California Golden Blogs - Cal plays well, but loses to Stanfurd in the 118th Big GameThe OG CGB team moved to WriteForCalifornia.com. Cal Golden Bears coverage by SBNation.https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/community_logos/48267/cgb-fave.png2015-11-23T03:00:02-08:00http://www.californiagoldenblogs.com/rss/stream/95406552015-11-23T03:00:02-08:002015-11-23T03:00:02-08:00Post Game Thoughts: Stanford
<figure>
<img alt="" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/SA8wTlNIGTmTGqmHm6WKrZ3D9Dk=/0x0:5184x3456/1310x873/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/47721577/usa-today-8943115.0.jpg" />
<figcaption>Kelley L Cox-USA TODAY Sports</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>I bet you all really want to talk about 4th down decision making some more!!!</p> <p> </p>
<p>Being a fan is dumb. It's in the damned definition of the word.</p>
<p>Going to Big Game in Palo Alto is such a commitment. That's true almost no matter where you live, but I happen to live in Sacramento, which means you're facing a minimum of four hours of driving that will inevitably turn into five or six or more hours because of traffic, both on freeways and around Stanford Stadium. You might get stuck in an eucalyptus grove for an hour, or get lost in the dark trying to find your car.</p>
<p>Then there's the money. Gas. Tickets. Food and drink. The weather at night in November probably won't be pleasant. The stadium experience means watching a four hour Stanford infomercial. Our tickets were in the Cal section, but evidently two tickets in front of us were sold to Stanford fans. They arrived late and left at halftime, which was somehow <i>worse</i> because it was a reminder that Cal has been dominated by a team with a fan base that has collectively checked out of the rivalry during perhaps their greatest ascendancy ever.</p>
<p>So when you watch Cal lose for the sixth time in a row, knowing all of the above, one might start getting irrationally mad. I know I did. Then I got mad at myself for being mad about college football, which only made me more frustrated.</p>
<p>As we trudged out of Stanford Stadium, my wife could tell I was mad. She squeezed my hand and told me I'd feel better later. I apologized for being a #@%$. She would have been justified if she told me to suck it up and quit whining. Knowing in that moment that I'm married to somebody who understands and accepts my particular irrationality helped.</p>
<p>This is a long way of saying that I get it. Almost everybody is pissed off because we lost to Stanford, again. I took this loss harder than any loss since we went down to LA in 2011 and lost to a UCLA team that had suspended half of their starting lineup. After a loss like that, I expect extreme reactions, and while restrained reaction is preferable, it's a good idea not to hold anybody responsible for most of the things they say in direct response to another Big Game loss. It's been an interesting last 36 hours around here, but now we have a chance to step back and look at things as dispassionately as possible. Which isn't very!</p>
<h3><b>Offense</b></h3>
<p><b>The best performance against Stanford in years</b></p>
<p>This is cold comfort, but it's worth noting that, with the possible exception of the 2011 Big Game, this was Cal's best offensive performance against Stanford since the upset win of 2009. Although Stanford did a good job taking away big plays, Cal consistently moved the chains with underneath passing. 23 first downs is a lot on only nine drives.</p>
<p>Of course, this <i>should</i> be the best offensive showing since 2009. This is the weakest Stanford defense in a number of years, and the best Cal offense in a number of years. In an alternate universe, Cal scores 35 points and sent this game into overtime. Why not? Well, let's start talking about . . .</p>
<p><b>Red Zone failures</b></p>
<p>Red Zone failure #1: Cal gets first and goal at the Stanford 2. On first down, <span>Vic Enwere</span> loses a yard on a run. On 2nd down <span>Maurice Harris</span> appears to have a touchdown but is ruled to not have completed the catch. On 3rd down Goff turfs a throw to Lawler in the corner.</p>
<p>Issues: All kinds of things. Cal's inability to get a push on short yardage/goalline runs. Cal's receivers not helping out Goff. Goff not helping out Cal's receivers. Bad refs and/or bad rules. But it is worth noting that Cal ran two plays, and got open receivers on both plays. Should've been six.</p>
<p>Red Zone failure #2: Cal is facing a 2nd and 3 from the Stanford 11. Two incompletions quickly follow. I screwed up my DVR recording on this one, but one of them was a moderately tough catch that was dropped in the end zone.</p>
<p>Issues: Well, the coaching staff didn't feel confident running on 2nd/3rd (and 4th) and 3, and I don't blame them. And again, we had a chance to make a tough play in the end zone and didn't, but had a guy open.</p>
<p>Red Zone failure #3: Cal gets a 1st and 10 from the Stanford 16. Enwere runs for 2 yards on first down, Goff completes to Hansen for 6 yards on 2nd down, and a pass to Watson on 3rd doesn't gain any yards.</p>
<p>Issues: We just had to make a play on 3rd down - low yardage runs on first down happen, and the 2nd down play was a good one.</p>
<p><b>Cal's passing game: Good, but not good enough</b></p>
<p>38-55, 397 yards, 7.2 yards/attempt, no interceptions. That seems OK, especially against a decent defense. But here's an interesting stat: Stanford's defense recorded exactly one pass breakup and two sacks. Without a starting corner, and without much of a pass rush, Cal left plenty of plays on the field. There was a wheel route to Vic Enwere that was overthrown. There were the end zone plays mentioned above. There was a <span>Trevor Davis</span> drop that contributed to an eventual punt. There were even a few completions in which Goff made inaccurate throws that killed chances for yards after the catch.</p>
<p>I say this not to be Debbie Downer, but to point out that, in this particular game, Cal had the game plan and physical ability to win. That they didn't only adds to the frustration.</p>
<p><b>A quick word of confusion re: running backs</b></p>
<p>I think at varying points this year I've been of the opinion that four different runners represent Cal's best hope for a consistent running game. Judged solely on the Stanford game, the current answer would apparently be Tre Watson. Cal badly needs somebody to take hold of the job as lead back next season.</p>
<h3>Defense</h3>
<p><b>A contrast in short yardage</b></p>
<p>Stanford faced 13 short yardage situations (2 yards to gain or less) and converted 11 of them. Every single conversion was a running play. One failure was immediately converted on the next play. One failure led to a 4th and one that Stanford should have attempted to convert.</p>
<p><b>Winning without showing anything</b></p>
<p>Stanford ran the ball 40 times and passed the ball 12 times. Of those 12 passes, the majority were screens and short throws in front of the sticks. With Cal missing <span>Damariay Drew</span>, I really expected Stanford to try to challenge Cal through the air, but they never really did.</p>
<p>And they didn't have to. Stanford only had seven meaningful drives. Four ended in touchdowns. There weren't any trick plays, there wasn't much misdirection. Stanford knew that they could win this game with basic run after basic run, and they were right. When you have probably the best line in the conference and probably the best running back in the conference, and you're facing a defense that is OK but hardly dominating, you can get away with that.</p>
<p>For that reason, there's just not much to analyze. Cal got one stop because of a rare first down run for no gain and a Hogan incompletion to set up 3rd and long. Another came when Shaw cowardly punting on 4th and 1 (causing me to breathe a gigantic sigh of relief). A 3rd came when Stanford twice didn't give the ball to McCaffrey on 2nd/3rd and 3, then didn't go for it in Cal territory (causing me again to breath a gigantic sigh of relief).</p>
<p>I actually thought it was a pretty heroic showing from Cal's linebackers. The Stanford line was opening up big holes consistently, but McCaffrey mostly got tackled at the 2nd level rather than in the secondary. As much as it pains me to say it, Cal's defense did about as well as they could have been expected to perform considering the level of talent and execution that the Stanford offense brings to their bread-and-butter plays.</p>
<h3>Special Teams</h3>
<p><b>Losing the field position battle, badly</b></p>
<p>Stanford's first two punts were perfect kicks that netted Stanford 43 and 44 yards respectively, and stranded Cal deep in their own territory. Cal's first punt netted 36 yards and gave Stanford a drive that started in Cal territory.</p>
<p>Cal's kickoff return unit on average got the Bears out to the 20 yard line. Excluding the kickoff touchdown, Stanford's average return got them out to the 33.5.</p>
<p>Stanford partly gained that type of field position because Cal started short kicking to keep the ball away from McCaffrey, which . . . it's a problem when you have to choose between giving teams spectacular field position or giving up return touchdowns.</p>
<p>I have the same comment today that I did after the USC game: Cal's special teams routinely give up about 10 yards of field position per drive. Stanford's offense, on average, started 14 yards better than Cal's offense. And that's how you outgain a team by 139 yards and still lose by two scores.</p>
<p>As for the touchdown: As best I could tell, McCaffrey was untouched. And if I were a Stanford fan I'd have been irate if that holding had been called, because the Stanford player had the block well before he held, and the act of holding had no material impact on the play.</p>
<h3>Coaching & Game Theory</h3>
<p><b>Regarding those field goals</b></p>
<p>I'm going to do my best not to rehash what Avi said yesterday, but I'm probably going to do it anyway. Here goes:</p>
<p>Entering Big Game, Stanford had scored 30+ points in nine straight games. Against Pac-12 foes, they had averaged 40 points per game!!! Now, if Cal had the best defense in the conference, one might argue that Cal would allow less than that. But thus far Cal has had a slightly below average Pac-12 defense. You have to enter this game knowing that you need more than 30 points to win.</p>
<p>Here's a quick little chart, <a target="_blank" href="http://wp.advancedfootballanalytics.com/4thdncalc1.php">using this particular 4th down decision making device</a>. WP = Win Probability</p>
<table border="1">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td></td>
<td>WP, pre-play</td>
<td>WP, successful conversion</td>
<td>WP, failed conversion</td>
<td>WP, made FG</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td>4th Down #1</td>
<td style="text-align: center;">38%</td>
<td style="text-align: center;">48%</td>
<td style="text-align: center;">30%</td>
<td style="text-align: center;">36%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: center;">4th Down #2</td>
<td style="text-align: center;">23%</td>
<td style="text-align: center;">29%</td>
<td style="text-align: center;">15%</td>
<td style="text-align: center;">22%</td>
</tr>
<tr>
<td style="text-align: center;">4th Down #3</td>
<td style="text-align: center;">11%</td>
<td style="text-align: center;">18%</td>
<td style="text-align: center;">10%</td>
<td style="text-align: center;">11%</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<p><br>There are a few things to point out here:</p>
<p>One: The calculator I used above is set to NFL parameters, which means that the numbers above are approximations. But if they were set to college then they would likely lean even more towards going for it because 1) conversion rates are generally higher in college than the pros and 2) pro kickers are so much more reliable than college kickers.</p>
<p>Two: I didn't attempt to bake into these numbers that Cal was the decided underdog. If I did they would lean even more towards going for it because there's the added assumption that Stanford would keep on scoring. Which they did.</p>
<p>Three: The decision to kick the first field goal is defensible, even if going for it is the right call. You lose almost as much as you would gain if you fail.</p>
<p>Four: The biggest thing is that you need to compare the first column (pre-play odds) with the made FG column. In each case, kicking takes a bad situation (you're losing) and keeps that situation stable. Take 4th down #2. Sure, missing the conversion and seeing your chances of winning fall by 8% stings. But you're already in a situation where your odds of winning are very low - this is a major opportunity to boost your chances! You have to take that chance, because if you don't you're going to lose anyway.</p>
<p>Five: The decision to kick on the final field goal was utterly indefensible. It does you no good to kick a field goal if you're down two scores both before and after the field goal. As the numbers indicate, failing the conversion and making the field goal are almost identically as valuable (which is to say: not at all valuable).</p>
<p>Six: As noted above, Cal was getting open receivers in their goal line plays (and, really, all plays - one pass broken up all game by Stanford!!!) prior to each field goal. Sure, dropped passes and turfed throws are frustrating, but it's not like Stanford was presenting some kind of impossible defensive riddle. Cal was 10-18 on 3rd down conversions all game because Cal WRs were getting open on short routes and Goff was hitting them. The Bears very much had it in them to do it again on 4th downs.</p>
<p>Seven: By failing to go for it early in the game, Cal was put in a situation where they were forced to attempt undesirable conversions later. Let's pretend, hypothetically, that Cal converted two of the three 4th downs, and scored two touchdowns. That's 14 points instead of 9 points. Later, when the Bears face 4th and 15, Cal is down either 28-21 or 28-20, and they can punt the ball away and try to pin Stanford, knowing they can get the ball back to try for the tying score.</p>
<p><b>Surrender punting/surrender not onside kicking</b></p>
<p>I mean, we're talking about the difference between a .025 win probability and a literally zero win probability, but why not?</p>
<h3>Big Picture</h3>
<p>I am an emotional man-child that lets the location of a 116 year old broken piece of outdoor equipment impact my mood. Oh wait, you probably care more about the Cal football team's Big Picture.</p>
<p>I'll be really fascinated to see how Cal and Arizona State come out in a game that is as outwardly meaningless as a college football game can get. Both teams are bowl eligible, both teams have been eliminated from the conference race, and neither team has (to my knowledge) any bad blood. Hell, these two teams haven't even played each other in three years.</p>
<p>That said, this game does have some meaning in terms of program trajectory. If Cal beats ASU, at least the Bears can say that they beat every team they were supposed to beat, and it would be a strong indication that Dykes still has the team motivated and buying in. Considering how the team reacted to the OSU win and the effort they put out against Stanford, I would be surprised if they came out flat.</p>
<p>Beat ASU, and then win a bowl game against whomever, and the coaching staff can make a recruiting pitch about program trajectory going into what should be a fascinating (from a neutral perspective) transition year.</p>
<p>Lose to ASU and Cal will have gone from 5-0 to 6-6. <a target="_blank" href="https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2007_California_Golden_Bears_football_team">That doesn't bring up good memories</a>. Those questioning whether or not Dykes has what it takes to build anything more than a middle-of-the-conference team will grow. They will stick around all through the off-season regardless, because that is the very nature of college football, and if you ever hear a coach complain about it, you should remind them that they get paid multi-millions of dollars each year <i>because</i> of that fan obsession. That doesn't necessarily make it right, but it makes it very, very explicable.</p>
<p>Losing sucks. It sucks even worse when it could have realistically turned out differently.</p>
https://www.californiagoldenblogs.com/2015/11/23/9781550/california-golden-bears-stanford-cardinal-2015-big-gameNick Kranz2015-11-22T03:44:56-08:002015-11-22T03:44:56-08:00Cal brings their best at Stanford, but Dykes wilts
<figure>
<img alt="" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/pFJ3-UHQ0tCBK64T4_xSIKDnruU=/0x26:3554x2395/1310x873/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/47716389/GettyImages-498231974.0.jpg" />
<figcaption>Ezra Shaw/Getty Images</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Under the pressure, Dykes buckled again. </p> <p>The Axe is staying at Stanford.</p>
<p>If Sonny Dykes is staying at Cal, I don't know when exactly it's ever coming back.</p>
<p>In many respects, Cal played an even if not superior game with Stanford. Cal outgained Stanford 495 to 356, and that advantage was even more pronounced through three quarters. They both averaged six to seven yards per play. Cal was 10-18 on 3rd down, Stanford 5-10. Cal even won the time of possession battle, which feels like a minor miracle as an Air Raid squad battling Stanford grit and grind. Tony Franklin had the Bears marching down the field for much of the game and Art Kaufman had the Cal defense holding its own for three quarters (only 14 points allowed!).</p>
<p>This is actually the proudest I've ever been of the Bears this season. Stanford is a fringe playoff contender and Cal had their chances to pull off a monumental upset. Heck there were times that Cal often looked like the better team play to play.</p>
<p>So why was Stanford leading 21-6 at halftime and 35-16 midway through the 4th quarter? Why did Cal never have a realistic shot at winning this football game?</p>
<p>Sonny.</p>
<p>We'll track through the errors. To the recap.</p>
<h4>1st quarter</h4>
<p>Cal does a good job stopping <span>Christian McCaffrey</span> on the first drive of the game, allowing only seven yards on two carries (although they're aided by an odd third and long draw play). The Bears aren't much better though, getting pinned deep on their side of the field and running their own 3rd and long draw. A pretty weak Cole Leninger rugby punt put Stanford at midfield, and they marched down the field behind McCaffrey runs of 24, 9, 4, 5 to set up a short Wright touchdown. 7-0.</p>
<p>Cal then did a little ball control of their own, holding the ball for over six minutes! <span>Trevor Davis</span> had a nice return to the 33. <span>Jared Goff</span> completed 17 and 11 yard passes to <span>Darius Powe</span> and 8, 6, and 19 yard passes to <span>Bryce Treggs</span> to put Cal in the red zone.</p>
<p>But <span>Maurice Harris</span> couldn't maintain an easy touchdown catch, Goff threw a hopper short on 3rd down to <span>Kenny Lawler</span>. The Bears were without Kenny Lawler for most of the game (although he did come in at the end of this drive) and Cal simply did not know how to convert in the end zone without the sure-handed Lawler available.</p>
<p><b>Somewhat of a coaching error:</b> 4th and goal at the 3, and Sonny opted for points. This was after going for it on 4th and short in his own territory! Stanford would be at worst pinned at its own three. Try and tie this game up. Field goals are not going to win this.</p>
<p>It's still early though, so not a huge coaching error. It becomes more of a coaching error when the trend expands to monstrously bad decisions.</p>
<p>Cal trails 7-3 after one quarter.</p>
<h4>2nd quarter</h4>
<p>After the Cal defense stiffens near midfield and doesn't allow a play over seven yards, Stanford punts. Goff scatters the wealth to Treggs, <span>Tre Watson</span>, <span>Trevor Davis</span> and Powe, but a pick play penalty by Davis negates a first down and eventually puts Cal in a fourth down situation.</p>
<p><b>Coaching error #2: </b>4th and 3 at the Cal 45, Dykes has the team lined up to go for it and opts for the long punt by Harry Adolphus instead. How is this situation any different from the 4th and 1 on the previous drive--Stanford plays straight defense so no way? Goff has been shredding them!</p>
<p>The net touchback gains Cal only 35 yards of field position and Stanford gains most of that back in three plays. Then McCaffrey makes the Cal defense look silly for a 49 yard touchdown. 14-3 Stanford.</p>
<p>Cal marched back with another long and methodical drive before halftime, with Goff finding <span>Chad Hansen</span>, <span>Bug Rivera</span>, Powe and Davis for an assortment of catches. But the drive stalled in the red zone, with Goff overthrowing Hansen for a touchdown and misconnecting with Treggs.</p>
<p><b>Coaching error #3: </b>4th and 3 at the 11, and Dykes sends out the field goal unit to cut a 14-3 lead to 14-6. Cal has shown the ability to convert short yardage situations for most of the game now, Stanford has proven they aren't very good at stopping short yardage all season, so why not try and get a crucial touchdown? <span>David Shaw</span> has proven to not be the greatest game manager in close games. Make him think.</p>
<p>Dykes took the points instead.</p>
<p>Then came the coaching gaffe that essentially put Stanford in the driver's seat.</p>
<p><b>Massive error: </b>The decision to kick directly to McCaffrey. Okay, Hogan has done nothing with the football so far tonight. Stanford generally is one of the most conservative teams in the country when it comes to two minute drills--if they don't have to do it, they won't. <span> </span>Squib it and go into halftime down 14-6, if not 17-6.</p>
<p>So, why, why, why would you line drive kick it to Christian? McCaffrey was the 7th leading kickoff returner in the nation coming into Saturday's game and has been the only player on Stanford you've had trouble stopping. WHY?</p>
<div>Touchdown Stanford. Bears went into the locker room trailing 21-6.</div>
<div><br></div>
<h4>3rd quarter</h4>
<p>Cal got the ball to start the second half and were in the red zone in a minute thanks to a huge Watson rush and Goff finding <span>Maurice Harris</span> for 23 more yards. But again the drive stalled when Goff and Watson couldn't quite connect correctly on 3rd and short.</p>
<p><b>Colossal error: </b>4th and 3 at the 8 and down 21-6, Dykes sends in the field goal unit to cut a two touchdown lead to a two touchdown lead. Seriously, why? There is decent justification for the first field goal and at least you're cutting a two score game to a one score game on the second, but this one makes no sense. Again, for the THIRD TIME IN A ROW, the worst that can happen is Stanford gets pinned back deep. The best thing that happens is it's a one score game and you know a stop and score could have this thing all tied up!</p>
<p>Oh well. It's 21-9.</p>
<p>The Cal defense plays inspired football and forces a Stanford 3-and-out, and the Bears finally score a touchdown: 13 plays, 86 yards. Goff was at his best, going 7 for 8, overcoming a bad intentional grounding penalty and distributing the ball to Harris, Hansen, Powe and Davis. Goff would finally find Powe leaking to the outside in the end zone on 3rd and goal to make it 21-16.</p>
<h4>4th quarter</h4>
<p>But Stanford finally commits to the run for good, and Cal doesn't do a good job of stopping it. McCaffrey picks up 44 yards on the ground to fight his way to the Cal red zone, a screen to <span>Francis Owusu</span> puts Stanford in 4th and goal, and the offensive line just grinds down an overmatched front seven. 28-16 Stanford.</p>
<p>Cal had to respond on their next drive, and Goff led Cal back to the red zone with crucial first down throws to Treggs, Ray Hudson, Treggs and Powe. But a ticky-tack roughness penalty on <span>Dominic Granado</span> put Cal in 3rd and 25 situation, and Goff eventually overthrew Hansen on 4th down.</p>
<p>A Bryce Love 48 yard touchdown put the game on ice for Stanford on the next drive.</p>
<p><b>Why. Are. You. Kicking: </b>This game is almost out of reach, but crazier things have happened in Big Games, right? Cal always fights to the very end against Stanford, right?</p>
<p>Nope.</p>
<p>4th and 6 at the Cal 39 and Dykes sends in the punt unit.</p>
<p>Stanford burns 2.5 minutes off the clock and Cal gets the ball back in time to score a stupid touchdown.</p>
<p><b>Why. Are. You. Kicking, Part II: </b>A quick minute drill drive by Cal leads to a long connection from Goff to Treggs that makes it a two touchdown game with 1:44 left, so now we go for craziness and see what happens, right?</p>
<p>Nope, instead of attempting an onside kick, Dykes kicked the ball away so Stanford could run out the clock. Either that or it was the most off-target onside kick of all time.</p>
<p>The Bear will not quit! Except when Dykes was assured that Cal would not be blown out. Then it's time to go home.</p>
<h4><b>Conclusions</b></h4>
<p>Cal had a good overall gameplan to contain the Stanford offense that worked for three quarters before the talent gap up front had its way. The Tony Franklin System did a good job moving the ball up and down the field and putting Cal in a position to score. The players did their best to go toe-to-toe with a more skilled and talented foe.</p>
<p>But red zone failures plagued the Bears, and the coaching didn't step up and and with nothing to lose and everything to gain Dykes opted for field goals instead of touchdowns at every early juncture to give Stanford an advantage that they would not relinquish.</p>
<p>Repeat: Stanford has scored 30+ points in every game in Pac-12 play, and Dykes thought nine points would be enough to "keep the Bears in it". If that's the type of coaching you think will ever win the Pac-12, much less get the Axe back home, you're kidding yourself.</p>
<p>I don't know if Cal beats Stanford on Saturday, but losing by two scores to them is unacceptable given how closely the Bears played the Trees in the trenches. Dykes played it safe and hoped that the players would bail out the majority of his conservative decisions. They did their best, but Stanford is too formidable an opponent for the head coach to play it safe.</p>
<p>So Sonny Dykes has his bowl game, but it's hard for Cal fans to feel good about anything else.</p>
<ul>
<li> <span>For the second straight year, Dykes's team started strong only to falter late in the season. </span><span>Cal started 4-1 in 2014 and finished 1-6 with three narrow losses and three decisive beatings. Cal started 5-0 in 2015 and is currently on a 1-5 slid with two narrow losses and three decisive beatings. </span> </li>
<li><span>Sonny has only beaten hapless Oregon State past the midpoint of October during his Cal tenure. </span></li>
<li><span>Dykes is 2-19 against winning FBS teams (this year's San Diego State and Washington State squads). </span></li>
<li><span>Cal is 0-9 against the California rivals in Dykes's tenure, and only a third of those losses have come by a touchdown or less, and only in one of those games did Cal have a chance to win the game with the ball. </span></li>
<li><span>Cal has been outscored 146-52 in its last three Big Games. Sonny Dykes has never held a LEAD at a single point of any Big Game!</span></li>
</ul>
<div><span>Finally, the most annoying, frustrating, horrifying stat of all.</span></div>
<div>
<ul>
<li><span>Tom Holmoe: 12-21 in first three years at Cal, 7-17 in Pac-10, 3 Big Game losses</span></li>
<li><span>
<p class="p1"><span class="s1">Sonny Dykes: 12-23 in first three years at Cal, 6-20 in Pac-12, 3 Big Game losses</span></p>
</span></li>
</ul>
<div>Cal is going to make a decision soon about whether they believe in Sonny Dykes long-term. Throw out all the academic considerations, the great group of players who bleed blue and gold, and the embracing of Cal traditions. These are all things that can be accomplished with proper institutional support, and it seems like Cal is providing it on a stronger basis.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>Ask yourself these football-only questions about these coaches:</div>
<div>
<ul>
<li><span>Are you happy with what you've seen from your coaching staff on a game-to-game basis? </span></li>
<li><span>Do they make adjustments you agree with on a regular basis? Do they make strategically sound decisions? </span></li>
<li><span>Are you prepared for a step back to see if the program can take two steps forward in the years to follow?</span></li>
<li><span>Is this team ready to play from snap to whistle? Are they disciplined? Are there clear signs of improvement year to year, game to game? </span></li>
<li><span>Can they recruit at an elite level and find the players that can thrive at Cal and bring back the swagger missing from this program for a decade?</span></li>
<li><span>What are your expectations for this program year to year? How much (or little) do you expect from your Bears every year? And what do you expect these coaches to do based on what they've previously accomplished at Cal?</span></li>
<li><span>How much do you think this staff outcoaches the opposition on gameday? Are we well-prepared, ready to play, and executing at a high level? </span></li>
<li><span>Do you believe this is the group that can build a program that is resilient and strong for the long haul?</span></li>
</ul>
<div>As the Bears prepare to commit to Sonny Dykes for the future, I hope they ask these questions first and foremost. Because the Big Game brought all those warts back out. At times, it felt like Dykes was playing for a safe close loss rather than going all-out for the big-time upset, and that's a feeling I've felt way too many times this season in our second half stumble. "Yeah, we lost again, but look at how close this one was compared to last year!"</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>With nothing to lose and a bowl game at hand, I was expecting so much more from Sonny. He had so many chances to get that signature win, the game that would galvanize the Cal fanbase. After three years, Cal is still waiting, and the fanbase discontent grows stronger year by year. Time is running out for him to earn the goodwill he needs to be here for the long haul. Big Game was the best prepared his team has looked, but again his coaching flubs booted the opportunity away.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>So Cal goes another year without the Axe. And as Stanford celebrates another likely New Year's Bowl and potentially more Pasadena roses, the excuses for the Bears not being able to be as great when their archrivals can stand tall in the Pac-12 wear thin.</div>
<div><br></div>
<div>All it takes is one great coach to turn a program around. As season 3 draws to a close with Dykes, it's becoming harder to believe it's the one we currently have.</div>
</div>
</div>
https://www.californiagoldenblogs.com/2015/11/22/9777600/stanford-cardinal-california-golden-bears-big-game-2015-score-resultsAvinash Kunnath2015-11-21T22:44:17-08:002015-11-21T22:44:17-08:00Grade the heartbreaking 35–22 Big Game loss
<figure>
<img alt="Ugh." src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/mzr8DSQqa-twyreVa8jA65W6Xo4=/0x0:5184x3456/1310x873/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/47715859/usa-today-8943305.0.jpg" />
<figcaption>Ugh. | Kelley L Cox-USA TODAY Sports</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Sometimes, bad things happen to good universities.</p> <p>The <a href="https://www.californiagoldenblogs.com/" class="sbn-auto-link">California Golden Bears</a> performed pretty well, but the <a href="http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/teams/stanfurd-cardinal" class="sbn-auto-link">Stanfurd Cardinal</a> will keep the Axe for another year with a 35–22 victory, extending their winning streak over us to six years. There sure is a lot of RAGE in the Cal fandom tonight, so let us be your release.</p>
<p>Rage on, Golden Bears. Rage on.</p>
<p><iframe marginwidth="0" marginheight="0" frameborder="0" height="500" width="760" src="https://docs.google.com/forms/d/14S-yVa2BHoOCpWhpsXOrSC0oY84JyNr7FVa3gBVhkaY/viewform?embedded=true">Loading...</iframe></p>
https://www.californiagoldenblogs.com/2015/11/21/9738238/california-golden-bears-stanfurd-cardinal-big-game-dykes-goff-shaw-hogan-mccaffreyLeland Wong2015-11-21T21:58:54-08:002015-11-21T21:58:54-08:00Q4: Fans rage, but Cal has hope, down 21–16
<figure>
<img alt="" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/jKCmm50ezkJp5KgzL2w-rjgFoI0=/29x0:3937x2605/1310x873/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/47715777/GettyImages-498231510.0.jpg" />
<figcaption>Ezra Shaw/Getty Images</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>One more quarter to do this.</p> <p>Despite the rage throughout the entire fandom of the <a href="https://www.californiagoldenblogs.com/" class="sbn-auto-link">California Golden Bears</a>, we're still in this; however, we trail the <a href="http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/teams/stanfurd-cardinal" class="sbn-auto-link">Stanfurd Cardinal</a>, 21–16. C'mon, fourth quarter—be ours!</p>
<p><a data-widget-id="378939009554055168" href="https://twitter.com/GoldenBlogs/golden-tweeters" class="twitter-timeline">Tweets from @GoldenBlogs/golden-tweeters</a></p>
https://www.californiagoldenblogs.com/2015/11/21/9738244/california-golden-bears-stanfurd-cardinal-big-game-dykes-goff-shaw-hogan-mccaffreyLeland Wong2015-11-21T21:04:29-08:002015-11-21T21:04:29-08:00Q3: Who needs TDs when you can trail 21–6 instead?
<figure>
<img alt="" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/2Nsx5npMMDhQkitAR11VMCzx5mA=/0x35:1780x1222/1310x873/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/47715275/GettyImages-498225130.0.jpg" />
<figcaption>Ezra Shaw/Getty Images</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>Yay for giving up last-minute return touchdowns.</p> <p>We're heading into halftime of the 118th Big Game with the <a class="sbn-auto-link" href="https://www.californiagoldenblogs.com/">California Golden Bears</a> trailing the <a class="sbn-auto-link" href="http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/teams/stanfurd-cardinal">Stanfurd Cardinal</a>, 21–6.</p>
<p>Here's your thread to complain about the officiating and discuss the third quarter!</p>
<p><a class="twitter-timeline" href="https://twitter.com/GoldenBlogs/golden-tweeters" data-widget-id="378939009554055168">Tweets from @GoldenBlogs/golden-tweeters</a></p>
https://www.californiagoldenblogs.com/2015/11/21/9738242/california-golden-bears-stanfurd-cardinal-big-game-dykes-goff-shaw-hogan-mccaffreyLeland Wong2015-11-21T20:16:05-08:002015-11-21T20:16:05-08:00Q2: No separation as Furd leads 7–3
<figure>
<img alt="Exactly what you'd expect out of their drum major." src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/0KRqdcJmc1FD9uybP7hC3arFPM8=/0x1339:3200x3472/1310x873/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/47715091/usa-today-8942808.0.jpg" />
<figcaption>Exactly what you'd expect out of their drum major. | Kelley L Cox-USA TODAY Sports</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>It's a low-scoring affair so far.</p> <p>There's no separation this early in the Big Game as the <a class="sbn-auto-link" href="https://www.californiagoldenblogs.com/">California Golden Bears</a> trail the <a class="sbn-auto-link" href="http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/teams/stanfurd-cardinal">Stanfurd Cardinal</a>, 7–3.</p>
<p><a class="twitter-timeline" href="https://twitter.com/GoldenBlogs/golden-tweeters" data-widget-id="378939009554055168">Tweets from @GoldenBlogs/golden-tweeters</a></p>
https://www.californiagoldenblogs.com/2015/11/21/9738240/california-golden-bears-stanfurd-cardinal-big-game-dykes-goff-shaw-hogan-mccaffreyLeland Wong2015-11-21T19:15:02-08:002015-11-21T19:15:02-08:00Q1: The 118th Big Game kicks off!
<figure>
<img alt="#derpface" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/tOyaOgqbI93CRuDDgOjB4mZUOiE=/0x104:2980x2091/1310x873/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/47666907/usa-today-8233965.0.jpg" />
<figcaption>#derpface | Richard Mackson-USA TODAY Sports</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>The Bears aim to rescue the Axe in our first Big Game victory since 2009.</p> <p>Tonight, the <a href="https://www.californiagoldenblogs.com/" class="sbn-auto-link">California Golden Bears</a> war with our archrivals, the <a href="http://www.sbnation.com/college-football/teams/stanfurd-cardinal" class="sbn-auto-link">Stanfurd Cardinal</a>, in the Big Game. Let's go win the Axe and do our part to block those Furdies from being Pac-12 North champions!</p>
<p><a data-widget-id="378939009554055168" href="https://twitter.com/GoldenBlogs/golden-tweeters" class="twitter-timeline">Tweets from @GoldenBlogs/golden-tweeters</a></p>
https://www.californiagoldenblogs.com/2015/11/21/9738222/california-golden-bears-stanfurd-cardinal-big-game-dykes-goff-shaw-hogan-mccaffreyLeland Wong2015-11-20T10:51:33-08:002015-11-20T10:51:33-08:00It's a Big Week. It's a Big Game.
<figure>
<img alt="" src="https://cdn.vox-cdn.com/thumbor/MVtId0tYwpxsycC4FPgwMhTLufQ=/0x1438:3456x3742/1310x873/cdn.vox-cdn.com/uploads/chorus_image/image/47707365/usa-today-8927610.0.jpg" />
<figcaption>Kelley L Cox-USA TODAY Sports</figcaption>
</figure>
<p>That calls for a little something extra, a little something more. That means I couldn't cut this promo myself. Not this time.</p>
<p>I had to scour around in the locker room for the perfect substitute, the perfect advocate, someone who hates Stanford with a passion unmatched by any of us, and has in fact strapped up to play them...</p>
<p>I GIVE YOU…</p> <p class="MsoNormal"><span>"Ladies and gentlemen, my name is Donovan Frazer. This week, I am the advocate for your gridiron beasts incarnate, The <a href="https://www.californiagoldenblogs.com/" class="sbn-auto-link">California Golden Bears</a>.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>All season long we have building towards a crowning moment. From the opening week’s desecration of Grambling State, to the siege of the University of Texas, and to this past week’s reemergence into the ranks of bowl eligibility, our sturdy Golden Bears have clawed their way out of the dark that had shrouded the program these past few seasons.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>While these achievements are wonderful and will be celebrated in due time, it’s very clear that the mission is far from accomplished.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>This brings us to what shall be our crowning moment; reclamation of The Axe through the destruction of the Stanfurd Cardinal.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Stanfurd, it is undeniable; your recent accomplishments have been great. So great. in fact, that you have even managed to attract the services of a former Golden Bear. To discount your record would be madness, and as much as we loathe you, we do respect you.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>But come this Saturday, you are facing your most dangerous opponent of the year. "Why?" you ask. It’s simple. We have nothing to lose. We’ve punched our ticket to the post-season, and while it might appear minor to your aspirations, such an accomplishment is comparable to throwing bait to a pool of hungry sharks. We’ve had our first taste of success in what seems like an eternity…and we crave more.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>What better way to satiate our hunger than by snuffing out your already dim playoff hopes? We’ll be able to feast for a calendar year on the mere thought of snatching away your fading conference championship. We might have nothing to lose, but your entire season’s hopes and dreams rest in the palm of our hands.</span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>Enjoy your next day with The Axe. Recall any fond memories you’ve had together these last few seasons. Maybe shine it up one more time, take it up to the top of Hoover, and lie to it again about how 1982 never existed. Because on Saturday night, the opponent you’re taking the field against is not that of merely a 6-4 team, but instead is a pack of vicious, unhinged, carnivores that are starved for the taste Cardinal blood. </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>We won’t be denied. </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span> </span></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><span>This is not a prediction, it is a spoiler; Cal is taking back The Axe."</span></p>
https://www.californiagoldenblogs.com/2015/11/20/9771082/nam-its-a-big-week-its-a-big-gameNam Le