I see fellow Cal blogger SDGldnBear has beaten me to the punch, nevertheless, here's my take...

We all know what this post is going to talk about.  So let's just jump right in.

The play was first called an "ineligible receiver down field."  Later after the game, ABC news said the refs clarified it as an "illegal formation."  I tended to agree with the call upon first thought.  But now that I look at the play more and more, I think Pete Carroll might have convinced the refs that it was an illegal formation when the refs weren't going to call it.

So here's the play (above).  Cal needs at least seven men on the line of scrimmage (LOS).  I'm pretty sure you can have more than seven men on the LOS.  This is probably a question for Ragnarok to answer since he's the rules guru around here.  Are there at least seven men on the LOS? 

Well, we'll assume all the five offensive linemen are on the LOS.  Technically they can be flagged for not lining up on the LOS.  I've seen it happen like once in the 8 years or so that I've been watching football.  But we'll just assume all the OL guys are on the LOS. 

So that means we need two other players on the LOS.  Specifically, one of those players needs to be Tucker on the bottom of the screen, and either Ross or Boateng at the top of the screen.  Ross and Boateng both can't be on the LOS otherwise Ross would be covered up and when Ross heads downfield he'd be an ineligible receiver down field.  So it must be either Ross or Boateng but not both.

Is Tucker on the LOS?  It appears so.  He could probably be up a few more inches, but for the most part he seems to be on the LOS.  If you notice, Tucker's front foot is on the same yardline (the 28 yardline) as Cal's right tackle's front foot and body.  Thus, it truly does seem like Tucker is on the LOS. 

Is Boateng or Ross on the LOS?  First off, Ross is in the slot, and Boateng is on the outside.  Ross, relative to Boateng, looks to be off the LOS, and Boateng looks to be on the LOS.  But if you look at Ross' front foot, it's on the same yardline as Tucker's front foot (the 28 yardline).  So Ross certainly seems to be on  the LOS.  That makes Boateng like really on the LOS.

Continue reading this post »

My enthusiasm pail overfloweth.

Honestly, I wasn't very energized until the horrible flea flicker turned miraculous TD to Boateng and the prophet Mohamed's pick 6 in the fourth quarter.  Prior to that, we experienced the same herky-jerky game last witnessed (successfully) against ASU.  I felt a pair of series in the third quarter nicely encapsulated they alternating excitement and discouragement so prevalent throughout the game.  After Anger pinned the Bruins on the 10, Alualu came up with a sack on 1st down and we (AGAIN!!) came thisclose to a safety on a stuffed run.  On third down, the little bruins completed a short pass and we were ready to start our drive at the UCLA 40.  Our defense had done its job and then some, forcing UCLA backwards and almost coming up with the safety.  Then our offense took the field.

On first down, a holding penalty.  On first down again, a sack.  On second down, a decent QB draw...with another holding penalty.  2nd and 34(!) netted us a 12 yard screen pass and a high, almost intercepted pass that would have been short of the first anyway.  With a 1st and 10 on their 40 yard line, we went back 12 yards.

Clearly, this type of offensive effort is not going to win us road games at USC and OSU, and will make life pretty difficult at home against Oregon and Stanford.  Our offensive line continues to struggle with penalties and protection, our receivers continue to drop catchable balls, and our QBs continue to make slightly to very inaccurate throws.  I wasn't terribly optimistic about our offense coming into this year, but I thought they'd be ahead (through 7 games and two bye weeks) of where they are now.

via d.yimg.com

He's the most awesomest.

Continue reading this post »

"If you multiply Tha1 by any integer, you get that integer."  via www.fearthebeard.org

Well, we've taken a look at many teams' stats over the past few weeks.  With the bye week, it seemed prudent to take a moment and actually LOOK at Cal's numbers.  There's been a lot of perception of stats, so let's see what the stats actually are. 

Continue reading this post »

So last week against ASU I saw something which caught my eye.  In the past 4 years or so that I've really started to study and analyze the Cal offense I saw the QB do something I've never seen them do before.  I saw a Cal QB create-a-play at the line of scrimmage.

You see, I've said many times before, Cal QBs cannot do their best Peyton Manning impressions (meaning they call any play they want at the LOS or create-a-play at the LOS).  QBs in the Cal offense are allowed to change the direction of runs, allowed to choose between the run or pass play on option plays (where the offense goes to the LOS with two plays in mind), and is allowed to audible to pre-selected plays which are packaged jointly with the personnel and formation on the field. 

But on Saturday against ASU, I am pretty sure we witnessed Longshore doing a Peyton Manning-esque create-a-play at the LOS. 

Let's have a look.

Above is the pre-snap look.  Cal has 11 personnel on the field (3 WRs, 1 TE, 1 RB).  Longshore is in shotgun with twin WRs to the open side of the field along with the TE ("open side" = the side of the offense with more field).

[Author addition post-publishing:

dballisloose asked a very good question in the comments:

Why do you always start off by saying “Cal has 11 personnel on the field”? How many did you expect them to have? I say, if there are 10 or 12, go ahead and mention it ;-)

I’m sorry, I guess I haven’t explained this before, but when I say “11 personnel” I don’t mean 11 people on the field.

Personnel packages are given numbers which correspond to how many RBs, TEs, or WRs, are on the field.

The first digit corresponds to how many RBs are on the field. The second digit corresponds to how many TEs are on the field. The number of WRs is implied. Thus 11 personnel = 1 RB (first digit), 1 TE (second digit), (3 WRs implied). 12 personnel = 1 RB, 2 TEs, (2 WRs implied). And so on…

When Cal is on defense, you can see the coaching assistant on the east sideline put up a yellow card with such numbers alerting the defensive players on the field of the offensive substitutions and what offensive personnel package the offense has on the field.]

Continue reading this post »

After seeing Cignetti's playcalling after 5 games, what are your thoughts?  Is it too early to tell if Cignetti is a good hire or a bad hire?  Or are you ready to conclude he's incompetent?  CGB reader Jiggets seems to think Cal's offense is vanilla.  CGB reader RickySanchez brought up a few good points regarding the offense, namely pointing out how perhaps Cignetti wasn't adapting to take advantage of what the Maryland defense was doing.

So while doing my Reviewing Cal @ Maryland: What Happened to Cal's Running Game? post, I came across a cool playcall that I thought I might share.

Here's the situation.  Cal is at Maryland's 5 yardline.  It's second and goal.  Cal has 11 personnel on the field (3 WRs, 1 TE, 1 RB).  There are two WRs to the offense's left; and one WR and one TE to the offense's right (see picture below).

Continue reading this post »

"Praise Be To Tedford!"  -  Image via www.bcemba06.org

HydroTech:  Before we start on the actual discussion, let's look at the depth chart.

QB: Riley; Longshore; Mansion
RB: Best; Vereen or Slocum
FB: Tau'ufo'ou
SE: Calvin, Cunningham,
WR: Young (it's unknown if Young is SE or FL so I'll list him as WR, he's probably FL though)
TE: Morrah; (who else? Tad Smith or Anthony Miller? or the other TE?)
LT: Teofilo; Tepper
LG: Guarnero; (who else?)
C: Mack; Guarnero
RG: Malele; (who else?)
RT: Schwartz(who else?)

TwistNHook:  Didn't Okanes do a depth chart?  Is that where you are getting this from?

HydroTech:  Yes, but he only lists the starters.  We could talk a lot about who will be key reserves if we know the two-deep.

Continue reading this post »