post two above mine. Why doesn’t the site have a delete button?

by hunger on Oct 31, 2011 5:54 PM PDT up reply actions  

Do you really want it deleted?

Am I known as Cugel the Clever for nothing?

by Cugel on Oct 31, 2011 6:03 PM PDT up reply actions  

Nope

I mentioned Penn State in another comment somewheres, I think he had two losing seasons then went to the Rose Bowl the following year.

Mark Richt’s had issues too, even Devil Mack had a losing season while trying to BREAK IN A NEW QB

by fuzzywuzzy on Oct 31, 2011 6:04 PM PDT up reply actions  

Mark Richt has had issues that he hasn't actually fixed yet.

The same can be said for Mack.

"Let me tell you a story. I was a political prisoner for two years. The instant I was released I ran to McDonald's. I had a Big Mac and a Coke.

It was fantastic."
-Toyama Koichi, US Presidential candidate from Japan
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uGZqOkeYbB0

by AERose on Oct 31, 2011 6:37 PM PDT up reply actions  

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6XDe1qa2On0

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 31, 2011 6:36 PM PDT up reply actions  

Thanks. This is a good write-up.

I have been thinking about this a little, as the team appears to be underperforming and not meeting expectations.

I think a winning record is a useful indicator for the health of a program, but a coach should be evaluated on more than that.

Winning certainly is important, especially during the game: it is the objective and it is the culmination of all the preparation. Winning is pure: identifying who crossed the line first, threw the weight the furthest, put the most points on the board is a clear metric and one that we all can identify with. It is also an important indicator, as winning reflects successful aggregation of all the components of a program (it is hard to win if your team is not executing, your players not performing, your strategy is out-dated, etc.) But it is not he only thing, particularly in college.

Here is a germ of an idea. Let’s evaluate a coach based on a number of specific elements, with the elements given varying weights depending on how important they are. (FYI: this is how I vote for President, looking across the issues I care about, and look how well that has worked.)

1. Winning. Important as a general indicator, and for practical reasons (the alums who invest way too much of their self worth in what 20 year olds do on the playing field need to be placated.) I would weight this heavily.
2. Player development. Remember, the sports are primarily for the athletes, not for the students, administration or alums. Is the coach helping players achieve their potential? Are they learning, improving, and taking their game to the next level? Are they using what they learned, either as pros or as coaches or PE teachers or citizens of the great state of California? I would weight this heavily.
3. Contribution to the university community. Do the games and the players support what the University is about building school spirit and fostering creativity and effort? Is the thinking state-of-the art, and does it contribute to the work in other departments and disciplines? I would weight this medium.
4. Stay classy, bears. Is the coach and team playing by the rules, playing with class, and representing the university well? I would weight this low, unless there is a problem – then I would give it high weight to replace the coach. That is to say, it should be expected.
5. Money. For football, you have to pay a lot of other sports bills. Sad, but necessary. I would weight this highly.

So, I guess I am trying to compare this decision to the decision to get rid of the chair of the history department. yes, we want our history students to be winning competitions and making us proud, but in fact the department’s contributions are much more layered, and the chair is evaluated on a number of things other than the prizes. I would like to see that instead of the monomaniacal focus on the ups and downs of each seasons win total.

Jason Hafemeister

by Jake88 on Oct 31, 2011 6:31 PM PDT reply actions   1 recs

Nicely put.

n.b. -- This comment does not constitute official chemistry advice.

by sec119 on Oct 31, 2011 8:01 PM PDT up reply actions  

Sadly, I don’t think we’ll be seeing another 56-game hitting streak from Coach Tedford, for, although a fanbase still turns its lonely eyes to him, Joltin’ Jeff has left and gone away. :(

I blame Twist.

by CalBear81 on Oct 31, 2011 6:48 PM PDT reply actions  

I’m surprised nobody referenced this sooner.

Am I known as Cugel the Clever for nothing?

by Cugel on Oct 31, 2011 6:51 PM PDT up reply actions  

:)

2011 World Cup Champions Team India

by Rishi on Oct 31, 2011 6:59 PM PDT up reply actions  

I don't always comment on the frontpage

But when I do, it’s because the posts are this good.

2011 World Cup Champions Team India

by Rishi on Oct 31, 2011 7:00 PM PDT reply actions  

56-game streak

If Joltin’ Jeff gets a decent QB, we could. Plus, the new facilities may add to the depth of the team, team cohesion, (he can address the entire team at once), health and wellness, better weight training, ect. However, I will still seek out a porta-potty, solely on gp, to bring back the memories…

Give Jeff a Chance

by fuzzywuzzy on Oct 31, 2011 7:15 PM PDT reply actions  

All he is saying,
Is give Jeff a chance.

I blame Twist.

by CalBear81 on Oct 31, 2011 7:18 PM PDT up reply actions  

Guys, I figured it out!

We hired the wrong Oregon coach!

If Tedford doesn’t give us 9 wins next year…

MIKE BELLOTTI!

by cjwethers on Oct 31, 2011 9:13 PM PDT reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

The California Sports Website that's .....different from all the rest.

GoldenBlogs' FAQ and Community Guidelines

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Humpty_dance_1_small
100 Days and counting... Sneak peek inside Memorial
Cal_2_small
Cal Softball Playoff Video: First Cal vs. Arkansas Game - Reid Steals Home
Cal_2_small
Softball Playoff Video: Cal vs. Iona
Ajoceywcalhatpic_small
DBD 5/18/12:  Riddles!
Cal_2_small
Cal Men's Crew Earns Second Place at the Pac-12 Championships

Recent FanPosts

Ab_small
DBD 5.25.12 #YOLO
Cstcst3644_small
DBD 5.24.12 Philip Philips is a person who exists?
Ab_small
DBD 5.23.12 Meeting yourself
Small
Rugby 7s in Philly!!!
Small
Cal vs Ohio State-getting tickets
Ab_small
DBD 5.22.12 I've made a huge mistake
Noneedtobeupset1_small
DBD 5.21.12 Jimmy Rustling DBD
Logo1_small
Cal rugby?

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

FanShots

Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.

Recommended FanShots

Coach Tedford is mic'd up for spring practice. Listen to him talk, while people practice! It is...
Steve Bartkowski elected to College Football Hall of Fame
Shareef Abdur-Rahim earns his Cal degree 16 years later!  Better late than never, right?  We're all proud of him.  Go Bears!  (H/T John Montgomery's Twitter)

Click here for more on this story from The Sacramento Bee.
Cal Women's Crew Captures Pac-12 Championship

Recent FanShots

DANBURY MINT CAL MEMORIAL STADIUM REPLICA- Just wondering if anyone had...
Alex Morgan links
Natalie Coughlin feature on ESPN
warren long should be offered he has all cal needs really good kid is the word around town.
I recorded the entire last out as Cal clinches the first ever PAC12 Softball Title! It was also a...
WSJ Writer Urges Pac-12 & Big Ten to Secede From BCS Playoffs
KTVU profiles the USA Olympic men's eight rowing hopefuls, and it includes interviews with former...
Former Cal football players make career in music
Cal has one of college football's best passing and catching duos
Best unimpressed by Floyd Mayweather, boxing in general

+ New FanShot All FanShots >

More great SB Nation Blogs

Pac-12 On SBN

Pacific Takes (Pac-12)

Pacifictakes-165x74_medium

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)


Marshawnthusiasts!

Bear_small ragnarok

Script_cal_small HydroTech

Cal_football_2005_09_16_roll_07_012_small CBKWit

Cstcst3644_small TwistNHook

1262541127_small yellow fever

Avinash6_small Avinash Kunnath

Jahvidtician

Bear__small norcalnick

Monty_in_cal_gear_small Ohio Bear

Giorgiorope_small Berkelium97

Ajoceywcalhatpic_small Kodiak

Mbc_small ManBearCal

Members Of The Follettariat

Oski_mini_small LEastCoastBears

Sofele20squarecal_stanford2011_small solarise

47081_1264898881265_1793562355_517598_1551191_s_small FrankCohen

Rugby_split_small RugbyVet

Sam_i_am_small unclesam22

The Hit Squad

1129748640_small LeonPowe

Atom_small atomsareenough

Basketball_desktop_small CALumbus Bear

Humpty_dance_1_small Cugel