SB Nation - Nyan Boateng

Cal vs. Stanfurd, Post-112th Big Game Thoughts

HydroTech — Mon, 30 Nov 2009 11:23:42 -0000

More photos » by Marcio Jose Sanchez - AP

23 days ago: California players celebrate an interception by Mike Mohammed (18) late in the fourth quarter against Stanford during a NCAA college football game in Stanford, Calif., Saturday, Nov. 21, 2009. California won 34-28. (AP Photo/Marcio Jose Sanchez)

Browse more photos »

(1) Tedford's decision to center the ball on 3rd and 8 was a conservative decision but not a wrong decision. Let's get something out of the way first. Tedford centered the ball. He didn't take a knee. I see a lot of people, and newspaper writers who seem to think the only point of that play was to not stop the clock and make Stanfurd use their last timeout. If those were the only reasons, then Tedford would have just called a run play. But Tedford centered the ball. Centering the ball places the ball directly between the hash marks to give the kicker a straight-line kick. As we all know, the further you move left or right from directly between the hash marks, the smaller the width of the uprights become due to the angle. Thus, centering the ball is more crucial in college football than the NFL because the hash marks in college football are wider than the NFL. And centering the ball is also more crucial the closer you get to the goalline because the angle of the kick is harsher from the 10 yard line right hash (for example) as opposed to the 30 yard line right hash. In short, Tedford centered the ball. He did not just "take a knee."

This decision to center the ball was clearly a conservative decision. I personally would have run the ball left (because Cal was on the right hash). Running the ball left serves two purposes: (1) it keeps the clock running; and (2) it can potentially center the ball. Of course the runningback might take the ball outside one of the hashes rather than keeping the ball between the hashes and thus the ball is no more centered than it was earlier, but the benefit of actually running the ball is that there is a potential to score a touchdown. By centering the ball, Tedford gave up any chance that Cal might score a touchdown. At the time of that 3rd and 8, Cal was up 31-28 with about 2:45 left on the clock in the 4th quarter. A touchdown would have made the game 38-28 (assuming Cal goes for the PAT and makes it). That would have made the game a two-score game and essentially would have iced the game - or at least made it very difficult for Stanfurd to come back. On the other hand, centering the ball and kicking the field goal merely assured that Stanfurd needed a touchdown to win, as opposed to 10 points to tie or 11 points to win (if Cal had scored a touchdown on the 3rd and 8 with a play).

I suppose it's possible that the team could have executed a run play to the left and told Vereen to directly between the hashes as much as possible. Such a play preserves the chances of getting a touchdown (although those chances are probably reduced because Vereen is restricted to his running space), but it also serves the purpose of centering the ball (although the centering probably won't be as accurate as a QB-centering).

I do believe that centering the ball is more important than most critics of Tedford's decision realize. This should not be confused with saying that centering the ball is extremely important. However, critics of Tedford's decision don't even mention the lowered chances of a successful field goal kick from a far hash at extremely close range. To them, it appears, as if there is no difference between kicking a field goal from the 11 yard line far hash, and from the 11 yard line center. This is where they are wrong. Clearly there is a difference and kicking from a far hash is harder. How much of a difference does it make? It's a small one. Small enough that many coaches will just ignore the diminished percentage, and essentially trade a slightly bigger chance at missing the field goal for a chance at scoring a touchdown by running a play on 3rd down instead of centering the ball. Using numbers, it might sound like this: a kicker has a 95% chance at making a field from the 11 yard line center; a kicker has a 90% chance at making a field goal from the 11 yard line far hash; and the team has a 15% chance at scoring a touchdown on a run play from the 11 yard line. Most coaches will gladly take a 5% less chance at a field goal to keep that 15% chance of scoring a touchdown. Obviously Tedford isn't one of those coaches.

Was Tedford's decision wrong? No. I don't think so. There are two ways to win the game in Cal's situation. You go for a touchdown on third down, and if you get it, you ice the game with a 10 point lead. Or you kick the field goal, go up 6 points, and force the offense to score a touchdown. Both ways are valid ways to win. Of course one is more conservative than the other, or one is more aggressive than the other, but neither way is wrong. What is a wrong decision in football? Had Tedford passed the ball on the 3rd down to get a touchdown, I think that would be a wrong decision. You clearly want to run the ball on the 3rd down to make the offense use its last timeout. Even if Tedford passed the ball and Cal scored a touchdown, I would still criticize the decision as being wrong. Anyways, I don't think Tedford's decision is "wrong" as so many of his critics suggest. Conservative? Sure.

If you want to talk about "wrong" decisions, then let's talk about Stanfurd Head Coach Jim Harbaugh's decision to go for it on 4th and 8 on his own 23 yard line with 3 timeouts remaining. That was wrong. That decision pretty much gave Cal a very good chance at scoring a touchdown that would have put Stanfurd into a 10 point hole, and at the very least it gave Cal an extremely good chance at a field goal which would put Stanfurd into a 6 point hole. The 6 point hole now required that Stanfurd get a touchdown to at least tie the game or win it. On the other hand, if Stanfurd had punted the ball on the 4th down and subsequently forced Cal's offense to punt on Cal's next possession, then Stanfurd would only need a field goal to tie the game. If Stanfurd scored a touchdown, they would have gone up 35-31 which then would have required Cal to get a touchdown to win the game.

Clearly, Tedford's decision to center the ball on 3rd down was conservative, but it was nowhere near as "wrong" as Harbaugh's decision to go for it on 4th and 8 from his own 23. That decision was clearly wrong (no quotes).

Addendum:

Coincidentally, Cal's first field goal of the game, was from the 11 yardline right hash - the very same position that Cal was in during the 4th quarter with just under three minutes remaining. Tedford had no problem kicking the field goal from the far hash then. On their face, these situations seem the same, and people might suggest that Tedford's actions were inconsistent. But the situations were slightly different. The first field goal kick was early in the game and Cal had tons of time left in the game to score again even if the field goal was missed. But the second situation was near the end of the game. Cal needed points and knew that they might not get the ball back this game. Thus, the added risk of a far hash kick may be less acceptable, hence why Tedford centered the ball.

And, of course, CGB did delve even further into these decisions last week, which you can read about here.

(2) Tedford should have gone for it on 4th and less than one yard. Another conservative decision. I personally would have gone for it. It's hard for the defense to prevent the offense from gaining less than a yard. That first down which never occurred could have led to a touchdown drive or perhaps another field goal.

(3) Gregory kept the 3-4 defense on the field on most third downs. When Cal forces opponent offense into 3rd downs, Cal usually brings out its 3-3 defense. However, in Big Game, the first thing I noticed was Gregory keeping the 3-4 defense out on the field for third downs, even third and longs. Why? He clearly wanted greater run support against Stanfurd runningback Tony Gearhart. Cal's pass rushing linebackers, and nickleback are less effective in run support than Cal's bigger 3-4 linebackers. I liked this decision by Gregory. It did concern me though because this decision also allows Stanfurd to put a slot WR against LBs. That is a huge mismatch that Stanfurd tried to exploit, but believe it or not, Cal's linebackers played very well and didn't allow too many easy completions against them.

(4) The wildcat might be better served if it handed the ball off to Sofele on the fly sweep more often. When Cal uses wildcat, the runningback will usually keep the ball. Usually may be an understatement. I think that perhaps 95% of the time, the RB will keep the ball. Stanfurd's defense was clearly not respecting the fly sweep action much during Big Game and was just hitting their interior gaps to stop Vereen. They were pretty successful too, as since Vereen was mostly limited to tough 2-4 yard gains. If Cal handed the ball off about as equally as the RB kept the ball, it would get the defense into more of a read-and-react mode allowing the offensive line to push back the DL with more ease, and freeze outside defenders who are responsible for outside containment of the fly sweep allowing Sofele to gain an advantage. But since Ludwig has the RB keep the ball a very high percentage of the time, the defense is less likely to be read-and-react, and will just play the RB as opposed to the fly sweep.

(5) Cal's offensive line shows up for once! The run blocking clearly wasn't the best we'd ever seen, and perhaps it wasn't even "great" but it was better than we have seen for a couple of months now. I don't know what Marshall did during the week to motivate the guys, but it seemed to work.

(6) Trick plays; the flea flicker. When they work, everyone heaps praise on the coaches. When they don't work, everyone always says something like "that was a wasted play, why'd they get fancy when they didn't need to?" The announcers said pretty much exactly that after Cal tried to run a flea flicker. Cal's intended WR (Boateng?) was open deep too and had beaten the deep defender. That could have been a touchdown if Riley had space to step up into the pocket. But instead, Cal's LG (Summers-Gavin) got beat very badly on the play. The LG lost his individual battle and his defender was the one who pressured Riley to scramble and throw the ball away. Again, it takes 10 men winning their individual position battles and executing for plays to work.

(7) Cal throws in a new blocking scheme! Cal's past power running scheme has utilized a backside pulling guard. There have always been just one pulling blocker. But against Stanfurd we saw the revealing of a new scheme where Cal had two pulling blockers. This occurred out of the 12 personnel set (1 RB, 2 TEs, 2 WRs). Cal would put two TEs to one side of the formation. One TE would be on the LOS in their normal position just outside of the offensive tackle, and the second TE (sometimes called H-back) would be just back and outside of the first TE. The side that the two TEs are lined up on is the strong side. Cal would actually run to the weakside and pull the strongside guard (the backside guard), and the second TE. This play works well theoretically for two reasons: (1) it breaks Cal's tendency to run strongside; and (2) it makes it riskier for the defense to overload on the strong side of the offensive formation in anticipation of a strongside run. Cal also ran this same scheme with 21 personnel (2 backs, 1 TE, 2 WRs) from the Weak-I formation using the fullback on a pull in lieu of the second TE.

(8) The outside zone returns! I'm not really sure why Big Game was the game that it made a reappearance. But in the 4th quarter we saw it run a few times. Perhaps Ludwig saw something schematically that he wanted to exploit, but that doesn't quite explain why we didn't see the outside zone earlier on in the game. Or, perhaps Ludwig felt that the Stanfurd defense was getting tired and would be too slow to stop the outside zone. He did use a new wrinkle in that he used some pre-snap motion to the playside with the fullback. This pre-snap motion gives the fullback a head start on his block, and allows him to get further outside.

(9) Cal covered up the TEs a lot. This was actually something that I did notice slightly during the game but had forgotten about by the time I got home. Commenter Missing Barry asked me about this, and despite his questioning I still didn't recall these plays. But after watching the game again, yes, I did finally remember some of these plays.

Cal rarely covers up their TEs. By "covering" or "covering up" I mean that the TEs become ineligible receivers and thus cannot go downfield for a pass. Cal rarely does this because it removes the TE as a passing threat to the defense. Why does Cal do it then? Well, if covering up the TE removes it as a passing threat to the defense, then the TE becomes a blocking threat to the defense. Because of this, the defense has to respect the run a little more. And that's just what Cal wanted the defense to do. Cal, in formations where the TE was covered up, would mostly playaction pass. In other words, Cal purposely used formations where the TE was covered up to cause the defense to bite harder on the run-fake (because the defense expected run due to a covered TE), to open up the pass.

When Cal covers up the TEs, it's usually out of the I-formation with twin WRs to the side of the TE (the strong side). Because the rules requires that the offense have at least seven men on the line of scrimmage (LOS), one of the WRs has to be on the LOS. 5 OL guys, plus 1 TE, plus 1 WR, equals 7 men on the LOS. However, in these formations that Missing Barry noticed, Cal was covering the TE up with 12 personnel (1 RB, 2 TEs, 2 WRs) rather than the usual 21 personnel (2 backs, 1 TE, 2 WRs) for I-formation.

(10) Cal's punt which was blocked was due to a player not winning his individual battle. I know we all love to hat ("hate" for all you CGBers, or non-CGBers who are unfamiliar with our slang) on Alamar but I'm not sure we can blame that blocked punt on him. Cal's long snapper, Rios, missed his block pretty bad and thus his defender got into the backfield for the block. I know lots of people might be thinking, "well, It's Alamar's job to prepare his players so if they mess up then its the coach's fault." My response is that the players play the game and not the coaches. At some point, you have to stop blindly blaming the coaches and you have to start looking at the individual players. Does this mean I don't think Alamar is on the proverbial hot seat? No. He definitely is. Not for this blocked punt, but for many years of sub-par kick return and especially kickoff coverage.

My point here is that there isn't a lot or any blame to be placed on Alamar for this blown play. It wasn't a scheme issue or confusion between players on who to block. All the Cal blockers knew who to block, it was just a matter of the defender beating the long snapper. Rios just got beat bad. He knew it too. Despite him recovering the blocked punt, after the play he had his head down and slowly walked off the field. He knew he was responsible for that block.

(11) The 112th Big Game was perhaps Riley's most clutch game. I don't know if I would say it was his best game. That was probably the Maryland game earlier this year where Riley finished with a 65.4% completion rate, four touchdowns, and zero interceptions. But Riley sure was clutch towards the second half of the game. He got yardage when nobody was open, and he threw some great balls too.

I sort of hate using that whole cliche "maturity" line, but after the Arizona State game and this game, I do feel like Riley's matured. Matured not in the sense that he's been messing around and now he's finally decided to get his head in the game, but matured in that he's seasoned. He's seen it all. He's been through lots. He's played in a variety of situations to the point where it's nothing new and he's more familiar with things. He's probably less rattled about the situations than before. And I hate making these kind of statements based off of snippets of TV coverage, but he did just seem more calm, poised, and "in the zone" than ever before.

In the podcast this week, some of my fellow Marshawnthusaists expressed the idea that perhaps Riley is now the second best QB of the Tedford era. I whole-heartedly disagree with such a notion (imo, at least two other QBs come to mind before Riley), but I do admit that this game has inched him up the ladder a little bit. If he really turns things around in 2010, perhaps he can take the title of the second best QB of the Tedford era, but that's going to take a lot of work.

(13) Empty set is killer. I love empty (when Cal spreads out the defense with five receivers - and not necessarily wide receivers). I love it for two reasons: (1) Cal seems to be fairly successful out of it; (2) if nobody is open Riley seemingly is always able to run for a few yards of gain. I'm glad that we've seen the use of empty formation increase over the past few weeks. I've been advocating for it quite a bit as since Cal usually runs seam routes, and vertical routes out of this formation and those routes are routes that Riley is pretty good at hitting.

In previous post-game thoughts against Arizona, I've noted how Ludwig had been using 5 WRs in the empty set. Such an observation was significant because Cal used to only use 11 personnel (3 WRs, 1 TE, 1 RB) out of empty. So the switch to 5 WRs out of empty was a surprise. But in Big Game, Cal went back to using 11 personnel. Why this special change? Well, first of all, using 11 personnel helps disguise the empty set. Cal uses 11 personnel in other formations, so when Cal sends 11 personnel into the huddle the defense doesn't really know if Cal is going to line up in empty or another regular formation. But when Cal was using 5 WRs for empty (and Cal only uses 5 WRs for empty and nothing else), the opposing defenses knew they would be seeing an empty formation. Because the defense knows this prior to the defense breaking the huddle, the defense can call a play in response to not only just the personnel group, but the formation too; whereas with using 11 personnel, the defense can only call a defensive play in response to the personnel grouping and not formation.

Side Note: The defense can call a play in response to the offense's formation without seeing the formation post breaking of the huddle based on tendencies. For example, Cal usually passes from shotgun on 3rd and long. Defenses, can extrapolate from this and can make the (generally correct) assumption that if Cal sends 11 personnel on the field, that they are going to see a shotgun formation too.

Cal was also using a little neat trick with the empty sets to get player mis-matches. Specifically, Ludwig would put the TE and RB out as the widest receivers leaving the slot receivers (the WRs) inside and lined up against safeties and linebackers. This is a very simple tactic to get mismatches. I will cover this in-depth in a frame by frame analysis later on.

(14) Luck's ill-fated pass. So Mohamed did a great job reading Luck's eyes and getting the perfect depth. Even if Mohamed wasn't there, I think Cattouse might have INTed the ball anyways. Cattouse was on the intended receiver like white on rice. If Cattouse hadn't intercepted the ball, he definitely would have at least defended the ball. I can see why Luck thought his receiver was open, because his guy definitely was for a moment. But by the time that Luck threw the ball, and by the time the ball would have gotten to the intended receiver, Cattouse had cut in front of the intended receiver to defend the pass. What Luck needed was to put more air under the ball to get it over Mohamed. But more air under the ball might not have helped anyways actually because Cattouse was there to pick anything thrown near him. So I guess what I'm saying is Luck was screwed even if Mohamed wasn't there and even if Luck had put more air under the ball like he had wanted to.

(15) Vereen rushes 42 times! Not much to say here but Vereen was beastly. Sure he's a bit slower than Best, but what he lacks in pure speed, he makes up for in his uncanny ability to gain a few extra yards when surrounded by four defenders and having no business getting any additional yards. He just has that subtle elusiveness to intricately weave through the defenders and trash to get those yards nobody really thinks he'd get. I suppose this is a bit surprising because Cal really hasn't had a RB like him before. Previous RBs just brutally powered their way through the trash and defenders (Lynch, Arrington, Echemandu). Best sort of puts his head down and runs through them but without tons of power. But Vereen just kind of slips through them - like magic.

(16) Cal owns the time of possession 39 minutes to 21 minutes. Stanfurd's defense had to have been tired. Being on the field for that long, having to defend 88 offensive plays!!! Geez. Cal has been averaging 65.2 plays per game prior to Big Game with a 4.87 standard deviation. It's been a while since done statistics, but doesn't that mean something like 95% of the data points will be within two standard deviations greater than and less than the mean? So that means 95% of the time Cal will run anywhere from 55.46 to 74.94 plays per game. Running 88 plays in a game put Cal 4.68 standard deviations above the mean! That's ridic. Straight ridic. Perhaps this is why Ludwig wanted to try some outside zone late in the game; he wanted to see if the Furd defense had the energy in them to defend the outside.

(17) Cool story, Hansel. So my parents' neighbor went to Big Game. He apparently knew some big Furd donor and got to go with him to the game or got his tickets or something. The Furd donor has luxury box suites. The neighbor got to the stadium early before most of the fans got there. In the luxury boxes, there was tons of free food around. My neighbor, taking advantage of the situation, began gorging himself on all the food set out for the rich Furd donors who hadn't arrived yet - everything from fancy burgers to monster sized hotdogs. When the Furd donors arrived, they were quite stereotypically, old and white. Stanfurd, quite intelligently, had a coffee bar in the luxury suite area so the old fogies could stimulate themselves to an awake state to watch the game. Also, quite intelligently, the luxury suite area had a full bar where the rich donors could then drink themselves into a stupor after the loss. Some famous people that were in attendance in the luxury suites: Condoleezza Rice, and Jim Plunkett. Best part of this story: the old Furd donors did not appreciate the loud cheers of the neighbor. Quite literally, when the neighbor would cheer, the old Furd donors would turn around to him and say for him to not cheer so loud. Something about the cheering overloading their hearing aids or something. How rude of the neighbor. Doesn't he know that he's at a football game? You're not supposed to make noise!

************************

Bonus Thoughts from college football games from the weekend of Friday, November 27th, to Saturday, November 28th.

Texas vs. Texas A&M - Exciting game. Texas A&M got risky and frisky with some blitzes and man coverage. They got burned. Perfect examples of what can happen when you roll the dice. I'm not saying Cal shouldn't be more aggressive (sending more pass rushers) on defense because this is what happens, but this certainly is what can happen. We should all be aware of the risks. Also, if I recall correctly, Texas A&M missed a short field goal from far hash that could have made a difference in the game. Just another reason why perhaps Tedford isn't completely crazy for centering the ball on that 3rd and 8.....

Alabama vs. Auburn - Auburn really showed some 2-minute drill ineptitude at the end of the game. They needed to drive the field in about a minute, and ended up calling about 3 plays in all that time. Their QB was confused. The coaches weren't getting playcalls into the game quickly. It was one ugly hot mess. That is what happens when you don't practice the 2-minute drill and you don't have a system to get playcalls into the game quickly. Thankfully, you'll never really see Cal do the epic failure that Auburn did. First of all, Cal practices its two-minute drill every practice. Every single day, they practice scoring in under two minutes.

Second, and I've talked about this before, but Ludwig has installed a great two-minute drill system. In previous years, the sideline QBs would signal in the playcall to the starting QB. The signals would take a few seconds to signal in, and then the starting QB would spend another 15 seconds telling the play to the players - in actual team language. Meaning, the defense can hear what the offense's playcall is. Sometimes, you can figure out what parts of the play will be based on the terminology (some of the terminology was too closely tied to the words/routes that they were meant to represent). But now, the sideline QB just signals in a number, one through nine. This takes about half a second. The QB will then yell out the number to the offense. All the offense players have those 9 plays memorized. The players need only to merely line up and run their play. This takes less time than the previous system. The additional benefit of the new system is that the actual playcall terminology isn't being yelled out by the QB so the defense can't hear it, thus further protecting the playcall.

To Center the Ball? Or to Not Center the Ball?

Texas vs. Texas A&M - aTm doesn't center the ball and misses a short field goal that would have made a difference in the game.

Arkansas vs. LSU - Arkansas doesn't center the ball and misses a short game-tying overtime field goal.

Arizona vs. Arizona State - Stoops centers the ball for a game winning field goal and the kick is good.

It's like the football gods are talking to us and telling us to center the football. This weekend might be the undeniable proof that so many center-the-ball haters need to finally appreciate Tedford's decision.

Roll On: What Will Cal's Offense Look Like Without Jahvid Best?

Avinash — Fri, 13 Nov 2009 11:00:25 -0000

I wish I could come up with something optimistic to write, but the fact is Cal's offense was pretty screwed up even with Jahvid Best back there. At this point it all boils down to blocking. The run blocking and pass protection stink. It's been stinking all year, it hasn't improved from week-to-week, and it's wishful thinking to expect anything to change during these last three weeks. Coming up? Arizona, 23rd in sacks, 11th in rushing defense, 37th in passing defense. Oh yeah, I'm totally hot for this. Dipping myself in cocoa butter right now.

If Cal's going to beat Arizona, the offensive line is going to have to play way better than they've been showing through conference play. Steve Marshall's going to have to coach these guys up, really make them play this game for Jahvid, and try to finally open holes for Shane Vereen and Covaughn Deboskie-Johnson. If these guys aren't talented enough to execute the sets they're given, adjust accordingly. What's been the most frustrating thing about this season has been the lack of adjustments on both the offensive and defensive side of the ball. I understand losing these games, but to get blown out in each game? It's just hard to sit there and take the same plays being called when they haven't been working not just for one game, but ONE MONTH.

Well, the Bears are going to have to adjust now; without Jahvid Best this is a drastically different team. Find out more about what Cal might look like after the jump, and why the Wildcat might be used quite a bit.

The rushing burden is on Shane Vereen. I doubt Tedford and Ludwig feel Deboskie is ready to handle anything more than 15% of the snaps at this point, so a lot of the burden will be put on Vereen to play a Forsett 2007-type role. Vereen did a manageable job against Arizona State last season, and the same thing will be needed (probably more) from him to pull off a victory against Arizona. Unfortunately, he's not going to have any more leverage getting through no holes as Best did.

Less inside zone please? Hey Coach Ludwig. Everytime you run inside zone between the tackles just so our poor running backs can get levelled for a one yard gain, you're taking days off my life. Arizona has a running defense that is very good, on the rise, confident in themselves, and is certainly going to play Cal the same way every defense has played Cal since the start of the season. Please try something somewhere.

The Bears can no longer run two running backs in a multitude of ways. That kind of eliminates the double threat of having one of either Best and Vereen line out as a receiver. So now Cal loses some of the unconventionality they were showing the previous three weeks (and who knows how the Oregon State game turns out if Best doesn't get injured) and they probably return to the conventional sets typical of a pro-style offense, since Deboskie or Sofele aren't going to be lining out wide or forcing defenses to stack the box.

Without the great receiving threats our running backs offered...

This will put more pressure on the receiving corps. Outside of Jones, no receiver has really played two good games in a row. Lagemann has shown promise, Tucker has vacillated between brilliant and bad, Ross can leap a lot, Calvin hasn't really been heard from, nor has Boateng. These guys are going to have to start playing well to help Kevin Riley out by getting separation from their defenders, not quitting on their routes, anything to adapt to the bad O-line play.

Anthony Miller is also sorely missed here--he'd become Riley's go to option in bad spots. With Jarrett Sparks or Skylar Curran you just don't know what you're getting.

More rollout options for Riley? Given how bad the pass protection has been, you'd have expected more of this even before Best's injury. But Kevin does seem to be more effective out of the pocket than in it--it might be worth considering just getting him going with play action fake bootlegs. Or something of the sort.

Best's absence doesn't diminish the Wildcat option. Many people think that the Wildcat is used primarily to put another blocker on the field, but in this case I feel that the Wildcat hasn't been used this season just because the blocking has been so porous, no matter how many guys you put out there to block. It's also to get the ball into the hands of the runner more quickly.

Why is that? When you direct snap to your running back and quarterback, that gives them an extra few seconds that would've been otherwise used to hand off the ball. This time allows your blockers to get in place and open up the holes for the running back to cut through. But the blocking has been so bad this season though that you're often seeing defenders penetrating the line of scrimmage at the time it takes the Bears to handoff the ball (the Bears have allowed 78 tackles for loss this season, and that number's probably greater if you add in 0-2 yard gains). Hence you put it in the running back's hands quicker to just let him take off before defenders can anticipate it coming.

(Notice that the quarterback draw has also been used in previous weeks to surprising success. It's a pretty damning indictment of your offensive line if your best running plays are quarterback keepers and direct running back snaps.)

Is it time to go back to the book of tricks? Around this time last year the Bears were totally flummoxed by the passing ineptitude that they had to resort to flea-flickers, hook-and-ladders, running back lateral/wide receiver passes. Although I've seen signs of unconventional plays, they've been for the most part snuffed out or failed due to execution errors. This next two weeks are the difference between a 6-6 disaster and an alright 8-4/9-3 season. Might as well try and throw everything out of the playbook.

In the end though, unless Riley has a monstrous game, this one's probably coming down to blocking again. The fact is the Bears still have to run the ball. Going straight to the pass and expecting the receivers to make good catches is a recipe of quick 3 and outs, and leaving one of the worst passing defenses in the country out there for Foles to pick apart. Sounds reallly enticing.

If no one blocks well, the offense is going to throw up another turd sandwich. And we could see something we've never seen at the end of a Tedford-era Cal football game--an empty Memorial in the 4th quarter.

(For those wondering why I didn't write anything about the defense...they are what they are this point. Smarter people than me said we'd miss our senior linebackers, and they're right. Plus I haven't watched enough defensive gametape this season to know how much of this is on Gregory for putting them in the wrong positions to make plays on the ball, so all I can do right now is hope they play better.)

Poll

Cal's offense will be __________ without Jahvid Best.

clicking even

11 votes

surprisingly pleasing

36 votes

making me groan a lot

80 votes

unbelievably bad

31 votes

forcing me to drink more

65 votes

223 votes | Poll has closed

Thoughts On The Playcalling On The Final Cal Drive Against ASU

TwistNHook — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 11:00:23 -0000

More photos » by Paul Connors - AP

about 1 month ago: Arizona State linebacker Vontaze Burfict, left, breaks up a pass in the endzone meant for California tight end Anthony Miller, right, in the fourth quarter of an NCAA college football game Saturday, Oct. 31, 2009, in Tempe, Ariz. California won 23-21. (AP Photo/Paul Connors)

Browse more photos »

Wow! What a game. Cal wins on the road in dramatic fashion, coming from behind. Something that, unfortunately, we've seen all too rarely from Cal recently. After the initial rush of excitement subsided, many people started to discuss the game in further earnest as they are wont to do. There was much consternation over the play calling at the tail end of the game. In specific, there was both a strong negative and strong positive reaction to 2 play calls in the last drive: A run out of the WildBear formation and a surprising pass out of the WildBear formation. While some instantly decried these controversial calls, others immediately praised their ingenuity and aggressiveness.

I do not pretend to be a final arbiter for these plays. My knowledge of football analysis comes mostly from reading HydroTech posts. But I did want to try to dig deeper and take a closer look at the context of the plays. Perhaps get into Tedford/Ludwig's head regarding the play calls and see what the thought process was. I use Tedford/Ludwig, because, although Ludwig is calling the plays, I feel confident in assuming that Tedford was involved. Especially with key plays such as these. After the jump, watch the video of the plays (thanks to TouchedTheAxeIn82) and then take a journey deeper inside Cal football.

The most important thing to do before reading this is to watch the video. Thanks to TouchedTheAxeIn82, we already have a YouTube video of the game winning drive:

Before we can really get into the specific plays at the end there, we have to take a step back and see what preceded it in the drive. From the ESPN Play by Play, here is the drive up to the tail end:

California at 3:16		CAL	ASU
1st and 10 at CAL 19	Jahvid Best rush for 4 yards to the Cal 23.	20	21
2nd and 6 at CAL 23	Kevin Riley pass complete to Anthony Miller for 22 yards to the Cal 45 for a 1ST down.
1st and 10 at CAL 45	Kevin Riley pass incomplete.
2nd and 10 at CAL 45	Kevin Riley pass complete to Verran Tucker for 10 yards to the ArzSt 45 for a 1ST down.
1st and 10 at ASU 45	CALIFORNIA penalty 15 yard Face Mask accepted.
1st and 25 at CAL 40	Kevin Riley pass complete to Marvin Jones for 26 yards to the ArzSt 34 for a 1ST down.
1st and 10 at ASU 34	Kevin Riley pass complete to Alex Lagemann for 16 yards to the ArzSt 18 for a 1ST down.
1st and 10 at ASU 18	Kevin Riley pass complete to Verran Tucker for 11 yards to the ArzSt 7 for a 1ST down.

Jahvid Best apparently injured himself on that running play there. He later said that it was not that bad and felt as if he could have come back in if need be. Apparently, the coaching staff was holding him out for precautionary purposes.

Kevin Riley was absolutely dealing during this time period. There was 1 incomplete and an unfortunate facemask, but he was also hitting various receivers. He actually hit 4 different receivers, including Tight End Anthony Miller, who seems to always have at least 1 clutch catch a game. In 5 pass completions, Riley moved Cal from the Cal 23 to the ASU 7. Riley is 5-6 on this drive for 85 yards (which is slightly off, since he had to deal with that facemask penalty setting him back), slinging the ball with authority.

If you actually look one drive earlier, you'll see that Riley was dealing there, also. From the above Play by Play link, here is the preceding drive:

California at 10:21		CAL	ASU
1st and 10 at CAL 31	Jahvid Best rush for 3 yards to the Cal 34.	20	21
2nd and 7 at CAL 34	Kevin Riley pass complete to Alex Lagemann for 12 yards to the Cal 46 for a 1ST down.
1st and 10 at CAL 46	CALIFORNIA penalty 10 yard Holding on Anthony Miller accepted.
1st and 20 at CAL 36	Kevin Riley pass incomplete.
2nd and 20 at CAL 36	Kevin Riley pass complete to Nyan Boateng for 12 yards to the Cal 48.
3rd and 8 at CAL 48	Kevin Riley pass complete to Anthony Miller for 22 yards to the ArzSt 30 for a 1ST down.
1st and 10 at ASU 30	Kevin Riley pass complete to Jahvid Best for 8 yards to the ArzSt 22.
2nd and 2 at ASU 22	Jahvid Best rush for no gain to the ArzSt 22.
3rd and 2 at ASU 22	Timeout CALIFORNIA, clock 5:55.
3rd and 2 at ASU 22	Kevin Riley pass incomplete.
4th and 2 at ASU 22	Giorgio Tavecchio 39 yard field goal MISSED.

There, Riley is 4-6 for 54 yards. Again, throwing the ball very well. Unfortunately, Tavecchio missed a key 39 yard field goal, causing one red faced man at Manny's to go absolutely ballistic!

Despite that unfortunate incident, if you look at Riley's 4th quarter stats, he is, by my pathetic math attempts, 9-12 for 139 yards. Again, it's slightly off, because he had to throw for several yards twice thanks to a facemask penalty on Verran Tucker. Nonetheless, it is to Riley's credit that he was able to deal with that setback and continue marching down the field.

So, at this point with Riley absolutely slinging it, what do Tedford and Ludwig do?

Take the ball out of Riley's hands.

There are some reasons to do this.

1. Cal is on the ASU 7 yard line. So, with any reasonable kicker, you are playing with house money.

2. There is still a lot of time left on the clock (like 1:30ish). Assuming an accurate field goal is the end result of this drive, you want to bleed the clock of time. Runs bleed clock time much more than passes do.

So, what is the immediate next play call?

1st Down Play Call

1st and Goal at ASU 7Shane Vereen rush for 2 yards to the ArzSt 5.

This was out of the WildBear formation. While watching it live, I was incredibly frustrated by this call. That was because I did not believe Tavecchio to be a reasonable kicker. I know that is harsh to say and I duly apologize for it. But having seen him lo these many games and the attempts earlier in the game, I just didn't trust him. I realize that if your kicker can't hit a field goal from the 7 yard line, you might as well not have one. Nonetheless, I didn't have the confidence in Tavecchio that Tedford did. Tedford was right, so hard to squabble there.

Forza Italia via imgs.sfgate.com

My perception of this play call (besides the time bleeding aspects) was to catch the defense off guard. They were anticipating a throw, so to run might be sufficient to squeeze in a TD. Plus, runs, in my experience, tend to have fewer failure rates than passes. So, Tedford/Ludwig are going into a very conservative mode here. Again, in their mind they are playing with house money. Take the least risky play and if it works, great. If it doesn't, it is OK, because the likelihood of fumble is low and the Field Goal is there. I understand that, although, running out of the WildBear seems to tip the D that they are going to see a run.

Then again, the ASU run D is remarkably sick, giving up fewer than 3 yards per carry. Perhaps Tedford/Ludwig felt the advantages of the additional blocker was greater than the element of surprise. Having faith in the talent of their players over some sort of sleight of hand.

I offer no answers to some of the questions that I've raised. Merely the concept that it seems there are MANY different things to discuss in how to make a play call. And makes me feel incredibly unqualified to ever pass judgment as to playcalls. Yet, I continue to write unabashedly!

So, that fails, kinda. We don't get a TD, optimal result. We also don't lose the ball, negative result. But we do burn time off the clock. And we gain a few yards to make the field goal attempt slightly easier. So, overall positive result.

That brings us to this next play. And this one; well, it's a doozy.

2nd Down Play Call

2nd and Goal at ASU 5Shane Vereen pass incomplete.

HydroTech often speaks of specific tendencies. That offensive coordinators call certain series of plays to set up later plays. The specific example here is that although Cal has run the WildBear innumerable times this year, I don't quite remember them ever throwing out of it. Or, in the alternative, they rarely, rarely, rarely throw out of it.

Now, the ASU Defensive coordinator now believes that Cal has gone into conservative mode. They are in the WildBear again. Riley is nowhere to be seen. They are going to run again, right? They've never passed out of that damnable formation before. And passing, especially with a running back, in this situation, is extraordinarily dangerous. Some might even say foolish.

Time to set the trap?

Now, I cannot pretend to be inside the mind of Tedford/Ludwig. But this is, to me, the most reasonable theory I can figure regarding this play call. It was a remarkably ballsy call.

And yknow what, it almost worked! It also didn't work. Disastrously. That is generally what happens when you execute an aggressive play like that. The optimum and negative spectrum is much greater. So, here the TD is nearly scored, but also an interception is almost made. That play took about 4 years off my life.

3rd Down Play Call

After this, Tedford/Ludwig go into incredibly conservative mode and, I believe, took a knee. HydroTech informs me that Riley centered the ball. I don't quite remember, I was in full on panic mode by this point. At the time, I was extraordinarily pissed that we didn't take an honest shot at the end zone with the red hot Riley there. But, like I said, I didn't have the faith in our kicker. Tedford/Ludwig did and, seeing the near disaster on 2nd down, wanted to run down the clock and ensure the best situation for our kicker occurred. After I calmed down (i.e. after Tavecchio made the kick), I saw the wisdom in Tedford/Ludwig's 3rd down call.

via imgs.sfgate.com

Conclusion

I honestly have no overarching conclusion here. There's no TEDFORD IS GREAT! or TEDFORD IS STUPID! in my mind here. By this post, I am not trying to really make a determination as to whether or not they were good or bad calls. An argument could be made that, considering we achieve the optimum result in the end, a game-winning field goals, the calls were good. That argument, to me, seems to lack some context, in specific, the high rate of failure for the Vereen throw. Nonetheless, some credit has to be given for the win. In the end, I merely wish to provide some context to what I perceive to be the reasoning behind the play calls. I'll open it up to you:

What, dear readers, are your thoughts on these two play calls?

Poll

What are your thoughts on the 2 play calls at the end of the ASU game? In specific, the 1st down WildBear run attempt and the 2nd down WildBear pass attempt.

I agreed with both play calls

100 votes

I agree with the 1st down WildBear run attempt, but disagreed with the 2nd down WildBear pass attempt

166 votes

I disagreed with the 1st down WildBear run attempt, but agreed with the 2nd down WildBear pass attempt

15 votes

I disagreed with both calls.

30 votes

311 votes | Poll has closed

Spaulding Roundup: What's At Stake For Tedford, Focus On Best & Other Football Notes

Nestor — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 13:02:36 -0000

More photos » by Don Ryan - AP

Browse more photos »

Lets expand a bit more on the sense of urgency Bears are feeling heading into Saturday. Jon Wilner from the San Jose Mercury News writes on whats at stake for Tedford's program:

They don't need to dominate UCLA. They don't even need to look good. But they must win — doesn't matter if it's 49-48 or 4-3.

Given the manageable schedule ahead, a victory would have the added benefit of putting Cal (3-2, 0-2) back on track for an upper-level finish in the Pacific-10 Conference. You could make a pretty good case for the Bears reeling off three or four victories in a row if they win Saturday.

But just as victory could propel Cal to a first-rate season, defeat — especially a resounding, lifeless defeat — surely would accelerate its demise and raise legitimate questions about Tedford's future:

Has he taken the program as far as he can? If he was the perfect coach to raise Cal from the ashes, is he the wrong coach to lead it to the conference title?

In that sense, Saturday's game could close the Tedford circle.

It comes five years and one week after the performance that made his career — a 23-17 loss in the Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum to a USC team that stands as one of the greatest in Pac-10 history. Coming within a few yards of toppling the Matt Leinart- and Reggie Bush-led Trojans cemented the Bears' ascendancy under Tedford.

Now they're headed back to Los Angeles, trajectory unknown. Can they continue the climb? Have they, as many believe, stagnated? Or are they headed for another free-fall?

Hmm. I will defer to the Bear fans or the people who follow that program closely on marking which "performance" "made" Tedford's career. I've got to think there are more poigant moments in Tedford's career in Berkeley ending up with victories. To me when I think of Tedford, I think of a good coach who has built a solid program that was basically burnt to the ground and left in worse shape than what Steve Lavin left for Ben Howland in Westwood.

I think Tedford will probably get his team to the Rose Bowl or a big bowl game eventually. I could be wrong on that but I can't help but be impressed by what he has built up in Strawberry Canyon. Now in recent years one can argue that his team has looked a little bit like the teams Bob Toledo had in his later years in UCLA, when season which began with lot of promises at the beginning didn't leave up to the high expectations as it unraveled in huge games. Cal's 2007 season in some ways was a carbon copy of UCLA's season from 2001. Bears' recent demise against Oregon and Southern Cal has lot of people wondering again. However, I think people need to get a sense of perspective and the big picture. From what I see is a damn good coach who has built a good program featuring spectacular play makers, who are going to be eager to make an emphatic statement this Saturday. Our guys better be ready. If not it's going to be another disappointing Saturday. More notes on the Bears and our team after the jump.

Ted Miller has some quick notes on Saturday's matchup:

California (3-2, 0-2) at UCLA (3-2, 0-2)

California beat UCLA 41-20 last year ... UCLA leads the series 49-28-1 .... Cal ranks second in the Pac-10 with 15 sacks ... UCLA kicker Kai Forbath has connected on 13 of 14 field goal attempts ... Cal is second in the conference in turnovers margin (plus-six) and is the conference's least penalized team ... Bruins defensive tackle Brian Price ranks second in the conference with nine tackles for a loss. No other interior defensive lineman ranks among the top-9 ... Bears linebackers Mychal Kendricks and Mike Mohamed combine for 17.4 tackles per game, making them the conference's top tackling tandem ... Bruins safety Rahim Moore ranks No. 1 in the nation with five interceptions ... Cal and UCLA rank seventh and eight in the conference in pass efficiency ... Bruins punter Jeff Locke leads the Pac-10 -- and ranks fifth in the nation -- with an average of 46.3 yards per boot ... Bears punter Bryan Anger ranks eighth with 39.3 yards per kick.

If you didn't know by now (this was discussed a lot during off season IIRC) the Bears are take the bus instead of flying down to LA. The whole idea was to help with the budget shortcoming experienced by UC's up and down the coast. However, given the game time for Saturday, they are driving down on Thursday so it didn't matter all that much at the end. From Jonathan Okanes in the Oakland Tribune:

In an attempt to do their part to help the university with its budget shortcomings, the Bears have agreed to take buses to Southern California for Saturday's game at UCLA. Cal usually travels on a charter plane for its road trips.

"We definitely want to do our part," Cal coach Jeff Tedford said. "To do our part to alleviate some of the issues. ... We have a responsibility."

But the Bears won't be saving as much money for the university as originally intended because the team has decided to leave Thursday rather than Friday, meaning an extra night in a hotel for the travel party. The team made the decision after it was announced last week that Saturday's game will begin at 12:30 p.m.

"We are going Thursday night so we don't run into a deal of busing down there late Friday, having a late walk-through and then having a 12:30 game," Tedford said. "We will for sure have gotten over the bus ride. I don't think the bus ride will be an issue."

The bus ride actually will allow the team to spend more time together than the one-hour flight down south. Tedford said the Bears might even hold some position meetings during their travels.

Bears are also getting healthy after having a by week. According the same report in the Oaklan Tribune wide receiver Nyan Boateng who missed last two games with fractured right foot will be avalable for Saturday. Boateng was the Bear's leading receiver last year and did some damage in Bear's last win (against the Gophers) cattching 5 passes for 78 yards and a TD. I am assuming Moore, ATV and co. will be aware of him when he gets on the field.

Of course when we talk about the Bears Jahvid Best becomes the focal point of all discussion. Predictably UCLA defenders are getting peppered with questions about how and whether they can contain arguably the best back in the conference (and of the premiere ones in the country):

"He's probably, and not to knock them, the best of the three," UCLA senior linebacker Reggie Carter said. "Earlier in the year they said he was the best back in college football.

"They pick you when you're up, and when you're down, you're down. The last couple weeks he hasn't had great games, so you haven't heard too much about him. But I still know he's one of the best in the country and the best in the conference."

"I'm not going to take anything away from him just because his last two games weren't great."

If anything, the Bears used the bye week to devise more ways to get the ball into Best's hands.

On a Tuesday-morning conference call, Cal head coach Jeff Tedford talked about using his speedy back in the Wildcat formation. [...]

"It just gives you an extra blocker at the point of attack," Tedford said. "Ultimately, it's your quarterback running the ball and it gives you a hat on a hat. Then they try to come up with schemes that let a guy go on the outside. It puts the ball in your best ballcarrier's hands, and a hat on a hat, and it's a matter of execution."

It will be interesting to see whether the Bruins can contain Best this Saturday. We have been burned by big plays during last two Saturdays. Best and the Cal offense is all about big plays. Remember UCLA defense did a decent job of containing Best last year in Berkeley except he busted lose for a 34 yard run which seemed to set the tone for that game.

I don't think it's just a matter of needing to tackle better for our defense. I think it will come down to how effectively our LBers are swarming to Best or whoever has the ball. It will be matte rof making sure our defenders have Best contained instead of allowing him to get any kind of space from which he can explode into the end zone. Easier said then done. I know. I think the other key for Bruin defense will be getting pressure on Kevin Riley early and not allowing him to settle into any kind rhythm. If he gets into a rhythm early on giving that Bears offense much needed balance, it will potentially be a long afternoon for our guys at the Rose Bowl.

Speaking of our defense coaches are making Reggie Carter taking it a little easy this game week:

Carter sat out his second consecutive practice Tuesday after spraining his left knee last week against Oregon. He maintains, however, that he will play against Cal on Saturday.

"They told me to relax a little bit, but my knee feels great," Carter said. "It's kind of irritating. I don't like watching. I feel like a spectator."

Carter, who leads the Bruins with 27 tackles, suffered a knee injury last season against Brigham Young, but he played in all 12 games and finished with a team-high 83 tackles.

Coaches don't sound too worried about Reggie. He will most likely be ready to go on Saturday. Another guy who might be getting decent amount of reps this Saturday is running back Christian Ramirez. The OC Register reports that Christian "took more reps than usual during practice Tuesday":

Patience might finally be paying off for Christian Ramirez.

The UCLA tailback took more reps than usual during practice Tuesday and he hopes that it will lead to more playing time when the Bruins host Cal on Saturday at the Rose Bowl.

"Before this, I was just out there watching and just going in for a couple of wildcat plays. That was it," Ramirez said. "Now I'm back in the mix, trying to remember everything and dust off the cobwebs."

I think Ramirez looked pretty decent in the two carries he got against Stanford. It might not be a bad idea to work him back into the mix. We haven't seen our RBs make any play out of the backfield by catching the ball except for one great play Knox had in Tennessee. One of the reason Ramirez had moved up the depth chart earlier this spring was because of his size and his ability to catch passes out of the backfield. So if both of those guys are ready to go this week, they could add desperately needed new dimensions to the UCLA offense this Saturday.

Again to wrap this up, I think we know what we are going to get from the Bears and the mindset they are in coming into the Rose Bowl. I think we have a general idea about our defensive abilities. The only quesitons are whether they can continue to cut down on mental mistakes (they did a good job on that front last Saturday) and can minimize the big plays. The biggest question mark heading into this Saturday though is our offense.

Right now I have no idea what to expect from Kevin Prince (or Richard Brehaut/Kevin Craft) against the Bears defense. I don't know if the light bulb will go on for us so that we are not settling for FGs in the red zone and playing Donahue style of playing not to lose. I am hoping our QBs will do enough to manage the game and keep us in it. To beat the Bears though I think we are going to need to score at least 20 something point if not in the low 30s. Can we do it?

GO BRUINS.

Golden Nuggets: Press Conference Tuesday

Berkelium97 — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 23:45:09 -0000

As usual, today was the Cal football media luncheon. Tedford's comments were more informative and insightful than they normally are. He touched on a lot of areas the fans and press have been talking about. Here are some highlights:

Tedford:

On the UCLA defense, especially its front, and the challenge it presents
"It's another great defense. One of the best players in the conference in [DB Sheldon] Price - he's really a special player. But it's not just him. They have very good linebackers - the Bosworth brothers [DE Korey and LB Kyle] play very had and very well. Akeem Ayers is a great, very athletic linebacker. They're a really good defense. [Alterraun] Verner is a great corner. Again, they're one of the top defenses in the conference and they're going to make their plays. I think Oregon scored one offensive touchdown last week, so they're a good defense and we're going to have to execute, we're going to have to be patient, we're going to have to make sure we protect the football and not turn the football over. Again, very good defense."

On WR Verran Tucker's medical problems

"Verran has a calf issue, a pretty deep bruise. We're going to have to see how he responds to treatment. Verran is day to day."

On the status of WR Nyan Boateng
"Nyan practiced on Sunday and we're going to increase his participation as the week goes on, but he ran some routes on there and he ran a couple of one-on-ones, and today we'll get him going a little bit more. As of right now, it looks like he may be ready to play unless he has a setback."

On P Bryan Anger, who is currently ranked eighth in the Pac-10 in punting
"He hasn't been as consistent as we would like. We all know that he has great potential. It was real windy at Oregon and .. he kind of shanked one that day. And then one against USC, he punted right down the middle of the field, low, that got returned on us. Bryan will keep working at it and get back to the consistency that we need him to play with. He's healthy."

On whether the bye week came at a good time
"I think it was [a good time]. Time kind of heals some of the wounds and I think it gave us a little bit of time to go back and practice and get our thoughts together and get ourselves back together again before just jumping back into another game preparation-type things. It goes both ways. Sometime you jump into preparation, it forces you to forget about the last game, but I think last week worked really well for us, that we were able to have three really good, hard practices and put a little bit of space between last week's game and get ready for this one."

After the jump we have Riley's quotes from the press conference, lots of stories on the Cal-UCLA matchup, and a handful of other stories. Plus Justin Forsett being awesome. Yes, AWESOME.

Riley

On the team's demeanor coming out of its bye week

"Optimistic, [ready to] go out there and win a game. Bye week was the most physical bye week I've ever been a part of. We usually have a Thursday where the younger kids get a scrimmage, but this [past] week we practiced against the defense again. Everybody was a little banged up but it was good for us. Going live against the defense, we did a lot of situations, going red zone drills because the last two weeks we haven't been working down there. But just getting ready for the game - we're ready."

On whether he feels they accomplished the things they wanted during the bye week
"Yeah, for sure. Did a lot of throwing. We have more individual time with the receivers and we're going to continue to do that."

On efforts to improve some routes
"Every day we worked on a few routes that are staple routes. We can call them up anytime, we should be able to get a completion on them. The way of route-running and how we were reading it quicker and throwing the ball better on each route was great to see, and it continued even on Sunday's practice. We ran a few of them and it was just real easy and clear."

On specific things he worked on during the bye week

"I threw after every day of practice. The balls I am missing, I'm just putting them a little high, but every one is close, I'm just sailing them a little bit. Through that, just becoming more accurate and have receivers make more plays. Worked on it Friday as well during the day off, just putting it in a better spot. Threw the ball well last week and threw the ball well on Sunday."

On what may have caused high throws
"When the pressure is coming and I'd step up in the pocket, I'd release my hand up and it'd come out, just a little too quick."

Boateng talks about the sense of urgency Cal has for the UCLA game.
Rob Calonge talks about the surprising state of Pac-10 play so far.
JO on Tedford's decision to leave for UCLA on Thursday.
Wilner says a loss this week will raise questions about how much longer Tedford will coach at Cal.
Neuheisal is displeased with his team's QB play. Kevin Prince says he needs to do a better job breaking down film. UCLA's defense has been impressive this year, but the offense has been lackluster. The team is trying to avoid developing a schism over this issue, similar to what happened last year.
Both Cal and UCLA need to show consistency if they plan on winning Saturday.
After day three was cancelled due to rain and wind, men's golf finished first at the Alister MacKenzie Invitational.
Water polo's Zach White earned player of the week honors.

And now, your moment in Justin Forsett awesomeness, taken from Sunday's 41-0 smashing by the Seahawks of hapless Jacksonville:

via cdn0.sbnation.com

How about just the hit?

via cdn3.sbnation.com

Field Gulls was succinct in their description of the play.

It kind of looks like Brian Russell wants to give his old teammate a big bear hug but Justin's not going to have it.

Fun fact: Justin Forsett's NFL.com page lists him at 5'8", 194 lbs.

Golden Nuggets: Syd the Prankster

Berkelium97 — Sat, 10 Oct 2009 00:30:15 -0000

The SacBee ran a great story on the antics of the normally quiet Syd'Quan Thompson. The article goes on to talk about Syd's family. It's a great read for those who want to know more about Syd's background.

Thompson does have a penchant for prank-calling his mother, Patty, who falls for it every time.

"I'll call her work, change my voice and tell her that the pizza delivery is on its way, and she'll say it's not for her, and I'll have her going," Thompson said, a grin creasing his face after a Bears practice Wednesday. "Love that."

Or the time he called his mom and, with a deepened voice, said, "Yes, this is Berkeley police. Are you related to Syd Thompson?"

Mom's heart sank, before her son burst out laughing.

Earlier this year, Thompson called, in regular voice and tenor, and said she'd never guess where he was. The library. A perfect place to research and read--and where the quiet blend in with the really quiet.

"The library, of all places!" Patty recalled this week at her North Sacramento home. "I couldn't get that kid into a library at all during high school--too cool--and now where is he now every day? The library. I'm so happy, so proud. Look what the world can do for you."

After the jump we have JO's practice notes, injury updates, optimism from Wilner, previews of Cal sports events this weekend and more. Due to the bye week, the Golden Nuggets will take Sunday off (unless some unexpected news breaks) and will be back Monday with a recap of the weekend in Cal sports.

JO posts his practice notes. Boateng healed remarkably quickly and should play against UCLA. Matt Summers-Gavin should also be back against UCLA. Rob Calonge also has some notes and quotes from practice. Tedford says the bye week was an opportunity both for improvement and mental/emotional decompression.
Wilner says we'll know a lot more about Cal and Stanford by 8pm on October 17th. Wilner believes Cal will rebound and have a solid season. James Bucci says Cal can still play its way into a solid finish for the season.
Buster Sports predicts Cal will end up with six wins and land an invitation to the Poinsettia Bowl.
Fox Sports predicts Cal basketball will win the Pac-10. They also think Randle will take home Pac-10 Player of the Year honors.
Daily Cal on men's soccer making statements when it counts. They're confident heading into this weekend's matchups.
In addition to battling No. 3 Washington, No. 15 men's volleyball will also be battling colds and flu.
No. 4 men's water polo must overcome scoring droughts if it is to succeed in this weekend's tournament.

2009 Cal Football: Hype vs. Reality

Avinash — Mon, 05 Oct 2009 10:45:28 -0000

More photos » by Ben Margot - AP

The Golden Bears were probably a little overhyped going into the season given their issues. We delve into what the real Cal will look like the rest of the season.

Browse more photos »

I know people are depressed with 72-6 the past two weeks, but despite the one-sided scores, there's much to be encouraged about. Like I said in yesterday's post, people seem to look at the final scores and see Cal getting destroyed in both games. I firmly disagree; the Bears adjusted and played miles better versus SC, especially along the lines. One big deficiency (quarterback) ended up submarining all of those hopes on Saturday, but it's a long season and easier opponents await. Don't forget that.

So now that the last two weeks have totally ripped away the gloss on our season, let's start separating the hype from the reality of our team. ESPN and the mainstream media did their dirty work early in the preseason, again falling in love with talented skill players without looking deep into the Bears and exploring weaknesses that only hardcore football enthusiasts delve into.

Now we'll get plenty of hype this week, only it'll be of the negative side. Just like the positive hype, most of it will be wrong. Let's take a look at some aspects of it. Add your own hype vs. reality discussions of the Bears in the comments.

Hype: California was returning 17 starters, most in the Pac-10. Perception? The Bears have a deep, experienced, unit.

Reality: California was returning 17 players with starting experience. Okay, let's break this down, because none of us really analyzed this well, me included.

Our starting QB got the call in the first four games last season, was pulled in the fourth game, didn't return until late in the sixth game, was knocked out in the eighth game, came back in relief in the ninth game, then was out for the bowl game. To say that Kevin Riley had a "typical returning starter" experience short-sells the situation.
As for the offensive line, Chris Guarnero is a returning starter despite playing only a third of the season and playing at a different position than center; Justin Cheadle was playing out of position much of last season, as was Mitchell Schwartz. These shifts don't mean the experience they received is worthless, but there is something to playing the same position week. And of course Mike Tepper is the furthest thing from returning starter--he hasn't played competitive football in a year, and it's clear he isn't close to his 2007 form.
There's also the receiver roulette, where it's hard to say Verran Tucker and Nyan Boateng had anything close to typical starting years, especially considering one only emerged as the starter after Michael Calvin got injured, and the other kept on dropping catches both this season and last. It's hard to say our receiving corps is playing up to form.
Mike Mohamed did start most of last season, but his role is drastically different from last year. Although he's played okay, we might've gone overboard with our effusive praise for his abilities. The Prophet was clearly effective at being the most productive linebacker last season because he was the last resort guy. Stepping into Follett's shoes has not been easy for him; he does not have great rushing abilities on the edge and the coverage suffers without him back there. So he's been sort of switched back and forth between outside and inside the past two weeks, with little result.

Thus, the only starters with typical "starting" experience were Best, the defensive linemen, and the defensive backs. Maybe Mohamed and Riley. That's about eight to ten starts with strong, stable starting experience.

Moreover, our losses were definitely crucial. Subtract our two best blockers from our offense, our best pass rusher from our defense, and half of our coverage players...and, well, we're going to have our woes. Hopefully the worst is over in that regard.

More examples after the jump. What are your thoughts on the hyped Bears versus the real Bears, both positive and negative?

I covered this yesterday, but I'll add it in here.

Hype: We have one of the most talented players in the country and we can go far if we ride him all the way.

Reality: He is only as good as the rest of our offense.

Jahvid has his weaknesses, there's no doubt--his pass protection and blitz pickup abilities need plenty of work. However, in terms of running ability, he needs his blockers to open gaps for him and a stable passing game that plays in tandem with his abilities. He got neither in Oregon and only average run blocking against the Trojans. And even if he had Alex Mack and Will Ta'ufo'ou, they too would have had their difficulties against eight to nine Trojans in the box in that first quarter when it was a relatively close one.

Besides, how can Best step up if his counterpart in the backfield steps down?

I should also note something about the malevolent influence of ESPN. When given so much to cover, they focus on what's most likely to intrigue the entire nation--Tim Tebow, Colt McCoy, Tim Tebow's heart, Notre Dame, Tim Tebow's leadership, USC's daily drama, Tim Tebow's NFL Draft prospects... Their previews are painfully weak, usually looking back to last year's results for almost complete, blind guidance as to pick who will be back (and we see virtually the same teams that made last year's BCS getting picked again by the 'experts'!).

So obviously when Jahvid is our most prominent representative of the university, and he puts up almost a thousand yards of offense in the final four games of 2008...he's going to get pub. When he bursts for a 70 yard touchdown on Cal's first scoring drive or when he puts up all five scores in Minneapolis, it only gets worse.

This is a dangerous example of hyping a player to a level he cannot perform at, no matter the quality of the opponent. We always have to be prepared to lower our expectations in an age where media is dynamic in spinning messages that have no basis in reality (this is true in all worlds, entertainment, political or sports). Be careful how much you buy into the ESPN hype machine. They spin nothing but misinformation and lies, especially in college sports, when they tend to know only the barest of what's going on.

Listen to fools and be prepared to get fooled.

Now we turn it around the other way and blow up dumb hype.

Hype (of the negative sort): Our players showed no fire and heart this weekend. Holmoe era teams showed better spirit.

Reality: Are you joking? Did you watch the game? After the opening touchdown Cal's defense had three red zone situations where they could've caved and let USC blow the doors off. They gave up three points on each possession and kept it within a three score game late into the fourth. They even gave us a turnover that led to the Bears only points. If that's not heart for a team that didn't really have a prayer of winning in the second half, I don't know what it is.

The offensive line tried their best against eight/nine man fronts when it was clear Riley wasn't going to have his best game, even getting that bizarro Wildcat formation going for a full drive and chugging something out of it. You could tell Jahvid was trying all he could playing against overstacked run defense. There was occasional chippiness late, including a brief trash talking session with a Trojan on the Bears sideline.

The feeling I get is that fans are looking at the players glum, downcast expressions on the TV, and playing their best version of Dr. Melfi sans restraint. The team happens to be losing the biggest game of the season. Do you want them all to be doing push-ups on the sidelines and headhunting Trojan receivers to get themselves going?

Our guys played hard all the way to the end. It just happened that the more talented and focused team won. In football that tends to happen.

Hype: Jeff Tedford's stoic sideline nature is the reason we're falling behind the rest of the Pac-10.

Reality: People who believe this are the reason Roe v. Wade should never be overturned.

I'm usually nice to bitter, tired Cal fans. I don't mind people who glumly predict Tedford won't get us to the next level, because, well, it's normal for fans to feel that way after disappointing defeats. Especially when it happens in games we could've won if things had gone right here and here and here...

But I'm not tolerating stupidity, and this particular aspect below truly riles me:

There is this popular, annoying theory that what we need is not better recruiting classes, or even better playcalling, or we need USC to go on probation. No, what we need is firebrand leadership.

On whether he should yell at the team

We need to work hard. I’m never going to scream and yell at the guys. I’m never going to do that. They don’t deserve that. They play hard. I get e-mails saying you should chew them out. I’m not going to do that. I’m going tom motivate them and we’re going to work hard to get better and create a positive environment to get some confidence going.

In other words, what some Cal fans want is Tedford to go off on Riley and rip him for bad passes. Which, you might remember he did, last year against Colorado St. before inserting Longshore for the rest of the 2nd half. Moreover, they want Tedford going up to Best and ripping into him for not finding nonexistent holes, rip into Holley for not being Will Ta'ufo'ou, rip into the receivers for not catching uncatchable pases, rip into the defense for giving up 16 points through three quarters.

You know why? Because look at all the other 'great coaches' in the conference! Sarkisian RALLIED THE TROOPS and had everyone believing they can beat the mighty Trojans (it has carried onto the next two games, where the Huskies have won their next two by a combined total of negative 27 points). You've got Harbaugh getting mad and pissed at everyone, and clearly the Furd are a transcendent team. They beat UW, UCLA and Wazzu, who won a combined 6 games last year, by a combined 54 points. You've got Neuheisel chewing out Kevin Craft before sending him back out to the fire to throw another horrid interception. And of course you have Petie, who's a bigger cheerleader for his team than the Song Girls.

The solution, clearly, is to hire Rope Guy for Coach. He seems to get everyone fired up.

via cdn2.sbnation.com

Look. We have no idea how Tedford handles his team behind closed doors. The pregame stuff is off-limits, and we know he's ripped into his team during halftime after unsatisfactory first half performances. What does a coach ripping players in public accomplish other than to satisfy the libidos of idiot Cal fans?

Probably about the same as Pete Carroll at the Sanchez press conference: It makes you look like a dick.

Let's be thankful we don't have a coach who doesn't treat his players like shit when they decide not to return (see Aaron Rodgers his junior year, Marshawn and Desean after their junior campaigns, and probably the same for Best this season) and never, ever throws them under the bus. In the long-run, karma will pay us back for showing respect to someone who has put up with our and the media's slightly unreasonable expectations.

Unless the angry fringe Cal fans become the majority of Cal fans, that is. It's not a situation I'm interested in courting, so let's roar through the rest of the season to silence hype of all sorts, alright guys?

Getting to know the California Golden Bears: Q&A with CGB

jtlight — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 20:30:13 -0000

More photos » by Paul Battaglia - AP

The guys from CGB have a special place in their hearts for Marshawn Lynch. Will Jahvid Best take that spot?

Browse more photos »

With Cal coming to town this weekend, we caught up with the guys from California Golden Blogs and asked them a few questions on their team. Below you'll find our questions, and their answers. Our answers to CGB's questions can be found on their site.

1) Is Jahvid Best the greatest running back to ever play at Cal? More specifically, will he replace Marshawn in that special place in your heart?

That's like asking if the Father is better than the Holy Ghost. And I really hope that my knowledge of Catholic mythology is sufficiently good for that to have made sense.

That said, even if he were to win the Heisman and ride off into the NFL as a National Championship winning back, there's no way he is ever overtaking Marshawn in my heart. Marshawn is Marshawn. He's Marshawn.

That ALSO said, Jahvid Best is big. Gabby Hayes big. He's getting hype that Marshawn never quite did. He's doing it with amazing highlights, the only real currency in college football.

What he needs to do to overtake Marshawn in the minds of the reasonable is to have huge days in the big games. That's always been the critique, not only of Cal, but specifically of Best. If he can lead Cal to victories over Oregon, USC, and/or UCLA, he could really make a name for himself.

2) How has the receiving corp looked this year? While Oregon's secondary is not top notch, it will easily be the best faced by Cal this year. How will your receiving corp (without Nyan Boateng) fare?

HydroTech: HAHAHAHAHA. "While Oregon's secondary is not top notch, it will easily be the best faced by Cal this year." HAHAHAHAHAHA.

TwistNHook: Ya, not doing a great job of respecting the Juju:

jtlight: Let me clarify. It will easily be the best faced by Cal SO FAR this year.

TwistNHook: Seriously, though, each year there is a lot of hype about the Oregon secondary. But each year it seems that they never quite live up to the potential of that hype. I think having a productive passing game is the key to success here. Everyone and their mom (Hi, Mama Ward!) is gonna be on the look out for Best.

If Riley can pass and force the D to be honest towards the pass game, then Best is gonna have a huge game. Losing Nyan Boateng to injury is unfortunate. He is a very talented receiver, no doubt about it. But right now Cal has a lot of good to great receivers, but no amazing ones. There are no DeSeans here (....yet). So, while it is unfortunate to lose Boateng, we do have a variety of other WRs who can step up. WRs like Verran Tucker, Marvin Jones, and Jeremy Ross. Also, let's not forget that Andy Ludwig, noted pinata of the Oregon fandom, likes to put Best and backup RB Vereen out wide. Best scored a TD on a 30 or 40 yard pass play and nearly had a 60+ pass completion in the first game. He can get ahead of all the defenders and then its just up to Riley to heave it to him.

3) On a scale of 1-10, how worried are you that Jeremiah Masoli turns into the quarterback of the end of last season?

10. But thats only because Im an old school "dumbass" Cal fan who has no faith or belief in the success of his team. A more reasonable fan might say that not only has Masoli looked really, really, really, really bad the past couple of games, but the O-Line hasn't done him any favors.

Cal's 3-4 D is designed to suffocate the running game. Notice how Cal is giving up 2.0 yards per rush. They have squelched the running games of all 3 opponents to date completely. Now, Oregon will be the greatest running game they potentially see all year. Their QB can run great and their new starters are great runners also. But Oregon's biggest offensive strength runs right into our greatest defensive strength. We saw last year the same thing. Cal was able to control the Oregon running game (not stop it, mind you, just reign it in) and force Masoli to beat us with his arm. He couldn't.

Will he this year? With a worse O-Line and no more Blount? Oregon does have home field advantage now and it won't be a lake out there, but a better question might be, on a scale of 1-10, how worried are you that Jeremiah Masoli remains the quarterback of the beginning of THIS season?

4) In the ATQ Cal preview, the biggest worry was the Cal D-line. How have they looked this year. Have they been as dominant as expected?

In a word, HELLYESTHEYHAVEZOMGIMNOTSURETHISISONEWORD,BUTOK. In more words, yes. But also, yes. They have 13 sacks already on the year. They were getting pressure against Minn QB Weber last week with 3 rushers at times. Tyson Alualu already has 2.5 sacks.

Plus, they have some great depth. Last year, Tyson Alualu and Cameron Jordan were great. But they can only play so much. They depth wasn't there last year. Now, we have back ups like Ernest Owusu, Trevor Guyton, and Jarred Price. These guys can come in to spell the Jordans and Alualus of the world.

We just teed off on the Maryland QB. Here is a montage.

5) What's up with your secondary? Against poor competition, it has been far from world beating, as was assumed. Has the over-hype, under-perform curse spread from up north?

I disagree with the main assumption here. For two reasons:

1. What does far from world beating mean? It's so vague as to have minimal value. For example, in the first two games, Cal completely squelched the run, forcing the opponents to pass. And pass and pass and pass. And they were able to complete some short passes over the middle, which is more the purview of the linebackers than say the secondary.

Combining the short pass success with the volume of passing, some of the numbers are inflated. But when push came to shove, Cal held strong. Cal, after all, only gave up 1 passing TD in the first two games. So, I disagree in that sense that it has been far from world beating.

2. Regarding the Minn game, Minn definitely had some passing success. They threw for 3 TDs. One of which was on an impressive trick play. Thrown by Eric Decker. The other two were caught by Eric Decker. Essentially, Eric Decker was killing us out there. And when I say "us" I mean, in specific, Darian Hagan. Hagan certainly did not have a great game, no doubt about that.

But instead of denigrating the Cal passing defense, maybe we should instead credit Eric Decker. He is a top notch player. Easily a NFL talent. Any secondary would have their hands full with him. But I guess that's just how you Oregon fans are. Always so negative. Trying to bring me down. Make me feel bad. Let me live my life in peace, woman! Sorry, sorry, force of habit there, sorry.

Anyway, ya, there have been some break downs in the last 3 games. But I credit them to a defensive game plan that said "we'll give you the short pass over the middle, good luck with all that" and the fact that Eric Decker is just a special player.

Cal @ Minnesota Post-Game Thoughts (With Bonus EWU Thoughts)

HydroTech — Thu, 24 Sep 2009 08:00:27 -0000

More photos » by Paul Battaglia - AP

2 months ago: California quarterback Kevin Riley, right, fumbles the ball as he is hit by Minnesota defensive tackle Barrett Moen during the fitrst half of a NCAA football game, Saturday, Sept. 19, 2009 in Minneapolis. (AP Photo/Paul Battaglia)

Browse more photos »

Before I get to the Minnesota post-game thoughts, here are a few EWU post-game thoughts that came to mind after I wrote Cal vs. Eastern Washington University Post-Game Thoughts:

... (see link above for the earlier thoughts from Cal vs. EWU) ...

(11) Cal ran the ball using man blocking and a pulling backside guard to the weakside of the offense for the first time ... since at least 2006. I've only really started to truly analyze and chart Cal's offensive plays since 2006. Since I've been doing that, I've noticed that one of Cal's biggest tendencies is to run the ball towards the strength of the formation. Thus, if the tight end is to the right, Cal runs to the right. If the tight end is to the left, Cal runs to the left. Cal broke this tendency a bit in 2008 under offensive coordinator Frank Cignetti. In 2008, Cal began running weakside using its zone blocking scheme, but still would only run its man blocking scheme to the strong side. However, against EWU, I noticed Cal ran the ball using its man blocking scheme to the weakside of the formation a few times. This is significant because it breaks a tendency and gives the Cal offense more diversity. This new addition to the Cal offense is probably an addition implemented by new offensive coordinator Andy Ludwig.

(12) Cal ran the ball from shotgun using the trap for the first time since 2006! Note that this statement has a definitiveness to it, as compared to the statement of the previous point. Under offensive coordinator Mike Dunbar in 2006, Cal implemented a shotgun trap running play which utilized a pulling backside tackle. Cal used this play quite a bit as since Nate Longshore was the quarterback in 2006 and he did not have the speed to be an adequate zone read threat to run the zone read. The fact that Ludwig is running this play now doesn't mean that Ludwig thinks Riley doesn't have enough speed, but is probably running this play to show more diversity. Now, defenses who scout Cal will realize that they have to be aware of the zone read and trap plays - two different running schemes from shotgun and not just one.

(13) Riley's "QB keeper" was a zone read. Much hooplah has been made of Riley's scamper. A lot of people are calling it a "QB keeper." The play was actually a zone read. I think for accuracy purposes, people should call it a zone read. By calling it a "QB keeper" it suggests that the play was meant to have Riley run the ball all along. That is simply not true. On that play, the QB has the option of handing the ball off, or keeping the ball and running himself. He has an option. It is not a predetermined decision. A true "QB keeper" would be a QB draw, for example. Cal ran a QB draw against Minnesota to gain a critical 1st down conversion on a 3rd down.

(14) Ludwig's was probably using "new" plays against EWU to try them out against a live opponent. I was surprised to see the shotgun trap and man blocking to the weakside of the formation against EWU. I had figured that most of the wrinkles would have been unveiled against Maryland. I was wrong. Clearly, Ludwig is still tinkering with things. I believe he chose to run those "new" plays against EWU because it represented an opportunity to try them out against a live (non-Cal defense) defense, and because the risk of trying those plays against EWU was much lower against a better opponent. You don't want to try out new plays against a talented opponent defense when the game is on the line. But EWU presented an opportunity to try out "new" plays against a somewhat talented opponent defense when the game is somewhat on the line. That is better than trying the "new" plays against Cal's own 3-4 defense which would be less insightful for Ludwig since the 3-4 is not in use by many opponents that Cal will face.

Here are my Minnesota thoughts. I apologize for the tardiness of my posts and the lack of analysis this season thus far. School is keeping a lot busier than I expected this semester.

Now for some Minnesota thoughts:

(1) Minnesota's new stadium is pretty nice. It's shiny. It's new. It is really easy to get in and out of the stadium. Their replay screen is like the size of Dwinelle. Their press box is the size of the entire west side of Memorial Stadium. But the stadium only holds 50,000 people. My biggest gripe about the stadium is that the fans at the open end of the stadium cannot see the big-ass replay screen. In fact, Minnesota's stadium is much like U$C's Coliseum in that the visiting fans get shafted with seats where they can't see the replay screen because they're sitting behind the replay screen.

Cal's replay screen: about the size of the red "fan favorites" ad.

But Minnesota did have a small replay screen on the other end of the stadium for those unlucky fans who can't see the big-ass replay screen that they were sitting behind.

The Cal section was just to the right of the replay screen on the upper deck (and behind the replay screen).

Cal players warming up on the field before the game.

Minnesota players coming out of their tunnel with a fireworks display. Note the pretty empty student section in the endzone (the people all wearing gold).

(2) Minnesota band sucks and let the terrorists win. First of all, you couldn't hear them. Apparently, their band plays with dynamics or something, meaning they play loud some times and soft at other times. The problem is, when you play sort in an open-ended stadium that doesn't keep in the sound, you can't hear anything. I could barely hear anything they were playing. Even the Minnesota fans around me couldn't partake in singing their fight song and clapping because they couldn't hear the music. Sad. Second, the Minnesota band sucks because they let the American flag touch the ground. I don't know a lot about flag bearing stuff, but the one thing I do know is that you're not supposed to let the American flag touch the ground AT ALL. It's like one of the biggest disgraces you can ever commit. You might as well kill yourself after such a terrorist-like act. Minnesota's band let the terrorists win.

YOU'RE LETTING THE TERRORISTS WIN!

(3) Cal fans were pretty quiet. I get it. You're outnumbered 1,000 to 50,000. You don't feel like it's worth it to make noise when there are so few of you. You don't want to be that loud dude who annoys the home crowd around him because he's making noise for his team's defense. So, you don't yell on defense. It was rather pathetic how Cal fans were very content with not making noise. I was in the Cal section. Aside from my group, only perhaps 10% of the other Cal fans around me were making noise on Cal defense. Sad.

(4) Minnesota fans were pretty nice. They kept to themselves. Nobody went out of their way to trash talk, but they also didn't go out of their way to say hi either. Only three Minnesota fans talked to me. The first guy was the ticket scanner dude as you walked into the stadium. He asked me how much I thought Cal was going to win by (how dare he assume that just because I'm a Cal fan that I think Cal is going to win!). I said we'd win by 14. He said that we'd win by 6. The second Minnesota fan that talked to me was the middle-aged man sitting in front of me. He remarked how Minnesota looked slow in the first quarter. I told him the Pac-10 is just really fast. Faster than the SEC fast. He admitted that Jahvid Best is like nothing he's ever seen before. The third Minnesota fan that talked to me was an older gentleman at a restaurant. He saw me with my Cal shirt on and asked me if I had taken a bus to Minnesota. Um, jet planes do exist nowadays.... I politely said that I flew into Minneapolis. After the game, while my friends and I were waiting in a short line to get carded as we were entering a bar, a U$C fan walks by. The U$C prick sees the Cal contingent, he takes off his U$C hat, and points to the logo on it and says as he walks by: "This is what it's all about!" The bouncer checking our IDs said in response to his other bouncer buddy: "I bet you he has absolutely no affiliation with U$C whatsoever." The bouncer was probably right. Man, I go to Minnesota and I can't get away from your typical asshat arrogant U$C fan.

(5) It's still a mystery as to whether Cal is signaling in two plays one after another or if Riley is forgetting the signals. In my Cal vs. EWU Post-Game Thoughts, I discussed whether or not Cal was sending in two plays one after another or if Riley was forgetting signals. I'm embarrassed to say that I'm still not sure. Being that I can pick some of our signs, you would think that I would be able to figure this out. I guess im jus dum. Well, in my defense, some new signals have been added that I'm still trying to figure out. However, while at Minnesota, I did notice one instance where numbers were sent in to Riley, he stepped into the huddle for literally one second (not nearly enough time to read out the playcall), then stepped back out of the huddle, looked to the sideline and got more signals from the sidelines. The thing is, that he got the same signals both times! I am positive of this as since I was watching the signal QBs, I saw them both send in the same number the first time (for example, they both signaled in the number "34"), and they both sent in the same number the second time. Jonathan Okanes seemed to disagree with my conclusion that Riley was forgetting the signals. Tedhead94 on BearInsider reported that:

[Okanes] said he had heard nothing of the sort and had no idea where it came from. He found it implausible that this would be the case.

Well, it is plausible. It happened against Minnesota. And it has happened in the past. In fact, it happens quite often. When Longshore was the QB in 2006, he'd sometimes, although pretty rarely, would forget signals. I don't really blame any of the QBs. A lot goes on in the huddle between plays. Guys are talking. They're talking about what the defense is doing. They're checking things with each other. Sometimes they're talking to the QB. The QB is getting signals from the sidelines, making sure the right personnel are in on the play, he's checking ball location (to decide whether the play needs to be flipped or not), he's looking at the playclock. A lot goes through his mind in those 25 seconds and it's easy to forget the signals that were just sent in to you two seconds earlier.

Interesting story time: In my Cal vs. Maryland Post-Game Thoughts, I talked about how the signal QB must make sure that his signals are crisp and clear to the QB on the field. If the signals aren't clear, the QB on the field might ask for the signals again because he couldn't understand them which burns the playclock and runs the risk of a delay of game. Or, if the signals aren't clear, the QB on the field can mis-read the signals and run the wrong play completely. This happened on occasion in 2006 - perhaps as much as once or twice a game. One day at a 2006 practice, I was working with the QBs. During this particular period they were having a meeting with the offensive coordinator (in 2006 it was Mike Dunbar). They would talk about signals, and plays, and practice sending signals to each other. Dunbar explained to the QBs that sometimes they would run the completely wrong play because Longshore would mis-read the signals being sent into him from the sidelines. Dunbar described how it was quite the what-the-heck? kind of a moment when he sees the offense line up in a completely different formation than what he called. Naturally, Longshore would playfully tease the other QBs about being sloppy with their signals, and the other QBs would tease Longshore about not being able to read their signs. The QBs understood their mistake and despite their playfulness with each other, they'd take the mistake seriously. So for the rest of the period they'd practice quizzing each other on plays and rendering the appropriate signals to each other.

Bottom line, QBs do forget signals that they just saw two seconds earlier. It happens. It's plausible. But it's also plausible that Riley is BOTH forgetting the signals and receiving two signals (one after the other). It's also plausible that Cal does not signal in two signals one after the other (if they even do that) in away games because it is harder to implement against a hostile crowd.

(6) Cal uses the signal system to send in plays rather than the number/wristband system because it allows offensive coordinator Andy Ludwig to create the perfect play for the situation at hand. Venerable commentator and movie-maker Danzig and I had a conversation about this in my Cal vs. Maryland Post-Game Thoughts. It turns out, that there was actually discussion of this on the ESPN broadcast early in the game. The ESPN talking heads were discussing how Minnesota now signals in the play, instead of using the number/wristband system that former Minnesota offensive coordinator, Mike Dunbar, preferred. Their explanation was exactly the very conclusion that Danzig and I had theorized:

HydroTech: [Using the signal system instead of the number system] gives the offense coordinator freedom to truly make up a play on the fly that perfectly fits the situation on hand, that isn’t one of the 150 plays on the wristband.

The wristband that QBs use only holds 150 plays (at least, that's what they held back in 2006, perhaps the coaches have squeezed in more). At first thought, 150 plays sounds like a lot. But then once you consider that some proportion of those plays are goalline plays, some are short yardage plays, some are medium yardage plays, and some are long yardage plays... you can easily fill up that 150 play wristband and perhaps even two wristbands. This is why the signal system is superior to the number/wristband system. I like the signal system for this very reason, but am still concerned about other teams picking our signs.

(7) Decker had a great game against Cal's defense. Not too surprising. Cal countered Minnesota's passing attack with its usual zone defense. Decker would slip behind linebackers and find the seams, and Webber would throw the ball high above the zones and let Decker jump and catch the ball. Easy. Not too much Cal can do there but get a faster pass rush and have the over-the-top defenders blow up the Decker. I'll have to review the game but it looked like Cal put Hagan on Decker in goalline situations where Cal is more likely to play man defense. That makes sense since Hagan is taller than Syd.

(8) Cal's kickoffs suck. No explanation needed here. Oh, there was a slight breeze in the stadium. It wasn't constant, but it would gust to a modest 10 mph on occasion. It was going from right to left, for those of you watching things on your TV screen. Thus, Cal was kicking into the wind quite a bit. But I still don't think this was the reason for the short kickoffs.

(9) Cal had only 10 players on the field for a punt return. This error is on Alamar; the coach responsible for assembling players on the launch pad (the blue pad on the Cal sideline where players going in and out of the field congregate TO MAKE SURE THEY ARE ALL THERE), the player who wasn't on the field, and Syd'Quan Thompson for not counting the players in front of him. I spotted this error from my nosebleed seats about 150 yards away from the action. I mean, I spotted this error, but two coaches and multiple players didn't spot this error??? (Sigh................)

(10) Minnesota played piped in music on 3rd downs to alert the home crowd of the 3rd down and to get them to make more noise - and it worked great. Maybe Cal should consider doing this. Honestly, I think the whole hands clapping thing is kinda lame. It doesn't really alert the home crowd (aside from the students) of an impending third down and it doesn't get the stadium loud enough fast enough. Often, the noise of the Memorial will not peak before the other team gets the play off. But when Minnesota played that adrenaline inducing rock music, as soon as the second down play ended short of a first down and it was third down, the crowd got loud VERY FAST. I urge Cal to consider using this tactic as it is superior to what Cal does right now. Also, the other beneficial thing about pumping in music on third downs while the opponent's offense is in the huddle, is that the piped in noise does the work for the crowd initially. The crowd gets tired making noise for 20 straight seconds from when the opponent's offense is in the huddle to when the ball is snapped. By playing piped in music for the first 10 seconds, not only alerts the fans to be loud, but does the work for the fans and keeps the fans less tired so that when the music does go off, the fans can maintain their loudness until the ball is snapped.

(11) Jahvid Best just might win the Heisman. In my Cal vs. EWU Post-Game Thoughts post, I explained why I didn't think Best wasn't going to win the Heisman. My reasons were that he just wasn't getting enough yardage. Well, ignore that last post because everything has changed. Against Minnesota, again, he didn't have a spectacular yardage day (131 yards is great by not spectacular), but he did have 5 touchdowns! Those 5 touchdowns, in a close game, on national TV with the nation watching, really boosted Best's chances at winning the Heisman and made up for his lack of insane yardage gained. So, yeah, Best is back in the race as a serious top 2 candidate. If he can't get 2000 rush yards by the end of the regular season, if he has 20 TDs or more (preferably 25-30 TDs) , he'll still be right up there. Cal needs to not lose more than 1 game too.

(12) Alualu massacred Minnesota's right tackle (#71). At the game itself, it was hard to tell who was getting to Minnesota's QB so much. But after seeing the highlight reel, it's plain as day that Alualu was pwning #71 and pwning him bad. Alualu just had too much speed and quickness to be stopped by the gigantic and largely overweight 365 pound right tackle. When will the Big-12, and Big-10 learn that just having big fat dudes doesn't always work? The players need to be athletic too!

There was one play in the game where Alualu got chipped by the Minnesota RT, then got cutblocked by the Minnesota runningback but still made a sack. That was a beautiful play! Every single day, the defensive lineman practice shedding cut blocks from the runningbacks. I can still hear former Cal Defensive Line Coach Delgado saying to the players "violent hands! Push the back away from you!" Current Defensive Line Coach Lupoi still says the same thing to the players nowadays. "Violent hands!" Alualu's form on shedding that cut block was perfect! You want to get low, and use your hands and arms to push the RB away and/or into the ground, and keep the RB's cut block from your knees. Most of the defensive lineman are afraid of getting cut blocked and having their knees hyper-extended backwards. Even after being taught the technique to defend themselves, they still don't like getting cut blocked and many would rather just sort of give in to getting cut down and not truly defending themselves to get through the cut block and made a tackle. It's nice to see Alualu shedding those cut blocks. That was a truly textbook shedding. Take a look at it again if you have the chance.

(13) 1st Quarter playcalling was incredibly diverse. I really liked the first quarter playcalling because it featured a wide variety of plays. As for the very first play of the game being a runningback pass? Well, I'm okay with it. I do not necessarily think that it is a "tell" that it was a trick play merely because Jahvid Best wasn't in on the play. What really did make it a "tell," and I knew it was a halfback pass the moment Vereen went into motion, was because Vereen motioned and maintained his depth in the backfield so as to give himself more buffer room from the defense to throw the ball. Furthermore, Riley's pass went backwards which is another "tell" of a double pass play because all QB passes are meant to purposely go forward so if they are dropped they are incompletions and not fumbles. In other words, pretty much the only time a QB pass goes backwards is if the offense is setting up the double pass. And finally, if you didn't know it was a double pass play from Vereen's motion, his incredible depth, and Riley's backwards pass, it should have been obvious because Vereen was not aggressive in moving the ball forward.

(14) One of Cal's new goalline running scheme utilizes a pulling playside guard. This is new. I have NEVER seen Cal utilize a playside pulling guard since I've been closely studying the Cal Football offense since 2006. Cal has always used a pulling backside guard. In 2008, under offensive coordinator Frank Cignetti, Cal would sometimes use a playside pulling tackle on toss sweeps, however, Cal has never used any sort of pulling playside offensive lineman on non-toss plays since 2006. So this is another new wrinkle installed by Ludwig.

(15) Sofele's hit was legal and Tepper's "hold" was legal. Defenders must give the punt returner an opportunity to catch the ball. Sofele gave the punt returner that opportunity - for about .1 seconds - then blew him up. Perfectly legal. I know that .1 seconds isn't a lot of time and that's why the refs probably threw the flag, but that was a legal hit. .1 seconds is opportunity. It's .1 seconds of opportunity. Unless the NCAA rules committee wants to put in a definition for "opportunity," then any opportunity should qualify as opportunity. And as for Tepper's "hold," there was definitely holding in the layman non-football sense, but no holding in the football sense.

(16) Syd'Quan Thompson anticipated some run plays very well and perhaps had figured out a tell. When players scout their opponents, they look for team tendencies, playcalling tendencies, and player tendencies. Player tendencies can be things such as tipping off whether the play is a run or pass. Based on how Syd seemed to anticipate run plays a few times during the game, it's possible he had figured out a tell either prior to the game or during the game.

(17) Cal has diversified their running schemes. In the past, Cal has utilized about 3 different basic running schemes (zone running, two different types of man blocking). Cal rarely ran its man schemes weakside. But now, after seeing three games under Ludwig we've seen new additions such as: (a) pulling playside guards to the strong side; (b) pulling playside tackles to the strong side; (c) pulling playside guards to the weak side; and (d) shotgun traps with a backside pulling tackle. Not to mention that it looks like the zone read, and QB draw will be seeing more reps in Cal's playcalling. Of course, Cal's zone running is seeing heavy use. While off the top of my head I can't remember Cal running its zone weakside this year (and I've been so busy with school I haven't had much time to chart the games), this is something Cal did a lot last year, and I'm sure it still remains in the playbook and will be used. Let's not forget these end arounds and fly sweeps too. So in other words, in prior years Cal's running schemes were fairly few (although potent). Now Cal has many more running schemes - and perhaps just as potent.

Let's just list them out right now: (1) backside pulling guards pulling strongside; (2) playside pulling guards pulling strongside; (3) playside pulling tackles pulling strongside; (4) backside pulling guards pulling weakside; (5) outside/stretch zone strongside; (6) outside/stretch zone weakside; (7) shotgun zone read; (8) QB draw; (9) shotgun trap with backside pulling tackle; (10) end arounds; (11) fly sweeps; (12) under center draws; and (13) shotgun draws; and (14) toss sweeps.

I've never seen such a diverse Cal rushing attack before. Not under Dunbar. Not under Tedford. And not under Cignetti. Plain and simple, Ludwig has really diversified Cal's rushing attack.

(18) Riley played pretty well. He made a number of great throws. Off the top of my head I can only remember two really bad throws - both of which were almost INTed. The most egregious was when the offense was driving from left to right (on the TV screen) at 0:24 in the 3rd quarter. Riley faked playaction left, stumbled on the fake, then threw a late pass on a crossing route against zones. I remember this play pretty well, and being that I was in the endzone behind the offense I had a great view of what was going on. The intended receiver was very open over the middle right when Riley stumbled. Had Riley not stumbled, and had been looking at the intended WR, Marvin Jones, he might have had the time to throw to Marvin Jones and that probably would have been a big gain. But Riley stumbled, he was looking at the split end, Cal's Z wide receiver although for most teams that's the X, and threw a late ball that shouldn't have been thrown. I remember seeing this play unfold, and I knew Riley was going to pass it to Jones and knew it was a high-interception type of pass that shouldn't have been thrown. Riley probably should have thrown the ball away. There were only two receivers on the play (Cal kept the RB, FB, and TE in on max protect playaction), so Riley did only have two options. But still, either throw the ball away or start running. The defense wasn't that fooled. Minnesota players on the sideline are screaming "PASS!!!" And Riley probably could have run to his left for a 10 yard gain.

But aside from that play, Riley managed the game well. There were no delay of games. He made some great throws. He's a very inspiring and competitive guy. Also, I'm not seeing his ugly footwork from 2008. He's definitely improved.

(19) Magic Numbers reviewed. Remember my season outlook post? Back in that post I made a prediction on Cal's season based on a few assumptions and Riley's completion percentage. Right now, Riley has completed 64.8% of his passes. In my post, that number was predicted to be a 10 win season (11 wins if you want to round 64.8% up to 65%). But not so fast my friend! One of the assumptions I based my model on was that Riley's yards per attempt would be less than 8 yards per pass attempt. The number of 8 yards per pass attempt was a measuring stick because that was Longshore's yards per pass attempt in 2006 - a year whose team is comparable to this year's team. I thought that Riley's yards per pass attempt would be less than Longshore's 8.0 yards per pass attempt because Cal lacked a true deep threat this year and I figured Riley would be completing a lot of short underneath passes. But it turns out, my assumption was wrong. Verran Tucker and Nyan Boateng have both proven to be good deep WRs and are functioning in a similar manner like Desean Jackson did for the 2006 team. Right now, Riley's yards per pass attempt is a sick 9.8 yards per attempt!!! Do you remember some of the other measuring sticks I gave in my season outlook post?

In 2002, Kyle Boller threw for 6.68 yards per attempt.

In 2004, Aaron Rodgers threw for 8.2 yards per attempt (!!!)

In 2005, Joe Ayoob threw for 6.72 yards per attempt.

In 2006, Nate Longshore threw for 8.01 yards per attempt (thank you Desean "deep threat" Jackson!)

In 2007, from the start of the season through the Oregon game, Nate Longshore was throwing at 6.98 yards per attempt.

In 2008, Oklahoma's Sam Bradford threw for 9.8 yards per attempt (!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

Right now, Riley's yards per pass attempt are superior to that of Longshore's in 2006, and verging on Sam Bradford type sickness.

As for Riley's completion percentage of 64.5%, here are the other comparisons:

In 2002, Kyle Boller threw 53.6% (although perhaps a good 5% of those passes were drops by Ward).

In 2004, Aaron Rodgers threw for 66.1% (!!!).

In 2005, Joe Ayoob threw for 49.2%.

In 2006, Nate Longshore threw for 60.2%.

In 2007, from the start of the season through the Oregon game, Nate Longshore was throwing at 63.8%.

In 2008, Texas' Colt McCoy threw for 76.7% (!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

Right now, Riley is performing just about equal to Aaron Rodgers in 2004.

As for Riley's interception percentage of 0.00%.... Well, no comparison needed here. To be accurate, a few of Riley's passes could have been INTed, but the same can be said of all QBs.

So, I'm not saying that Riley is going to be Cal's next Aaron Rodgers in terms of NFL talent. But Riley's numbers are equivalent to Rodgers, and actually even better. But it's only been three games. Cal has yet to hit the meat of its schedule. But if Cal's deep threat WRs continue to keep defenses somewhat honest and prevent defenses from focusing solely on Jahvid Best, Riley may only need a 60% completion percentage to get Cal BCS bowling.

(20) Linebackers in zone could use some work. I think I talked about this after the EWU game. The linebackers need to tighten up their coverages while in zone. By that I mean guard the receivers more, as opposed to just dropping into coverage without any awareness of the receivers. The linebackers should be getting up close to the receivers to defend the pass and not just standing around waiting until the pass is completed to the receiver to make the tackle. In other words, guard the receivers in your zone, don't just stand in your zone.

Victory!

Post-game greetings.

50,000 disappointed fans!

(21) Ludwig is still unveiling new wrinkles. I want to end on a good note, instead of point #20. I really want to emphasize the diversity that Ludwig has brought to our offense. I'm not a football guru or genius by any means (seriously, I'm not), but I've noticed sooo many new things which Ludwig has added to the Cal offense. I already touched upon them above in point #17, but there's more! Ludiwg is also bringing back the half-rolls! Those pretty much disappeared under Cignetti in 2008. And all the pre-snap shifting and motion. And putting two RBs on the field. And passing to the RBs. I really really like the diversity that Ludwig is showing us right now. I cannot remember the Cal offense ever being so diverse. I love it. It's really a joy to watch. I mean, just today I took 10 minutes to watch some of the game for a break, and Cal ran to the weakside with a trap block by the backside guard from a bunch formation with the QB under center. The play didn't work because a defender got by Boateng, but the play itself was so nifty and new! I saw even more new stuff when Cal was using 22 personnel with TEs in a two point stance. It's like Christmas. There's just new cool things everywhere. With Dunbar and Cignetti, I felt like I had seen the entire Cal offense by game two. I didn't really see anything incredibly new after the first two games. But this is the third game and I'm seeing new stuff still - and not just a little bit, but a lot. I don't think Ludwig is done either. I think he might still have even more to add. I'm truly amazed by the new wrinkles I'm seeing in the offense and am very impressed with Ludwig thus far.

CGB Report Card: Grading Cal's Performance Against Eastern Washington

Avinash — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 19:00:19 -0000

More photos » by George Nikitin - AP

Kevin Riley seems like he's cruising during the win over Eastern Washington. How do you feel the Bears performed against the Eagles?

Browse more photos »

Here's a list of those who participated (forgot to do this last week, my bad).

rurata, BeastMode, SanMateoBear, hrlincon, California Pete, Swamphunter, solarise, cruidzoid, ohsooso, tonyser, Haas8388, carp, CaliforniaCMB, katster, Berkelium97, chowder, Spazzy Mcgee, Yleexotee, dballisloose, Troatie, Jason Snell, omnizzle, rocksanddirt, LEastCoastBears, Norcalnick, kjdsider, highwireact, thinthen, DrBeeoer

Thanks again for taking the time out to set this stuff up. I'll try to attribute the best comments you made in the post; if I snubbed anyone, it wasn't intentional, and feel free to let me know (bearsnecessities@gmail.com).

Going from a national telecast to a regional telecast, it was clear we were going to have a dropoff in people who watched the game, and thus peopleinput. Still a good twenty-nine forms were submitted. Hopefully next week with the early kickoff, more Cal fans will be watching, cheering, and grading their Bears!

Best comments as usual picked out from the game.

Quarterback: 3.16 (B)
Running back: 3.93 (A)
Receivers: 2.92 (B)
Run blocking: 3.93 (A)
Pass protection: 3.47 (A-)
Run defense: 3.99 (A)
Pass rush: 3.05 (B)
Pass defense: 2.78 (B)
Special teams: 2.60 (B-)
Coaching: 3.52 (A-)
Overall: 3.39 (B+)

For the second week in a row, people agreed the most on the running backs, with a standard deviation of only about 0.186. I'm sensing a trend.

For the second week in a row, people disagreed the most on the special teams, with an SD of 0.573. I'm sensing ALAMAR.

Commenter awards followed by grades after the jump!

Old Blue Award

Commenter/reader alias	Average score out of 4
Haas8388	2.924
SanMateoBear	2.939
California Pete	2.985
Norcalnick	3.121
Berkelium97	3.136

We have plenty of reasonable, pessimistic Bears fans on our suite. Haas8388 was in the top 5 last week, and he rises to the top with giving Cal a little less than a B for their performance. He points out a few things that we should pay attention to in the upcoming weeks.

Pass rush (C-): The Bears had a relatively difficult time getting to the QB, especially against the first stringer. Given that the run game was all but nonexistent, it is surprising to me that our bigger, stronger DL's were consistently bottled up. Even with a three man rush, I would have thought that Cal could apply more pressure.

Pass defense (B-): It seems like Cal has always been vulnerable to the short passing game. TE's and RB's running short curl and crossing routes, in front of the LB's, seem to be open most of the time. An accurate QB, with a little patience, can move the ball through the air.

Coaching (B+): Some interesting offensive wrinkles, especially misdirection plays to Best and Isi. I would have liked to see Riley throw more to the WR's in this game as I think they are still a bit off. Despite only giving up 7 points, the defense still did not look exactly dominant. Considering the level of competition, I would have expected more DL penetration and a more harassed EWU QB.

It's hard to find too many faults in a 52 point win, but the game did not feel as dominating as the final score would indicate, especially in the first half.

Golden Sunglasses Award

Commenter/reader alias	Average score out of 4
katster	3.788
Yleexotee	3.667
LEastCoastBears	3.606
Spazzy McGee	3.515
rocksanddirt	3.515
rurata	3.515

Katster was our most rational voter last week; now she's gone all Oski-lovey-dovey on us! Definitely generous with the As here.

Running backs (A): The running backs were on fire. Javid went for nearly 150, Vereen got three touchdowns, and DeBoskie-Johnson nearly went for 100. That's not bad at all. Plus, heads up for Jahvid for turning a very bad play into a really good one. Just imagine if he'd gotten the touchdown. But there was the fumble on the one which cost us a possible touchdown, so that knocks the plus off this grade.

Run defense (A+): Any time a team finishes in single digits in the run game, you have to be happy.

Coaching & Overall (A): All in all, not bad, although I'd like to see the reserves have come in a little earlier...Solid effort. Not spectacular, but we won the game, and won it handily, and yeah, going 111-14 in two games is nothing to sneeze at. Now! Onwards to Minnesota!

The Gold Standard: Steven Chu Award

Commenter/reader alias	Total standard deviation
highwireact	0.7139
kjdsider	0.8071
rocksanddirt	0.8305
solarise	0.8328
rurata	0.8776

This grade goes to the person who came the closest with his or her report card to the final grade. Just like Haas8388 seems like an Old Blue, highwireact has been a fixture in this category the first two weeks, coming close to the mark with logical insights into the way the Bears have performed.

Quarterback (B): Solid, but could have been better. Felt like there were a few throws where Riley was late throwing the ball.

Running backs (A): Would be an A+ except a couple of fumbles. Depth in the backfield is amazing.

Pass Defense (B-): Rough in the first half, but excellent after the break.

Good stuff highwireact, keep us rational on a week-by-week basis following a totally irrational institution like college football.

Note: Someone put up a W instead of a grade. Not cool man. I changed it to an A, since that's what I assume you meant. Don't do that again or I will start deleting Twist's comments, especially the one with exclamation points.

Onto the best of the comments! Photos provided by Cal Bears Online, check out his full album of the game here!

Quarterback

via calbearsonline.com

carp (B): Again, these grades are awarded without the stat sheet or game reviews in front of me. They are more like a fan evaluation from the 71st row.

To me, Riley's season and perhaps career will be coming to the proverbial crossroads. Will he become Boller/Rogers-esque or will he be like Ayoob? While he's trending in the right direction, we haven't exactly seen the stiffest defenses. Let's start with the positives:

- He's an experienced junior and a leader. I speculate that he does this very well.

- He doesn't turn the ball over frequently, either with INTs or fumbles.

- His handoffs/PA's look solid - he gives the ball off well, fakes giving it off well, and provides a believable "finish." On Vereen's TD going into the N. End Zone, I didn't even know who had the ball until Vereen was getting high-fived.

- Mechanics are MUCH improved

Negatives:

- At times, he holds onto the ball for DAYS while staring at one side of the field. I get the same feeling when Alex Smith's playing for the niners. At times - and this isn't always - he doesn't know when to use his legs, when to slide, when to throw it away, and when to find the dump off RB.

- Touch/accuracy. I think this will improve with regular game-speed attempts. It takes some time to get into a groove, and Cal had this one well in-hand (relatively) early on.

I would have liked to see Mansion and/or Sweeney through 5-10 passes. Is it possible to put Mansion in AND not hand it off everytime? As KenCraw says, we might need him for a series, a quarter, or a game against a formidable opponent. Getting his cherry popped early would be great.

Sweeney - flag'd for fumbling the handoff although I'm not certain it's all his fault.

chowder (B+): I thought Riley did pretty well after the first couple of passes. Obviously, the passing game was not as potent as it was vrs. Maryland, the shortfall is more of the receivers' responsibility. There were a few drops, and they did a poor job gaining separation. The game annoucers did a good job, pointing out how Boatang's coasting cost Riley a long TD pass, making Riley look bad in the process.

SanMateoBear (B): Last two passes were on the receivers, so his completion percentage is slightly misleading. However, seemed to hold the ball too long, wasn't particularly sharp with passes, didn't seem to look for Marvin Jones - who should be the go to guy... Like his run, though. All in all, didn't look nearly as sharp as against Maryland.

Spazzy McGee (B-): I mean, I can cook eggs as good as anyone and put them on toast as good as anyone. That's what Riley did in this game. He cracked two eggs, threw them in a pan, and put them on some toast. Tasty? Yes. Full? Yes. Does that make him a world class chef? Sadly no. Throws were off, and late. He had some nice ones (Best TD and Ross TD drop) but for the most part, as last year, he and his WR's were just not on the same page. To beat USC he's going to need to make more of a souffle and I just didn't see anything like that in this game.

Running back

via calbearsonline.com

Jason Snell (A+): How many running backs can score a touchdown before you get to the center of the Tootsie Pop?

dballisloose (A): Yes the tailbacks get the credit, and it shows on the box score, but the fullback Holley is really blossoming and showed a lot of strength catching and running, not just blocking.

ohsoooso (A): We're four deep now. I was amused that EWU's defense took much better angles to our ball carriers than Maryland's. Still, these guys are terrific.

SanMateoBear (A-): Would be an A except for the fumble and inability to punch it in from the 5 on first and goal. Also, does Jahvid seem to have lost half a step? He's getting caught in the secondary where last year he was gone. Maybe the weight gain for durability costs a little speed? Debo was awesome in the 4th quarter.

Receivers

via calbearsonline.com

kjdsider (B): The passing game just wasn't there. In terms of catching the ball, the WRs didn't have very many chances. Maybe they weren't getting open or there were just safer options to throw to, but the receivers weren't really part of the game unless they were run blocking for the backs.

Berkelium97 (B): There were some drops. Nyan missed a catchable TD, but that was partially Riley's fault because it was a little overthrown (the announcers, however, said Nyan wasn't going full speed and could have caught it if he did). Fullbacks and tight ends were incorporated well into the passing game.

rurata (B): If only Nyan didn't let up on that route!

Norcalnick (C+): Weren't asked to do much. They were overthrown on a few potential big plays. Meh

Run blocking

via calbearsonline.com

Swamphunter (A): This ties in with the RBs. Our OL is something that is really working right now. We're definitely right next to or even better than USCs.

Haas8388 (A-): A lot of big holes, but that is to be expected given the physical advantage Cal's OL had. There were also more than a few rushing attempts that were stuffed at or near the LOS. That should really not happen given the disparity in physical ability between Cal's Ol and EWU's DL.

SanMateoBear (A-): Great, except for inability to push it in from first and goal at the 5.

Pass protection

via calbearsonline.com

cruidzoid (A-): one sack was pretty bad. but otherwise they were decent (helps with riley being more mobile than longshore)

solarise (A-): Besides the one sack on Riley, pass protection was stellar. With the way JB, SV, CVDJ, and Isi were running, it was hard to pressure Riley.

Troatie (B): EWU only got to Riley once, and while EWU's front maybe not that great, they put a lot pressure on. I'm worried about when Cal faces a potent pass rush.

Run defense

via calbearsonline.com

rurata (A++++, rounded down to an A+ for our purposes): EWU had 9 rushing yards?

kastster (A+): Any time a team finishes in single digits in the run game, you have to be happy.

Berkelium97 (A): 14 yards on 28 carries? Dominance. The Big Sky conference isn't known for running the ball much, but EWU's run game was absolutely shut down. Speedy Taiwan Jones' longest run was when he broke free for a whopping 4 yards.

Pass rush

via calbearsonline.com

BeastMode (B): This grade is more a function of not blitzing enough in the first half and utilizing too many 3 man rushes.

Troatie (B+): 4 sacks and ok pressure in general.

EWU avg OL weigt: 283 lbs
Cal avg DL weight: 294 lbs

Add in some speedy linebackers... I don't know, I would have expected more pressure.

Spazzy McGee (B+): They did get through to their veteran QB but often times he had plenty of time to make an easy dump pass. I feel like the Dline got nowhere near the penetration they did vs Maryland. Then again Maryland is a dirty whore.

Pass defense

via calbearsonline.com

dballisloose (B+): First time I've seen Syd miss an assignment. Safeties blew assignments on a few occassions and a better QB would have exploited that.

solarise (B): Once again the secondary performed well. EWU revealed questions in Cal's LBs' ability to cover TEs. As EWU's Overbay demonstrated, the LB corp has a slight disadvantage. Gregory will probably study the tapes and remedy this issue before Cal plays the likes of Rob Gronkowski of AZ.

carp (B-): My grade feels harsh considering Cal gave up 1 TD and won by 52 points.

Versus Oregon last year and their spread-option attack, I was particularly concerned with what base defense we'd play. Would we play a 3-3-5, 3-4, 3-2-6, 4-2, 4-1-6, etc? Probably not a 3-4 was my assumption since this would leave a guy like Follett or Young on a WR or result in more man-coverage with Thompson and Hagan as the safeties would have to help out. While Cal stuck to the 3-4, fortunately Masoli was the QB.

Nicholls and his Tx Tech-ish offense appeared, at times, to find the hole in the zone - particularly in the middle of the field. I saw a lot 3-4 with the OLB's on WR. I think I even saw a # 90 on a WR. I'm no HydroTech, but that sounds like a mismatch to me.

Special Teams

via calbearsonline.com

(whoops, chose the wrong special team. You go Cal gals!)

yleexotee (B-): Still being tortured by weak kicks. missed fieldgoal leaves me with lack of confidence in kicking game.

norcalnick (B-): Kickoff distance was better if not as good as we hope it can be. The missed FG is something that can't happen against Pac-10 teams. Punt teams continue to be excellent.

thinthen (C): Georgio did get it inside the 10 on occassion. Um, yay?

Coaching

via calbearsonline.com (that looks familiar)

Troatie (A): Great defensive adjustments after EWU touchdown drive. I was a little surprised that Cal didn't take a knee on that last touchdown drive. It was cool to see that 5th person (debOSKIE) get a touchdown, of course. Did EWU have lots of timeouts? I don't recall.

kjdsider (A-): Initial gameplan wasn't as solid as it should of been. The Eagles went short all the way down the field on their 2nd drive. They made the adjustments and the team responded well for the rest of the game.

Only thing I wish we did more of was passing to wide receivers. We need more practice in this area of the offense.

Swamphunter (A-): Ludwig continues to really work well as OC... I question some of his choices to do the Shotgun in the redzone, but it works so I can't complain.

The Special Teams has improved coverage-wise... but the minus this week goes to Bob Gregory and his lethargic pass coverage on defense. This WAS the team that was #3 overall in INTs last season... correct?

ohsooso (A-): First string didn't really appear to want to play this game for awhile before perking up late first half. Coaches must have motivated them somehow.

Overall

via calbearsonline.com

BeastMode (B+): Should not have been that close in the first half but Cal got back to running the ball and playing stiff defense after that. This is what Top 10 teams do to D2 opponents.

chowder (B): We should have won, we did, but we still need to get better.

California Pete (B): Mission accomplished. Dominated the run game. Didn't turn the ball over. Won by a very comfortable score. No significant injuries. Not spectacular, but good for maintaining momentum heading onto the road.

Berkelium97 (C+): Sure, the defense gave up only 40 yards in the second half and 7 points total, but that first-half performance was subpar. I don't know if they didn't study much for EWU or what, but that's not going to get the job done over the next five weeks. At the same time, I'm glad the team was humbled because they were reminded that every opponent has the ability to win if Cal doesn't execute.
Another note: Cal hasn't turned it over once this season, but they also haven't caught a single interception...

Gameday experiences

via calbearsonline.com

SanMateoBear: Watched the game on A-Dubble's feed - so did my son. His feed was about 5 seconds ahead of mine (he was in the next room) so success or failure of each play was always telegraphed by his cheers or groans.

cruidzoid: i don't know if any of you guys are in the student section, but rally comm is being a straight up BITCH. Never in my 3 years here have they stood up during the halftime (everybody knows halftime = sit, rest up, and enjoy the show") apparently the logic is that "rally comm shows its respect to the band by standing up during halftime" thereby blocking the view of the rest of the (sitting) student section. the poor freshpeople in rally comm are told to sit down (by the rest of the student section) and stand up by the few senior/non-freshman leaders in rally comm. I wouldn't be surprised if a scuffle happens in the next few games.

also the mic-men took a step down from last year (the one returner is good, the nerdy guy improved from last week, but the other guy was seriously high/was still busy flirting with the cheerleaders)

and the cal band taught us another chant (of course when our offense was on the field)

carp: Spend a $100 and get binoculars - well worth it!

Sarah and the new girl were both cheering next to each other in the 2nd half...hot! My wife caught me peepin through the binocs!

dballisloose: Went shopping with the wife. Thank God for Tivo and iPhones

Troatie: The regular Comcast package now carries CSN California. That was nice. Finished up the night with The Killers in Mountain View. Awesome. Was able to flip off the 'Furd while I was down there.

rocksanddirt: Quarts of beer at the Bears lair....

norcalnick: Two idiots a few rows behind us (who booed Longshore last year) ACTUALLY BOOED SYD-QUAN after EWU's only touchdown. Cal fandom revoked! I think I need to move to the young alumni section.

Poll

How accurate are these grades of Cal-Eastern Washington?

Right on the money

21 votes

Most of the grades are about right

62 votes

Some grades seem about on, others not so much.

10 votes

A lot of these are off.

2 votes

Were you watching the same game I was watching?

4 votes

99 votes | Poll has closed