SB Nation - Eddie Young

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

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

More photos » by Marcio Jose Sanchez - AP

28 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.

Cal 24, Arizona 16: Bears Play Spoiler. Can They Do It to The Furd?

Avinash — Sun, 15 Nov 2009 10:59:14 -0000

More photos » by Ben Margot - AP

The Golden Bears spoiled Arizona's rosy outlook this season. Can they do the same to their hated rivals across the Bay next Saturday?

Browse more photos »

After five home duds, we finally had a winner. The Bears avenged their 2006 defeat to Arizona with a game strikingly similar in its flukiness and heartbreak.

An upset goes two ways. Cal had a lot of lucky breaks, from dropped passes, to Nick Foles missing streaking receivers downfield, to surviving two really bad Riley interceptions (one on the offensive line, one on him), to Mike Stoops and Sonny Dykes calling a curious amount of runs to Keola Antolin on 1st and 2nd down, to MVP of the game Giorgio Tavecchio playing the game of his life on special teams defense (2 big tackles), to Foles catching his own pass and throwing it again...anything else swings the other way, Arizona walks ahead to an epic showdown with Oregon unscathed. Oh well, at least they know how we felt three years ago.

But Tavecchio hit clutch field goals, the defense stepped up, Shane Vereen played the game of his life, and the Bears held on. The question now is, can they replicate that effort against their cross-Bay rivals?

CBKWit will have more detailed postgame thoughts later. But I want your guys's thoughts. Based on what you've seen of us, and what you've seen of the Furd, how do you feel about the Big Game?

Poll

How do you feel about the Big Game?

TIMBERRRRRRRRR!!!!!

117 votes

We have a good shot, Tedford will have something planned.

184 votes

Probably losing, hope Harbaugh goes to Notre Dame.

135 votes

Drop a tree trunk on me. It's gonna get ugly.

102 votes

538 votes | Poll has closed

Cal vs. Oregon State Post-Game Thoughts

HydroTech — Wed, 11 Nov 2009 12:00:25 -0000

by Ben Margot - AP

about 1 month ago: Oregon State's Jacquizz Rodgers, right, outruns California defense to score during the fourth quarter of an NCAA college football game Saturday, Nov. 7, 2009, in Berkeley, Calif. Oregon State won 31-14. (AP Photo/Ben Margot)

View full size photo »

(1) To send more pass rushers or to not send more pass rushers? For most of the game Gregory was sending 4 pass rushers. Sometimes he'd send 5 if he was feeling a little frisky. But for the most part, only 4 pass rushers were devoted to pressuring Canfield. I agree with this strategy. I do not think more pass rushers should have been sent to pressure Canfield.

I'm sure that last sentence is quite shocking to a lot of Cal fans - especially the ones advocating for a more aggressive defense that sends more than just three or four pass rushers. Even I, initially, in the CGB podcast last week, suggested that perhaps this is the game where Gregory just needs to get crazy ultra aggressive and send lots of pass rushers because Canfield is so good that he can pick apart 7 and 8 man zones anyways.

I made that statement prior to seeing film on Canfield. Subsequently (but still prior to the game), I was directed to some video of Canfield's completions against USC's defense over at Trojanfootballanalysis.com. After seeing that film, I decided that blitzing Canfield was not really the correct strategy. Why? Canfield gets the ball out so quickly and efficiently. He hits his TEs and RBs on short check-downs to neutralize the blitz. When an offense's QB can get the ball out quickly against a blitzing defense, it just neutralizes the blitz and allows the offense to gain big yardage (see the final Cal drive of the 2009 Cal vs. Arizona State game for a pretty good Cal example of this). Blitzing against an offense that can get the ball out that quickly and efficiently is extremely risky, and has much less reward than normal blitzing strategies. Canfield was getting the ball out extremely quick - and against USC's very fast pass rush too! USC's pass rush is much faster than Cal's pass rush, yet Canfield neutralized them. It doesn't matter if Cal was sending five or six pass rushers per down to get a quicker pass rush, Canfield still probably would have been able to get the ball out. He did it against USC's faster defense and I have little doubt he would have done it to Cal's defense.

So what do you do? How do you defend such an efficient QB? Play really good coverage. Tighten up those zones. Make Canfield hold onto the ball longer and pray that your pass rush gets to him. Perhaps man up, play man coverage, and a little bump and run to knock the QB/WR timing off.

But I'm sure most of us are thinking that Cal is no good at playing coverage. That is true. But Cal is pretty bad at pass rushing the QB too. Essentially Gregory is presented with two evils: (1) Blitz Canfield with a poor pass rushers in hopes that pressure does get to him and open yourself up to big gains; (2) cover the field with some poor coverage defenders, and hope that Canfield makes a mistake or your pass rush gets to him. Gregory had to choose the lesser of two evils.

Both strategies have their pros and cons. But I think that option #2 is the safer option that gives Cal a better chance to win. Option #2 would force Canfield and the OSU offense to drive the field for longer increasing the chances they'd make a mistake. Option #1 could lead Canfield to drive the field in only a few plays leaving little chance for them to make mistakes.

But Option #1 comes with greater possibility of sacks, say you! True. But did you watch that film of Canfield? Did you see how quickly he got that ball out against a USC defense that is faster than Cal's defense? I'm sure Gregory had little doubt that Canfield could repeat that performance against us. Thus, Gregory opted for option #2: cover the field with some poor coverage defenders, and hope that Canfield makes a mistake or your pass rush gets to him.

FYI, Canfield's was only sacked by USC 3 times on 47 pass attempts against USC (43 pass attempts + 1 positive rush gain + 3 sacks) for a percentage of 6.4%. That's a pretty low success percentage. A very low success percentage. It's just about not even worth it to blitz when the success rate is that low.

In summary, our pass rush sucks. Our coverage sucks. OSU's passing offense is great at neutralizing blitzes. Gregory was presented with two options: (1) blitz and get defeated quickly; or (2) not-blitz and get defeated slowly. He opted for option #2 in hopes that the slow death might result in OSU mistakes which would kill drives (penalties, turnovers). I can't blame Gregory for his decision. I think it was the right one. It was the lesser of the two evils.

Tedford understands this concept of not being overly aggressive against great offenses that can get the ball out quickly. In yesterday's press luncheon he said:

On how to pressure Arizona's quarterback against a line that has only yielded four sacks so far this season and whether that is a concern
"There's no question. I don't know that you're [going to get to Wildcats QB Nick Foles]. You can try to get to him, but they get the ball out so fast, that I don't know. [Even] if they just let a guy run free off the edge, they probably get the ball off. So there's a lot of times where they get the ball out very quickly. But that doesn't mean you just abandon the rush. There's going to have to be times that we mix it up and we pressure and we cover. So that's how we're going to have to go into it."

Clearly, Tedford is conflicted. Of course he wants to pressure the Arizona QB, but he's afraid that it would be futile in some instances. Nevertheless, he does surrender to the idea that you're just going to have to roll the dice some times and bring the pressure - although he seems to imply that the use of added pressure via additional pass rushers is something very strategic and something that will happen judiciously.

(2) It's even harder to sack Canfield because he takes really deep drops even from shotgun. Most teams don't have their QBs drop back much more when the QB is in shotgun, but not Oregon State. Canfield, while in shotgun will still perform a pretty deep three or five step drop, dropping back up to an additional 6 yards from the shotgun location (so he's 11 yards from the LOS) to pass. That makes it especially hard for your pass rush to get to him as since they have to cover more yardage.

(3) My Sunday Morning Couch QB advice for the defense. (Please take this advice with more than a couple of grains of salt, or perhaps more appropriately just ignore it as since I'm not a coach) Clearly, Cal lacks the pass rushers to merely rely on three or four pass rushers to get pressure. Clearly, Cal lacks superior zone coverage players both at the linebacker, cornerback, and safety positions. Despite Arizona's ability to get the ball out quickly on offense to neutralize the blitz, one of the few remaining options I see for the defense is to play tight bump and run man coverage with the cornerbacks, and send five to six pass rushers at the QB fairly often. While blitzing does open yourself up to bigger completions down the field, this should hopefully be minimized with this strategy by the tighter man coverage and applying a quicker pass rush. The quicker pass rush will force the QB to hopefully throw the ball earlier than he wants causing more inaccurate throws, or for him to throw the lower percentage throws. Alternatively the tighter coverage on the receivers may cause him to see nobody as open and hold onto the ball longer thus allowing the pass rush to get to the QB.

Using various pre-snap looks and disguising the coverage and pass rushers can help cause confusion for the offense. The defense already does this, but it should continue to show more pass rushers than it actually pass rushes, and vice versa. Throw in some defensive line stunts for some added spice. Overload blitzes, maybe. Some of these strategies can achieve pressure without actually sending more pass rushers.

I think such a strategy might come as a welcome relief to Cal fans. Of course, it is not guaranteed to work at all. But just the mere fact that Gregory is trying something else will be a relief to fans. It seems as if many fans are desperate for change. Any sort of change. Anything. But even something that perhaps is even worse than Cal's current strategy? Many fans who advocate for a more aggressive offense seem to assume that the results will be better than the current results. Such an assumption may not be true. I understand that when X isn't working, it seems like there is no harm in trying Y. But it is possible that X > Y, and that Y will be more harm than X.

(4) Our offensive line kinda sucks. Against Oregon State, it was pretty bad in the interior positions, namely at LG, C, and RG. I think in general, that is where we are the weakest from week to week.

In the podcast, CBKWit makes the argument that this is one of our highest star rated offensive lines perhaps ever during the Tedford era. CBKWit made this comment in response to my remark suggesting that the OL's poor performance could be a talent issue. It seems that CBKWit might have been disagreeing with me. If that is so, CBKWit is clearly making the assumption that the higher the star rating of the player, the more talented they are. Such a notion is generally true, but not always. CBKWit seems to make it a forgone conclusion that is always true and thus this year's highly rated OL suckage cannot be due to lack of talent; hence obviously a coaching problem. I disagree. I think it's possible that there is a talent issue here, perhaps as well as a coaching issue. I have not discounted the talent issue, whereas CBKWit seems to have done so. CBKWit points to last year's OL which started Guarnero (prior to injury), Cheadle, and Boskovich (after Guarnero's injury) as evidence that this OL shouldn't be this bad due to the fact that so many of this year's starters saw playing time last year and were fairly productive. Last year, I personally thought Guarnero was doing fine at guard. However, I was not that impressed with Cheadle or Boskovich. Furthermore, last year's line was anchored by Alex Mack and Norris Malele who were both three year starters or so. Thus, I am not convinced that just because he have players from last year's OL, which performed decently well although not great, means that this year's OL cannot be suffering from lack of talent.

To summarize my position, I do think we are lacking in talent at the offensive line. However, I am not adverse to the idea that the problems could also be a coaching problem too. Last year, Tedford stated that Cignetti didn't focus on technique with the QBs because as an NFL coach, he was more interested in schemes rather than technique (NFL teams usually assume you have the requisite technique to perform in the NFL already). Marshall is an NFL guy too, and perhaps he's having this same problem.

Prior to this season, I didn't think the entire OL as a whole would be this bad. Although I knew nothing about Marshall, I had hopes that he was proficient enough to sustain an offensive line that can give Best and Vereen 5+ yards per carry even against some of the tougher defenses of the Pac-10 just like the OL seemingly did under Coach Michalczik. But things are pretty bad. The run blocking isn't there. The OL has little explosion off of the line. Power schemes aren't working. Inside zones aren't working. We don't use outside zones any more. Pass blocking is probably the better of the two but still nothing to brag about.

So is it time to fire Marshall? I don't know. I think it's a bit early for that kind of talk. I don't know what he's teaching the kids so I am going to refrain from saying he should be fired. Many Cal fans who want him fired are pointing at the on-field results as evidence of his incompetence. Perhaps that is indicative. Or perhaps we're just lacking talent.

In the past, Cal has had been pretty lucky to have diamond in the rough NFL guys on our OLs. Cal seemingly has always had one or two NFL guys on the offensive lines for most years. But this year, do we have NFL players on the line? Nope. Doubtful. As of now, I don't really see NFL futures for any of these guys. It's possible that one or two could break through and make it big on Sundays, but they sure as hell aren't playing well right now for the 2009 team.

So what do you do when the offensive line sucks? You work around it. You use more deception. Hence the fly sweep fakes - although those have disappeared quite a bit in the past few weeks. You use the wildbear (more flysweep fakes). You use playaction deception to buy the QB time. You don't do a lot of 7 step drops because it requires your OL to pass block longer. You get the ball out quickly. You call short passing plays.

Basically, with the OL not doing that well, you have to limit what you do. Not a lot of deep drops and long developing plays. No straight dropbacks without some sort of deception to buy the QB some time. In other words, our passing game has been limited in its diversity due to the lack of superior offensive line blocking.

(5) Missed tackles still a problem. Missed tackles have been a pretty big problem all year. I guess that's one thing I personally took for granted with having Follett, and especially Felder and Williams around, was that those guys squared up on the ball carriers, and dropped them cleanly. But the current set of guys, they're not quite squaring up perfectly. They're nicking the ball carriers who then squirm away for a few more yards of gain. They're reaching and arm tackling. Have we really seen any of those big square-up hits that Williams and Felder used to always deliver? Nope.

Why is this a problem? Probably due to inexperience, but also because they're not reacting on the ball quick enough. If they were getting there on time then squaring up shouldn't be a problem. But these guys are getting there a bit late, reaching, and arm tackling.

(6) The key to winning this game was through the passing game. Here's the gameplan for the opponents that Cal plays: shut down Cal's running game and force Cal to pass. It's that simple. Cal's passing game has to be clicking for it to win. But Riley and the passing offense were only successful 55.9% of the time today (completion percentage).

Cal's running game was averaging 2.53 yards a rush between Best, Vereen, and Holley. Cal's passing game was averaging 5.9 yards per pass attempt. Game theory says that Cal should have passed more. On the day, Cal ran the ball 24 times, but some of those were sacks so we'll say 22 times. Cal passed the ball 34 times. That's a passing 60.7% of the time, and rushing 39.3% of the time. That's markedly different from usual Cal gameplans that involve rushing the ball anywhere from 55%-65% of the time. Nevertheless, I don't think Cal was passing enough.

I know Tedford and Ludwig like to establish the run first to open up the pass. But it because quite clear early on that OSU was looking to stop the run, and they were being successful in their attempts. You have to just give up on the runs when they're not working at all that early on. You have to use the pass to open up the run, instead of vice versa. So, I am being a bit critical of Ludwig for not pass enough; however, I do understand that when the offense as a whole kind of sucks, no matter what you call you might be screwed six ways to Sunday anyways.

(7) A little slide protection. Cal's first play of the game featured what looked to be a little slide protection. This is something that we have rarely seen in the past 4 years or so. This scheme put Best on the end blocking a defensive end. Best quickly lost this battle which resulted in Riley getting rushed, Riley shoveling off the ball to Best, and Best running for a loss of 4 yards or so.

(8) Magic Numbers revisited. Well, a long time ago I made a prediction on Cal's season based on how well the QB's completion percentage would be. Basically, my reasoning was that Cal's success would be very closely correlated with Cal's passing game success which can more or less be measured via the QB completion percentage.

Here's what I predicted:

If Cal's starting QB can complete greater than 65% of his passes, Cal will most likely have an 11+ win regular season.

If Cal's starting QB completes between 62%-65% of his passes, Cal will most likely have a 10 win regular season.

If Cal's starting QB completes between 60%-62% of his passes, Cal will most likely have a 9 win regular season.

If Cal's starting QB completes between 58%-60% of his passes, Cal will most likely have a 8 win regular season.

If Cal's starting QB completes between 55%-58% of his passes, Cal will most likely have a 7 win regular season.

If Cal's starting QB completes less than 55% of his passes, the 2nd string QB should probably be starting.

I haven't looked at this prediction in a while. And when I just looked at it now for the first time in over a month, I cringed. Right now, Riley is completing 55.6% of his passes. That means, I think Cal could be aimed at a 7 win season this year. Ouch. It hurts even more when you think about how highly ranked we were pre-season and how much we were hyped as the team that could finally beat USC. But in all honesty, all that preseason hype was a bit much. People gave us too much benefit of the doubt. So if you ignore all the pre-season hype, it doesn't hurt as much and it actually makes sense.

Cal had questions at QB, WR, and OL. Simple measures of all their success (or lack thereof) can usually be seen in the the RB's production and the QB's production.

In 2008, Jahvid Best averaged 8.1 yards a carry. This year he's averaging 6.1 yards per carry.

In 2009, Riley completed 50.7% of his passes. This year he's completing 55.6% of his passes.

While the QB completion percentage has gone up, it's still bad. To put things into perspective, Kyle Boller only completed 53.6% of his passes in 2002. Cal clearly is having offense problems. So what are the causes of the problems? For the most part, I think it's talent talent talent.... err, lack thereof.

Passing and rushing begins in the trenches. It starts with the OL opening up holes and sustaining pass blocks. They haven't been getting that production. There haven't been holes. There haven't been great pass blocks. Whether the problem is due to incompetent coaching or lack of talent is debatable but I think the problem is mostly just lack of talent. In a couple years we'll probably have our answer when we know if any of this year's starters are playing on Sundays, but I'm already pretty sure the answer is going to be no.

(9) Coach critique. I'm not too fond of dishing out tons of coach criticism because I'm not at practices. I'm not seeing what the coaches are teaching the kids and how they are handling things. All I can do now is look at the on-field results and try and make some sort of judgment from that. But even then, on the field results aren't always indicative of the coaches. As good as a coach may be, some players just aren't talented enough or just make untimely mistakes. Sometimes there's nothing more that you can do about it. Some players have it, and some don't. Some players perform better than others regardless of the coaching they receive. That is one of the truest facts in any type of performative sport or performance. The greatest coaching in the world can't make up for the lack of innate talent and innate consistency.

But as Ragnarok said in the podcast, if we merely step aside and don't critique the coaches because we lack the requisite knowledge or because we're not at practice, we're simply putting the state of the program in Tedford's hands and admitting our own ignorance. Ragnarok calls this a "cop out" and seems to think it's an unsatisfactory alternative. It seems as if he thinks fans should have a voice despite our lack of knowledge and connectedness to the program. I know a lot of fans feel the same way. I am not going to argue that we can't critique the coaches. Certainly, fans have the freedom to do so. But that doesn't mean the critique is accurate or even warranted. You'd never think that from reading some of the critiques though. By the sound of it, a lot of us are genius football coaches. Go ahead and critique the coaches, but I just wish there was a little more self-awareness of our lack of substantive football knowledge and knowledge of the situation.

With that out of the way, allow me to critique the coaches. Please disregard everything from here on out because, well, let's face it, I'm a cook not a football coach.

Alamar. He has to get it together. Special teams have sucked for a while. I've been pretty tolerant of it. But now I'm finally growing tired of it. Kickoff coverage is below average. Kick return blocking sucks. Our field goal kickers haven't been great despite supposedly getting some of the top kicking talent in the nation. Our place kickers have been unsatisfactory for the past few years too. Perhaps Alamar should just do TEs, and we should bring in a dedicated special teams coach?

Ludwig. I'm a bit perplexed why the offense seems to have become less diverse over the past few weeks than what we saw earlier on in the season. Perhaps Ludwig was merely trying out new things early in the season. Maybe that's all he was doing, but I think it was working too. It gave defenses a lot to think about and it kept the off guard. But the offense as of late has seemed to become less diverse and I find it a little disappointing. I also would like to see a bit more down-field passing. I think Riley is best throwing the deep balls, such as gos/flys. He's pretty good at posts too. He's perhaps shown the most accuracy with the seam routes. We've been very successful with the seam throws against opponent zones and even man coverage (Minnesota game, ASU game, OSU too). We have the TE to make those tough catches too, in Anthony Miller.

In regards to Ludwig is calling bubble screens and easy swing passes, I understand those are generally easy passes and a safe way to keep the defense honest and from stacking the box completely, but I'm not sure Riley's even that good at those throws. I have no idea who Zennie Abraham is, but he has noted that Riley's best throws are the routes which do not require "leading" the WR. In other words, routes without a lot of lateral movement. I hadn't quite thought about it like that, but I certainly had noticed that Riley's best routes were the deeper down-the-field routes (which require little lateral "leading" of the receivers). As Mr. Abraham notes, Riley consistently misses those bubble and swing passes. Sometimes the passes are behind the receiver (backward passes), and thus laterals which can be fumbled and recovered by the defense. The passes need to be forward passes. Riley is also just a bit slow to throw the bubble screen passes. He doesn't get the ball out to the WR quick enough.

Does Ludwig need to be fired? I don't think so. Not yet. Going through so many offensive coordinators has hurt the offense. As I reported in my Emerald Bowl Pep Rally and Luncheon report, one of Cal's notable starting offensive linemen of the 2008 squad felt that the team was still not 100% confident and proficient in the new pass blocking schemes that Cignetti brought to the offense in 2008. Ludwig has shown promise. And I think with more talent, we can do just fine with him. For now, I think we should keep him to maintain some continuity for the Cal offense that it has needed for a long time.

Gregory. I do think he's a better coach than most people think. Nobody was complaining about Gregory in 2008 when the defense was dominating. But people are complaining this year. What's the big difference between 2008 and 2009? The loss of three great linebackers who all had multiple years of starting experience, a decline in Hagan's abilities (he missed some of fall camp, and I think he self-admittedly stated that he wasn't quite pushing himself as much as he could), and a decline in Ezeff's abilities (missing practices to take a class). Oh, and a pretty crappy offense which isn't giving the defense any help. I don't think this year's defensive struggles are really due to lack of defensive coaching. I see it mostly as a talent issue. The guys just aren't as talented as last year's players, and they aren't as talented as we all hoped they would be at the start of the season. The DL is fine. But the LBs only have about half of their game together. They're pretty good at stopping the run but they're pretty bad in pass coverage. The DBs have been pretty bad except for Syd. Overall, I think the defensive woes are more a talent issue, than coaching.

Tedford. Many of us might not like how he runs the program, or how he keeps certain positional coaches or coordinators around. Nevertheless, I do think he's still the right coach for Cal. Few could have done what he did with our shoddy program. Even fewer would have stuck around like he did through the thick and thin. He is completely dedicated to this program. That shows. That helps sell this program. It sells it to recruits. He also has honor and a reputable reputation. He raises the kids first and foremost to be good upstanding people in the world. It's life and academics first; football second. Football just isn't about winning games. Tedford recognizes this. He hasn't sacrificed morals, or jeopardized the University's reputation to win a few more games unlike other notable coaches around the country. Tedford has shown a willingness to challenge himself, reflect, and learn from his mistakes. Not all coaches have the courage to set aside their own stubbornness and pride to say they were wrong and that changes need to be made. Perhaps Tedford still has to make more changes within his positional and coordinating coaches ranks. Perhaps he will. But of all the coaches on the Cal Football team right now, I do think that Tedford is the most important of them all. There should be little talk of firing Tedford. Things have not gotten that bad yet at all. He has set the program in the right direction. With more time, talent, shiny new facilities, and a supportive fan base, I do think he can officially get us to a BCS bowl or the Rose Bowl.

Cal-Oregon State 2009 Report Card

TwistNHook — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 11:00:32 -0000

Position	QB	RB	Rec.	Run B	Pass P	Run D	Pass R	Pass D	ST	Coach	Overall
Score	2.140	2.281	2.167	0.658	0.633	3.267	0.975	1.000	1.883	1.350	1.079
Grade	C	C+	C+	D-	D-	B+	D	D	C	D+	D

A new week. And a new drunk commenter trying to tell the world his thoughts. Last week it was Goldblooded. This week? USAFGoldenBear. Even American heroes aren't immune to the emotional disaster that was Jahvid Best's injury. I've highlighted the best part:

USAFGoldenBear

QB - Just whn i was goin to sau riley doesnt suck...he does.   Unfortunately there was a lackj on the oline as well...

RB - I hape jvid is ok....dude is oo aweme to go downre like that

whhhy cnat we get a runn gng? wttf is up?

WR - Can the not dropp good passe plz? give marvin the balll

Run Blocking - well for th lorve of god......quit suckling...

Pass Protection - ummmm, makkeres me so mad. reley needs the time to throw

Run D - quioss got stopp...nice, bestn jobr\.

Pass Rush - i saw som blitzx...but osu got tu much time. sackls to muccch to ask fr

Pass D - haaaaaaa...cent gert protrec whenn qb get al day

Special Teams - angr did k but to mnyy punts    cnt beart beavres? whyy?

Coaching -    iu thouygt gregoy coulkd stop canfilllesd ....wryoung...my bad

Gameday - i got to watghc the gamre on ZTV...no mare internetz....javid got hert....drank by my sedf...i dtn have a problam

After the fold, see more of your comments on the Cal-OSU football game! GO BEARS!

Golden Rationality Award, which I think is for being rational, a rare occurrence for internet college football fans.

Commenter/alias name	Standard Deviation
Kodiak	1.348
yorzepol	1.527
rickruss	1.764
Berkelium97	1.869
Ohio Bear	1.872

Old Blue Award, for I guess being really really really really really old.

Commenter/alias name	Average score (out of 4)
rurata	0.515
ososdeoro	0.758
bluehenbear	0.818
iVinshe	1.100
Oaklandishbear	1.364

Golden Sunglasses Award, for spending way too much money on a pair of sunglasses that is going to bend too easily. I mean gold is one of the most malleable substances on earth. Just an imprudent purchase in my view.

Commenter/alias name	Average score (out of 4)
BTown85	2.333
ajay	2.273
USAFGoldenBear	2.212
Manwich	2.152
MadBum	2.037

And now onto the report cards!

IMG_6971 (via Monica's Dad)

rurata - Riley back to his overthrowing self. What was his final completion percentage, like 35%? This has convinced me that we should be giving the backups more playing time. At least he didn't fumble the ball today.

MadBum - Riley did an okay job. Was I overly impressed? No. Was I incredibly dissapointed? No. Riley was shaken up by a cheap shot, and I think that hurt us. Kevin did what we could hope for: not too many mistakes, an occasional shot down the field keeping the D honest, and giving the run game a chance. He did make a INT throw in the redzone that was called back. But let's address one thing: Riley isn't a quarterback that can lead a team back into games. He's a guy that'll give you occasional shots downfield, and he'll do a nice job mid-range game. But he's not a guy you want attempting 30+ passes per game. He doesn't possess the ability to single handedly bring a team back into the game, and when asked to he'll dissapoint. Riley was passing tonight, and you can't blame him for the loss.

ajay - It's the same problem he has been having all year long. Whether it's a screen pass or a short pass, his passes just aren't on target, and that's what is killing us game in and game out. One thing that I noticed this game compared to others was that he would hesitate on throwing some of his deep balls, and after that slight hesitation, throw it anyways. When doing that, I remember him only completing one pass. It's something I never saw before, and I definitely don't think it's a good thing . . .

oaklandishbear - Why, oh why, can't Riley hit a screen pass? Such a power weapon for the Bears eliminated by the utter failure of Riley to hit Best or Vereen in stride. Absolutely inexcusable. Riley not terribly "on" tonight, and I know the O-line bears most of the responsibility for Riley being constantly hurried, but I'm not seeing Riley step up on a consistent basis.

Ohio Bear - Riley was inaccurate. Being pressured constantly prolly didn't help. It would be nice if he had opportunity to plant has back foot on the last step of his drop and not have someone already there whom he has to elude.

via www.calbearsonline.com

MadBum - Our runningbacks touched the ball 14 times all night. And we weren't falling behind huge early. Play-calling takes the blame. Obviously, Best's situation hampered the team completely. He's the team's biggest play-maker, and without him the running game is severly hurt. Vereen didn't have a chance, 5 carries isn't enough. Poor blocking crushed any hopes of a passable run game.

ajay - Jahvid had a relatively quiet night until the first touch down drive, which was great until he went down (sadly with that second concussion this week). From that point on, we just struggled running the ball, so I can't say anything positive. One thing I do remember us not doing is making a run of 15 yards or more. I'm guessing they just played us well.

BlueHenBear - Jahvid's concussive run was the only highlight of the game (except for the injury). I hope he's OK for his sake...and for his sake I hope he takes the rest of the season off, cuz there appears to be no daylight for him to run to anymore. The beavs forced us into a passing game, so there's no reason to fault the running game, except maybe in the first quarter, but all the holes were plugged.

BTown85 - Unimpressive running, but what can you do without run blocking? Best flew through the air and I was holding my breath for him. I was SO glad to see him move his hand while they put the c-collar on him.

OhioBear - Losing Jahvid didn't help the running game, and certainly not the psyche of the team. Not a film guru, but near as I could tell, we got everything we could out of what the O-line gave us. The fateful play that hurt Jahvid was a testament to Jahvid's courage and tenacity.

via www.calbearsonline.com

Berkelium97 - Too many drops, again. I'm really losing confidence in Ross. Lagemann had some great catches. He has a great presence in the middle. Nyan had a few nice catches too. Sparks made his presence felt a couple times.

MadBum - Pretty meh performance here. Tucker impressed me with his pass-catching ability, and he did make some big plays. He needs to cut down the trash-talking. Verran was our lone star, and I'd say he was very good. Everybody else didn't carry the load. Sorry, Marvin isn't a star quite yet. It was obvious to me that Anthony Miller is one of the keys to this club's success, and he was out.

ososdereo - This receiving corps clearly suffers from separation anxiety.

oaklandishbear - Probably the brightest unit on the field Saturday. Tucker was active and Lagemann had a couple of nice grabs. Only one catch by a TE, though. What's up with that?

kodiak - Generally did okay...Not sure if Riley was missing open guys (again), if the WR's weren't getting open, or if there just wasn't enough time. Disappointing not to dominate an inexperienced secondary. Losing Miller hurt here a lot. Ross had his one crucial drop...He must have a quota or something.

Run blocking

via www.calbearsonline.com

Berkelium97 - I thought OSU was supposed to have a weak front seven, but you'd never be able to tell against the Maginot line of OSU. I don't know why we didn't at least try more outside runs to go around the Maginot line. Even if the O-line isn't athletic enough to block like that out of standard I-formations, we've had success running outside out of the wildcat. I was hoping to see more wildcat.

yorzepol - Once again our O-line was owned by the opposing D-line. I don't know enough to know if it is guys losing their individual battles or our run blocking philosophy in general but something is rotten in Berkeley. We can not run against any team with a decent run defense. No running game makes baby Jesus cry. :(

BlueHenBear - Rodgers brothers got their yards and their TDs. Not spectacular running and we did get some tackles for loss, but OSU was able to execute their methodical clock eating drives that were not quite as painful as getting my fingernails ripped out. Maybe danzig can make a highlight film for the beavs showing our linebacker whiffs.

Pass Protection

via www.calbearsonline.com

rickruss - It's as though we were we missing a lineman tonight during the game, i.e., we were missing a down lineman (4 instead of 5)

yorzepol - Riley was not sacked much but he was hurried. OSU's pass rush got in his head for most of the game and he was in a funk almost all night. I was encouraged by our last drive but sad that we couldn't do it earlier in the game when it might have made a difference.

OhioBear - It was a "huzzah" moment every time Riley could plant his foot on the last step of his drop and actually have a moment to look downfield before throwing. Those moments were too few. OSU was in our kitchen all freaking night.

Run D

via www.calbearsonline.com

Berkelium97 - Except for the one TD run, it was the best performance of the year. No one has been able to shut down Quizz and James like that. I was very impressed. Holding them under 2.5ypc is an incredible feat. Syd had an especially strong presence in the run D.

yorzepol - I thought we did as good as could be expected under the circumstances. The circumstances being that we got owned in just about every facet of the game. With the passing game able to convert first downs at will, it makes it very difficult to stop the times when they do run.

DrBeeper - Very credible job containing Rodgers. The bend-don't-break strategy is pretty consistently undermined by the pass D breakdowns

OhioBear - Excellent. We basically held Quizz down the entire game until he finally broke the 24-yard TD and we had effective defense against the fly sweep. Syd is an awesome DB in run support - best I've ever seen at Cal.

Pass Rush

via www.calbearsonline.com

Berkelium97 - Canfield had all day to throw and unlike recent QBs we've face, he's deadly when he had time. He torched us all night. Gregory tried a few stunts and blitzes, but nothing was getting through.

MadBum - What pass rush?

yorzepol - What pass rush? I think we got one sack. Canfield had time to pick our secondary apart and like most other quarterbacks we've faced, we made him look like a Heisman candidate (of course he was leading the Pac-10 in yards/game before this game but still, he was above his average today.)

JrBear- FFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFFF.
We should really be in a 4-3 this season.

Pass D

via www.calbearsonline.com

Berkelium97 - As usual, a TE had his draft stock boosted tremendously. Without the pass rush, there's not much to do against a QB like that. Syd had a great day, but everyone else was mediocre to poor, particularly with tackling.

MadBum - What pass defense?

secret Asian man - It was disappointing to see them contain the run and to see them convert on long third down situations again and again. Canfield picked apart the defense like it was a video game today.

BlueHenBear - What was OSUs third down conversion percentage? Seemed like ~75%. 3rd and 6, 3rd and 9, even 3rd and 12, 3rd and 16, etc. Rinse, lather, repeat. I think our opposition has scouted our zones and yet we continue to camp out where the WR/TEs are not. :banghead Oh, and tackling :banghead whiff!

kodiak - Cattouse is getting better and it's good that they're giving him more time. Ezeff should stick to special teams. He gave up another TD and this one can't be blamed on Conte. Johnson blew so many tackles that they should check him for concussion symptoms...maybe he forgot which team he wanted to win. Syd is a flat-out stud that we're really going to miss.

Special Teams

via www.calbearsonline.com

BTown85 - Kickoffs were worse than ever. To the 30??? In warm-ups I thought Tavecchio was trying some sort of pooch/onside thing. Little did I know this was his full leg for the evening. Brian anger continues to impress.

Coaching

DrBeeper - The good news? We only kicked off twice so how bad could our coverage be. Anger was typically great punting.

BlueHenBear - Hey, they didn't lose the game for us! woo hoo. OSU seemed to always have good field position though to go along with their steady consistent drives.

Coaching

via www.calbearsonline.com

rurata - O-line has sucked all year. Right now I'm not sure if this is on Marshall, or the athletes. Maybe both. Very depressed about the state of our o-line.
Alamar's ST killing us again. We can't hope to keep a team like OSU contained if they're consistently starting at their own 45.
I was a little annoyed to see Riley in on the last drive. Sure we scored a TD, but it didn't make a difference. Why didn't Tedford put Sweeney in?

Berkelium97 - I don't know what's going on with the O-line, but Marshall's unit is the worst line we've had during the Tedford era. I understand that we were playing from behind for much of the game, but the play calling was uninspiring after Best was out. No wildcat, little running. I understand the running game wasn't going well, but neither was the pass. I was hoping we'd mix it up a little more.

MadBum - I can't give an honest grade here. The Best injury completely changed the game, and I don't think any coach could've recovered from that. Before that, he did a medicore job. We still abandoned the run game way too often, and I don't know what happened to our pass defense. Liked implementing the WildBear, and it worked pretty well. Our gameplan was to stop Quizz, and it worked to perfection. After Best's injury, there was nothing Tedford could do.

JrBear - Ludwig, I don't know. I can't even see how the play is going to develop if the O-line doesn't do its job. I think the O-line needs another year of growing up to truly judge Marshall. Coach Simmons (DB) had that monster season last year for Syd and Hagan. Thompson (LB) was stolen from San Jose St., so maybe we can do better? Daft (WR) has got the receivers improving slightly, but they're still dropping good balls and having trouble getting open. Of course Gould and Lupoi are absolute keepers. Gregory isn't perfect, but has shown he can run a good defense.

Tedford is Tedford. When it works, it works. When it doesn't, hold on to your seats.

BlueHenBear - Did anyone watch tape of OSU vs $C? anyone? Bueller? They have this position called tight end and they tend to throw to it after clearing out the zone over the middle, but maybe you were busy thinking (not doing something) about a pass rush. The coaches have installed their systems and that is that it seems. Our weaknesses are exposed and it appears we have neither the horses nor the imagination to do anything about them.

OhioBear - We got outcoached, it seemed. Oregon State appeared to have a much better game plan than we did and we did not respond. I suspect that the coaches had a difficult job to do after the Best injury to keep the players focused on the game at hand, and it appeared that they did an okay job with that. But all in all, the game took a back seat to what happened to Jahvid.

Overall

via www.calbearsonline.com

rurata - Another year, another loss to Oregon State. I had hoped to see the team step it up when Jahvid left, but nope. They seemed as let down as me.
Why is it that every time Cal does well enough to just get my hopes up, they find a way to crush them in the worst way possible?

MadBum - Best's injury crippled the team. It took out our biggest decoy, our biggest threat, and our biggest source of yardage. We also simply seemed shell-shocked from his injury, and the intensity and execution reflected that.

secret Asian man -In the end both teams took the field to contain the opponents running game and put points through the air. Cal lacked a functional O-line and there were probably some physical mismatches in the secondary and that made all the difference. If there were fewer false starts in the first half and an actual pocket for Riley, things might have been different.

yorzepol - I honestly thought we could go 10-2. Boy was I wrong! I hope that Jahvid gets well regardless of whether he can play again this season or not, but that could be a season crushing injury for the team. Let's see how they react. I hope they bounce back but, I would not be surprised if we finished 7-5 or even 6-6. Without a running game or a passing game, it will be hard to win many more games. At first I thought that every team we played kept having their best games against us and that it was just luck, but now I wonder if maybe, just maybe, it's us.

ajay - Two things: open field tackling and our passing game.

I don't have the stats on this, but I'd venture to guess that due to missed open field tackles, we gave up an extra 150 yards, and most importantly, let them complete third downs and get into scoring position off of those plays. This happened again and again, and not only ate up time (w/ the new set of downs), but hurt the crowd noise, and caused the D to be on the field longer, which isn't anything you'd want.

The other is the passing game, and again, Kevin Riley overthrowing or throwing passes that don't catch our receivers in stride. On our screen passes, the receivers have to adjust to the football, and can't get their first positive step until the defender is relatively close. On OSU's screen pass, the pass led the receiver perfectly, and the receiver's first step literally his first step with the ball, which is how it should be. Riley's deep balls were okay, but a good repertoire of short range passes leads to drives, which leads to touchdowns and keeping defenses honest. Long passes are only good a few times because you have to catch the D sleeping.

JrBear - All that matters is that Best is okay.

2008 spoiled me. That was a fun season, with sackmaster Follett&Friends and the zany hijinx of our receivers. Every game in Memorial I felt this sense of invincibility that Cal was going to win, and I just loved that team. Now we're in 2009, and I'm very split over how to approach this team. Do I love them for the az st and ucla games, or do I hate them for the sc and or st games? This definitely isn't 2007 though, not nearly as bad.

BlueHenBear - Every time OSU comes to Memorial (under Tedford) we lose the same way. OSU puts together drive after drive, get enough of them into the endzone or between the uprights while our offense sputters after a few (nice, but ultimately meaningless) completions. Rinse, lather, repeat. It's been a long time since I dreaded the Big Game and I'm feeling a little queasy.

kodiak - Tedford loves X's and O's, but Riley has his number and has for years. It's no coincidence that Aaron Rogers had the worst game of his career against the Beavs.

Pawlawski made an interesting observation during the telecast. He said that the Beavers don't run a lot of plays, but do so out of several different looks. This focus on execution and simplicity lets them play fast. I'm wondering if we're over-coaching our guys on both offense and defense. Too many things for young o-lineman to think about. Too many keys and checks for young linebackers. We're certainly not maximizing the use of our talent. Either that, or we're way off base with our recruiting and talent projections.

Gameday

via www.calbearsonline.com

Berkelium97 - Awful. Just awful. I haven't been that disconnected from a game since...I don't know, Tennessee 2006? Once Best was out, I couldn't enjoy it anymore. This was a dark day for Cal fans. I just pray Best will be able to recover fully.

MadBum - I spent 15 minutes in horror watching the same replay over and over again. One of the saddest days in Cal history.

secret Asian man - What gameday experience? I was cleaning parts of my house in preparation for Mad Men party tomorrow so the game was background. Listened to Starkey during the fourth on the way to Fremont to have dinner with the secret ASian dad.

iVinshe - I fell in love with Cal football last year as a freshman. Games were actually fun (it helped that we never lost at home). Now...

ajay - Played bball before the game, so didn't experience the tailgating, but the fans definitely showed up and were behind the team at the beginning. We pulled together and cheered loudly, almost as loudly as for USC. But after incompetence, people started leaving, and our fourth quarter mic man even started to get us to cheer for booze to keep us in the game.

JrBear - -Some alumni definitely ought to be supporters of the other teams if they're going to talk shit about us the whole game.
-Did we really need a hurt Jahvid to get the volume up?
-Hail to California, home of the best armchair QBs!

ososdereo - The result against OSU is exhibit A in why football games are to be used as an excuse to have parties with your friends outside on beautiful Fall afternoons, and that a victory by the team, should it happen, is merely icing on the cake.

BlueHenBear - Stadium attendance is beginning to dwindle. QQ, usually a somewhat rowdy place, was sitting on their hands. Can we stop the card stunts please, cuz they look lame if the students don't bother to show up. And who is Oskette and where has she been all my life? A transfer from ucla perhaps?

oaklandishbear - I couldn't attend the game as I was in DC. Spent the afternoon in Northern Virginia doing some sight-seeing, and then found a sports bar to watch the game. Got them to turn a TV to the Cal game, and proceeded to drink my Newcastle and have some food. By the 4th quarter, I had seen enough and left. I was so sick to my stomach at the Bears performance that I couldn't even bring myself to keep drinking...

BTown85 - Flew down from Portland and took my son and Dad to the game (three generations of BTown85). Walked to Sproul for a rousing drumline performance, which was awesome. Lunch at the faculty club (yummy). Sat in the Alumni section and tried to represent, but boy are they a bunch of lumps on a log. Made as much noise as I could and sometimes a few others came to life. I was impressed by how much noise the student section made. Props to you. I'm tired of the color orange.

OhoiBear - I nearly cried when Jahvid went down. Seeing it on the screen, I was scared. He just didn't move, at least not what I could see. I feared the worst and was ecstatic to hear it was "only" a concussion.

kodiak - I got food poisoning, so instead of quaffing cold beverages from my giant Cal mug, I lay curled in a fetal position while watching the game. It was oddly appropriate.

CGB Report Card: Grading Cal's Performance Against Arizona State

Avinash — Tue, 03 Nov 2009 22:26:53 -0000

Position	QB	RB	Rec.	Run B	Pass P	Run D	Pass R	Pass D	ST	Coach	Overall
Score	3.520	2.697	3.081	1.470	2.354	2.889	1.970	2.424	2.225	2.828	2.838
Grade	A-	B-	B	D+	C+	B	C	C+	C+	B-	B

Thanks to the 34 people who submitted grades this week, and again thanks to Twist for gathering these.

goldblooded, perfectstrat, MadBum, slaphancock, USAFGoldenBear, GoldenBear 77, JrBear, coolingfan, BTown85, TKE Prytanis 79, BatmanSF, minesweeper, rocksanddirt, CaliforniaCMB, Jake, totallyawesome, jsnell,
Kodiak, California Pete, Berkelium97, BeastMode, yorzepol, beson, bluehenbear, Ohio Bear, oldBear, CALumbus Bear, solarise, HOUSE66, omnizzle, rurata, GBB4188, ikoolykedat, Prd74

Your gameday experience winner goes to inebriated goldblooded, who got bonus points for writing this post drunk.

i drNK LIKE 7 beers in 100 mnutes plus a shotgun fter we won i am heppy also alex gots beers for us hen they were empty and chrius is doing homeworjk and i am pissing him off, ps geeeeeogeeo kicked a fild for ONCE wow

Quarterback--kevin riley for the seahg geneiss is the best quarter back ever/

Running backs--kahvi sstill rules, and shane is tight cause he didnt throw an inT

Receivers--ummm mrvin made me cry once but then he won the game so i hd a beer

Run blocking--i hope that we got bettercause hahivid needs to run feree as a birrd now

Pass protection--jebin riley threwew a shovel pass like tim jesus and he was good, even thoguh the other guys culdnt really helpo him and he got sacked a few trims

Run defense-- that fat guy 26 i hate him a lot i think that mikey mo needs to be better

Pass rush--it was ok, especailly on the last play where we broke the ASU quartererbacks arm haha two penakties

Pass defense--syd uan is so good at everything syd quan, sometiems si se him on the glkf cart, i think i wqill give him a ug nect time i see him he is so good

Special teams--gireeeegeeeo kicked q filed goal over 50 years sthen another one and won it was cool

Coaching--well jeffy bear didnt lose dso he is still kinda tight and alomar was a poop

Overall--we require more vespene beer

The lesson as always? Alcohol is a beautiful thing.

Here's the best of the gameday experiences:

coolingfan - Nothing much, just watched the game at home in my "graduate student" costume.

GoldenBear77 - I missed a couple of minutes of the first quarter -- shopping with my wife. After being gone three days this week on a business trip, didn't think I could just blow it off. She is gone to see her sister next week, so you know where I will be at 4 at when the Oregon State game starts.

totallyawesome - Picked up some KFC and b/c of some unfortunate circumstances (Bay Bridge being closed, GF doing halloween-related errands, friends out of town) I plopped down on my couch to watch the game by myself. Lurched back during Ross's dropped pass and hit my head on the wall. I was shaken up but the wall was ok.

yorzepol - In Hawaii watching in a sports bar with an incredibly drunk and obnoxious bunch of UF fans. They have some pretty lame cheers BTW. As Cal kept making me more and more nervous, those Gator fans kept getting louder and more obnoxious. Fortunately, Riley drove us drown the field and Taveccio redeemed himself and then those Gator fans weren't as annoying (don't get me wrong, they were stil annoying, just not as much.) BTW be very afraid of the Loco Mocos at Giovanni Pastrami's (you Hawaiians know what I mean; they are ginormous!)

rocksndirt - guy in the bar i watched the second half at had a little radio and was listening to starkey....the feed for that was a bit a head of the ABC feed. That and Norrie's kill'n me.

House66 - Sitting down, standing up,Sitting down, standing up,Sitting down, standing up,Sitting down, standing up,Sitting down, standing up,Sitting down, standing up,Sitting down, standing up,Sitting down, standing up,Sitting down, standing up,Sitting down, standing up,Sitting down, standing up,Sitting down, standing up,Sitting down, standing up,Sitting down, standing up, and almost throwing up at the end of the game.

JRBear - Watched the game on ESPN 360. Then I went to Chipotle on Telegraph with a Zack Follett jersey and a tin foil hat with a spike on my head for a free burrito. My costume was "The Space Rhinoceros."

OhioBear - I watched this bad boy on espn360. Unfortunately, I was late getting logged on and missed the first 3 plays of the game. In my zeal to hurry to get the game on, I totes forgot to open a separate window for the first quarter thread on CGB. I was so engrossed in our fine start, that I didn't think about joining the in-game threads until late in the 1st quarter when we were up 14-0. After I opened a window for the threads (and even posted a couple of comments), bad stuff piled up one by one: the Riley fumble at the 3, the ensuing TD, the missed Tavecchio FG, the brutal 80-yard TD pass. So I decided my logging into the in game threads was a reason that we had lost control of the game. So I left CGB and didn't come back until the post game thread, after we'd won. Clearly, I was instrumental in the victory.

BTown85 - Tape-delay viewing of Cal game with a beer. Riley fumbles three times in the first quarter......more beer. Vereen tries to give the game to ASU with 24 seconds left......bourbon !!!!! Line-up for game-winning field goal - knock at the door. Pause DVR to greet guests for Halloween Party. Back to the TV with a beer. 21 seconds of hell after the Field Goal; Party Begins.

minesweeper - My gameday experience began Friday night with some early Halloween partying. To make a long story short, lots of Indian food for lunch followed by an open bar at night does a number on one's stomach. After leaving most of its contents on the streets of San Francisco, my companion (who's smaller than me but can somehow handle much more liquor) helped me stumble home where I promptly passed out.

The main benefit of evacuating ones stomach before passing out is no hangover Saturday morning, and I was up early enough to take in a full 10 hours of college football.

TKE Pryantis 79 - Watched it in a sports bar in Fort Worth TX, with no audio, joined by my wife and colleagues from Scotland and New Zealand, so was put in the interesting role of explaining the rules, strategy and meaning of American College Football...not sure how I did, but the Bears effing won so that's all I cared about

CALumbusBear - I watched it on lo-def. BOOO Time Warner Cable. Why the F did I pay 160 bucks for ESPN Game Plan (aka fleece plan) to watch shit in lo-def? Because I HAD NO CHOICE. Lo-def sux donkeys f'realz

Kodiak - Mother in law came over to babysit, so I got to go fishing for the first time in months. After nailing some nice smallmouth, spotted bass, largemouth, and one really mean trout, I zipped home in time to take the 3 year-old trick or treating for the first time. With the kid safely geeked on sugar, I passed her off to grandma, got the wife to bring me my big mug 'o beer, and watched the game on dvr. Managed not to stroke out while watching it...but holy crap, it's tough being a Cal fan, sometimes.

Golden Rationality Award

Postponed for a week. Data is all screwed up. I'll try and figure out and have the actual answers in next week's report card. So I declare you all winners!

Old Blue Award

Commenter/alias name	Average score (out of 4)
prd74	1.939
ikoolykedat	2.000
GBB4188	2.030
rurata	2.091
omnizzle	2.152

Man, the guy who took photos last week seemed the most distressed about our team, and now it's our video guy. Is it going to be danzig next week? NOOOOOOOOOO...

Golden Sunglasses Award

Commenter/alias name	Average score (out of 4)
perfectstrat	3.182
MadBum	3.121
slaphancock	3.030
USAFGoldenBear	3.000
GoldenBear 77	2.939

Quarterback

GBB4188 - Some great deep balls once again from Riley. However, he once again through some funky thing into the flat while he was rolling out of the pocket which was fortunately not a pick 6. Combine that with 3 fumbles and you get, despite the nice passes, a pretty sloppy overall game.

That beard is what champions are made of, though.

bluehenbear - Well, Riley didn't make any mistakes and his mediocre completion percentage is on the WRs to had several drops (Ross and Tucker especially). Managed the game and got us in position for the winning FG. Wanted to give + but just couldn't do it with the fumbles.

Jake - When he's good, he looks like Aaron Rodgers, and makes the crowd hold their breath. When he's bad, he looks like Nate Longshore, and makes the crowd hold their breath for reasons. He looked good today, but the offense went nowhere for 2 1/2 quarters. Also: seriously, dude, three fumbles in the first half?

Only reason it's a B is that he came alive that last drive.

jsnell - Riley played pretty well, other than a couple of bad decisions and the fumbling. But really, that last drive... pretty much erases the rest of it, doesn't it?

Running back

ikoolydekat - Both RBs were contained today, but I believe most of the blame should be placed on the OL.

Berkelium97 - There wasn't much they could have done with the lack of holes being opened up. The wildcat wasn't too bad against the stout ASU D (especially that Vereen run called back due to penalty).

totallyawesome - Meow! Moar Wildcat pleez!

No, but seriously, aside from some great catches, our running back couldn't do much against this ASU run defense. Thankfully, the ASU D Coordinator dared us to beat him thru the air and we did (mostly).

yorzepol - Javid had an ineffective running game. Shane was not much better. I saw Jahvid completely whiff on a block and then come back to prevent the sack. The problem was by that time Riley was so out of position he had to throw it away. Then I saw him make some great blocks. Blocking continues to be a problem for him. Maybe if he stayed another year he could work on it? Anybody?

MadBum - Vereen never had a shot. Wasn't given the ball enough, only seeing one rushing attempt. This is unacceptable, as against UCLA he was key in freeing up Best for his big plays. Best did okay with what he had. I'm not thrilled with 3 yards per carry, but Mr. Best came up big in the passing game as well. This linebacking corp is tops in the Pac-10, and Best did what he could. His average relies mainly on big plays, and he didn't get one. ASU refused to let Best beat them, and he freed up Riley.

BatmanSF - I thought the backs played well, given the limited holes available. Jahvid actually showed more toughness and grit and willingness to grind out tough yards than he has earlier. Shane Vereen is just a QUALITY player, all the way around...OK, maybe he can work on his passing! And, BTW, a very nice Brian Holley contribution!

BTown85- Uninspiring at running the ball. Best and Holley catching passes were awesome; let's do more of that. I KNEW Vereen was going to throw the ball at the goal line 'cause he came up there in the WildBear and I thought "Everyone KNOWS you're running....wait, unless THIS is the first time you EVER decide to pass it....against the MAN-CHILD who is Burfict!!!!" I put the call on the coaches ($%##$) and the crap pass on Vereen, who should have tucked the ball and taken a knee and 18 more seconds off the clock. ANOTHER thing the coaches should have prepped him for!!!!!

Receivers

GoldenBear77 - Verran, you made a great catch on the low throw on the final drive, but you owed Riley one. The one you dropped down the sideline hit you in a bad place -- your hands -- and that had six written all over it. Ross, you can't drop the screen when it is third down. We appear to be feast or famine here. Thankfully, there was enough to eat at this banquet.

Berkelium97 - Drops, drops, drops, drops, drops (mostly from Tucker and Ross). Everyone was getting chances, though. Marv made some great catches. Everyone really stepped up (Marv, Miller, Lage(r)mann, and Tucker) for some huge catches on that final drive. I can forgive the drops if they're willing to play like that in the clutch. Miller is really establishing himself as a consistent target. He made big catches today (just like he did in his lone catch against Miami last year).

bluehenbear - Great first half, lousy second half...another case of the dropsies. Way to hang in there on the last drive, though. Wanted to give a B, but but just couldn't do it with the drops.

MadBum - Great job done right here. Mistakes were made, like drops by Ross and Tucker that hurt us. That facemask hurt us as well, and that holding hurt us big by Miller. But Miller made up for that mistake with his catch on the next play, Ross came up with big play after big play, and Tucker had that huge diving catch. Lagermann proved that his studliness on NCAA 09 wasn't just restricted to the video game, and made some catches that we haven't seen in his career. If these guys play the same way they did today minus those mistakes, then we'll be tough to stop.

slaphancock - Two drops nearly cost us the game. But then they caught everything on the last drive. Still, those two drops (the over the shoulder td one and the screen pass on third down) were inexcusable. It looked like both bounced off the receiver's chest protection. Maybe they should find new pads?

beeson - I think Marvin Jones sweats super glue. The ball just sticks to him.

Run blocking

ikoolydekat - No hole, no glory, no fun.

GoldenBear77 - Almost a non-issue in the game. When is the last time you said this at a CAL game?

Berkelium97 - It was mostly non-existent. Matt Summers-Gavin wasn't playing, but I don't think he alone would have made a tremendous difference.

yorzepol - The line was dominated today. Jahvid and Shane had no room to juke. Fortunately we had a passing game to overcome the terrible blocking, but we might not always. Or it could be that their run D really is scary good.

CaliforniaPete - It looked like there were some nice holes created in the line, but the Bears had a hard time carrying it through the second level. In other words, a lot of 3 yard gains. Don't know if this was a scheme issue or guys failing to make plays, but it sure would have been nice to established more of a rushing attack after jumping out to a 14-point lead.

Beastmode - What run blocking? I know teams are stacking the box, but teams do so against Stanfurd and Oregon too. I know, different schemes, but that just means we need to scheme better, even if we have a young line, so does Oregon by the way.

OhioBear - The most frustrating part of the game, by far, was the inability to open holes for Best. ASU was all over our running game and our O-line didn't seem to rise up to the occasion. Credit to ASU, for sure. But I can't believe we're not better than that. Fewer than 100 yards rushing? We're lucky to win a game with that number.

Pass protection

coolingfan - Riley's running ability saved the game -- pass protection was awful, but this was the case pretty much for the whole season so far.

totallyawesome - Pass protection was circumspect, but thankfully, Riley and his happy feet bailed them out on a few plays. They held the line when it mattered, thankfully, especially on that last drive.

yorzepol - I don't remember thinking that they got owned very much. There were sometimes they allowed too many defenders through but mostly they gave Riley the time he needed. Oh yeah, except for the two sacks which led to two fumbles from Riley and made it a much closer game than it should have been. But besides that they didn't get owned much.

MadBum - I was impressed these guys. False starts and holdings derailed some drives but overall very well done. The last 2 drives were executed to perfection, as the only time they got a rush was when Riley took his time. They even held on plays when Riley scrambled around, not holding and letting him keep the play alive. Tepper seems to be a weakspot for us though. He commits too many penalties, but I can't complain too much.

OhioBear - Gave up 3 sacks, and pressure seemed consistently there from the ASU pass rush. I was holding my breath every time a guy got close to Riley, praying to Oski he wouldn't fumble again.

USAF Golden Bear - This seemed like a two faced o-line. Sometimes they were giving Riley a perfect pocket, and then other times it seemed like a minimal rush they were just getting straight beat.

solarise - Riley was running for his life like Neve Campbell in Scream 1 through infinity. It'd be nice to see what Riley could really do if he gets protection a la Matt Barkley.

CALumbus Bear - Dear O-line: Let's talk about that sucking thing. You know, that thing you've been doing a LOT of recently. Please stop doing it. Really. Stop. Like now. Holes are your friends. Please open them. Just push that big fat guy to the side you're supposed to push him. You've been doing it for years. Vacation over, get back to F-ing work.

Rush defense

Berkelium97 - The run D was generally good, but they could still move the chains on us (see ASU's last TD drive). I was surprised ASU's ypc (adjusted for sacks) was only 3.5. I thought it would have been closer to the mid-4s.

totallyawesome - Very solid. Saw Cattouse get in on a few plays. ASU is much improved running-wise from last year but still couldn't manage much against our defense.

JRBear - Defense is so hard to grade for this game. It's hard to give them credit for their first two lucky TDs. I think the Run D did a good job holding back Bass, not so much Marshall.

OhioBear - Statistically, pretty good. But it seemed like Cam Marshall gave ASU a spark in the 2nd half, getting good gains. I would've graded the run D higher had it not been for ASU's run game awakening in the 4th quarter. Props to the D, however, for stopping them when we had to in order to get the ball back.

Kodiak - Did a nice job in the 1st half, seemed to wear down in the 2nd. No question we're more stout with Derrick Hill. I hope he's back soon. For the 1st time in...a month(?) we didn't give up a bone-headed long run from someone being woefully out of position.

Pass rush

ikoolydekat - what pass rush?

GoldenBear77 - CAL was stronger as the day progressed, and that was a good thing. I thought we did not get enough pressure in the first half, but, particularly in the first drive of the second half stepped it up. However, no one is going to mistake Sullivan for Aaron Rodgers.

Berkelium97 - Sullivan generally had a lot of time to pass. Alualu was abusing their O-line in the early third quarter, though. The 4:3 helped get more pressure, but Sullivan still had some time.

totallyawesome - Very pedestrian. Our D-lineman need to get better at shedding blocks and we need to dial up a few more blitz plays. They need enough, however, to force Sullivan into some bad decision making.

Beastmode - No sacks. Not many TFL. Teams obviously know to get rid of the ball quickly against Cal, but it isn't just a matter of that. it's that our guys do not get enough of a push, particularly on the interior.

slaphancock - When we got the QB under pressure, he looked like a normal college QB, not like the hyper-accurate heisman contenders the rest of the QBs we've played have looked like against us.

USAF Golden Bear - This was the most abysmal part of the team, IMO. Play after play, I saw no pressure being put on Sullivan, who was playing poorly in the 1st half all by himself. Unless ASU's o-line suddenly became not-horrible in the last couple of days, Cal's pass rushers need to figure what the deal is and fix it.

Kodiak - Sullivan is a statue with happy feet who makes bad decisions when pressured. Yet, he had enough time to stand there and utilize his scud-arm to some effect. It's becoming pretty apparent that our 3-4 is more than a little gimped without a legitimate pass-rushing threat from the LB's.

Pass defense

GoldenBear77 - What happened on the 80 yard reception in the first half? That simply should not happen, the way we play pass defense. Other than that, OK with two interceptions, one of which led to the half-time lead.

Jake- Syd is a beast. 'Nuff said. The picks were works of art.

BTown85 - There were some SPECTACULAR plays that often will bring a PI call, but didn't 'cause Cattouse and Thompson played 'em PERFECTLY (no hand on receiver's back, etc.). We got lucky that we were able to jar the ball loose a couple of times from receivers who should have held on. Whew.

Totally blown coverage on that deep TD.

solarise - Syd & Josh Hill made some big plays. Cattouse deserved the start. The man produces big hits and provides coverage in the middle. I'd like to see Cattouse w/ even more playing time.

Kodiak - On the one hand, we finally got a couple of ints. The CB's seemed closer to receivers than previous weeks. Cattouse is such an obvious upgrade over Ezeff, it makes you wonder what took the coaches so damn long to make that call. On the other, I can't shake the feeling that the only reason we didn't give up another career day of 300+ passing yards is that Sullivan is really, really bad.

Special Teams

ikoolydekat - NO.

Berkelium97 - Anger quietly had a big day (53.0 average!) Giorgio missed some easy field goals, but also managed to kick a 51(!) yarder and --HOLY CANOLI--kicked the game-winning field goal! Return coverage was serviceable, but I still get nervous every time we kick off.

yorsepol - ALLLLLLLLLLLLLAAAAAMMMMMMAAAAA

AAAAAAR!

but also:

ALLLLLLLLLLLLLAAAAAMMMMMMAAAAAAAAAAAR!

Some decent plays (finally a kickoff in the endzone,) but too few to merit a higher grade. Taveccio would not have had to make the game winning filed goal in the last seconds if he had made either of the other two field goal attempts or better yet, if he had made both. But at least he redeemed himself. Those kick offs and kick off coverage WILL cost us a game though, mark my words.

BTown85 -We squeaked this out. Only one kickoff from the 30 got within the five, two makeable FGs missed, Tavecchio jumping OVER a would-be kick-rougher then falling down to ensure he didn't the call......and then squeaking out the last FG. Dang, I gave up the wrong week to quit doing tequila shots.

Anger was stellar as usual (to the point I'm disappointed if he doesn't get some punts in the 60-70 yard range....now THAT'S not fair), but our kick-off coverage was weak, weak, weak.

CALumbus Bear - Punting was good. KO coverage was mediocre to very poor. Salami's FG grades were as follows: F-, then a most shocking A+, then another fat F, then "why the frig are we sending him out there this is a coaching phail just go for it Tedford O MY OSKI HE ACTUALLY MADE IT WHEN WE REALLY NEEDED IT TAVECCHIO FOR THE GROZA AWARD GIVE IT TO HIM NOW!" So they get a nice + on the end of that medicre C.

Kodiak - Anger punted pretty well. I don't remember screaming while watching our kickoffs or kick coverage in general. You can go half-empty/half-full with Tavecchio. Yeah, he blew a couple of gimmes...But he also nailed on from 51, and had the stones to come through at the end. It does worry me when Tedford waits until gametime to name a starting kicker...and does it by asking Alamar who looks better in warm-ups. We're officially flogging the horse's fossilized skeleton at this point, but we need to do better than our current Mickey Mouse approach to special teams.

Coaching

coolingfan - Didn't get much out of Wildcat formations, but otherwise showed a variety of plays and formations, which we missed early in the season against 'SC and Oregon.

GoldenBear77 - Great confidence in Riley on the final drive. I am torn on the Vereen wildcat toss into the end zone. On the one hand, if it had succeeded we would have all thought the coaches incredible. On the other hand, if it was intercepted, idiots. Was it a lack of confidence in the kicking game? In any event, someone once told me "you can't argue with results", and the result is that we are 6-2, and 3-1 on the road.

Berkelium97 - There were a lot of smart play calls today. From the first play, that took great advantage of ASU biting on the run to the calls on the last drive. I was really surprised that we threw for the first down so often on that last drive (even on 1st and 25). Then that WildVereen pass, I loved that call even though Miller barely missed the pass. They did a great job of moving the ball (on that last drive and others) through the air. The offense still looked competent without Best or Vereen running for chunks of yardage. Gregory's unit made a huge mistake, but was otherwise good enough to keep us in the game. It's too bad we can't find a way to get more pass rush, but our unit just doesn't seem to have the personnel for it. Alamar lives to see another day...by the narrowest of margins.

CaliforniaPete - From a season-wide perspective, I'm happy. This team has really responded well to the adversity of two brutal losses. And for the second time this year, the Bears have won a game, on the road, in the fourth quarter. That's all good.

I'm a big Bob Gregory fan, and with the exception of the debacle in Eugene, I'm generally with the defense. As for Tedford/Ludwig's offense, I'm of two minds. For much of the year, this team has been fun to watch, and the Bears have often jumped out early to sizable leads. Such was the case again today. But when the offense stalls, it really struggles to get going again--or at all in the case of the two losses. All of this leads me to question the coaches' in-game adjustments; what's their response when Plan A is no longer working. Given today's performance, I wonder if we'll see some no-huddle series in the future, even when the clock isn't an issue. The change of tempo really appeared to help.

MadBum - This is where I question. That throw with Vereen on 2nd down and goal was completely unneccesary; he hasn't thrown a pass all year, is inaccurate, and there isn't alot of room for him to work with. Also, ASU knows Vereen is the back in the WildBear that throws. Didn't like some defensive calls, but can't think of specific ones. JAHVID BEST IS OUR BEST PLAYER. GIVE HIM THE BALL. VEREEN IS ALSO GOOD TOO. Both still need touches. Best could use 20 carries, but I guess I'm okay with that. Vereen really needs the ball more. He completely opens the offense up for Best and Riley. Without him, our rushing game is completely onedimensional and ASU keyed completely on Best.

JrBear - I like the WildVereen pass. Were you expecting that? I bet you weren't.
Overall, alright. Coaches aren't responsible for momentum changes, and that's what happened in the 2nd quarter.

jsnell - I wonder if they called for that halfback pass at the end of the game just to make people stop talking about how conservative the play-calling is, and instead let us talk about how reckless the play-calling is.

USAF Golden Bear - Whatever Tedford and Ludwig have done with Riley, its amazing. Keep it up. Gregory on the other hand, needs to get this D on track, and not make inept offenses look servicible. OSU is going to pile up huge numbers if this continues, and I'm not sure Cal's offense will be able to keep up.

solarise - I liked Ludwig's playcalling in the 1st. Aggressive & revealed some plays I haven't seen before. Some adjustments were made in the 2nd half to give Riley more protection. I thought the coaches showed a lot of faith in the players, especially for giving Vereen the freedom to pass out of that Wildbear at such a critical junction of the game.

Cut down those penalties.

Kodiak - 1) I still hate our special teams.
2) I'm skeptical of our defensive playcalling...but at least appreciate that we seem to be trying different schemes and players to get better.
3) I like the diversity and innovation displayed on offense. I hope there's some continuity. I get the feeling that the execution and range of plays will only get better as the players become more comfortable.

Overall

rurata - An ugly game overall, but we won on the road, and are bowl eligible now. Hooray for that.

Berkelium97 - Too many penalties, too many dropped passes, inadequate holes for the running game, but--Bak Bak Almighty--that last drive was incredible. I am as confident in Riley as I have ever been. He puts the ball where it needs to be (just outside of where the defense can get it) and can make huge plays when necessary. I am now confident--and more importantly, so is the team after today--that this team can run the table. It won't be easy, but they can do it.

totallyawesome - This was an emotional rollercoaster, to be sure. A very sloppy performance by both teams (penalty-o-rama). But I like how our team kept their heads in the game, overcame some huge letdowns and managed to escape with a win. Riley's last drive will definitely go in some kind of highlight reel from Danzig. Also, great to see Tavecchio make the game winner. He should have made at least one of the other two field goals, but he's our FG kicker and hopefully will learn and get better from this experience.

yorzepol - Let's face it, we were lucky to come out of there with a win. The worst thing is that IT SHOULD NEVER HAVE BEEN THAT CLOSE! I couldn't believe all the lost opportunities I saw. We need to execute better. Still, we didn't play well and still won against what I think is a decent ASU team so that's got to mean something right? (Right?) If we keep playing like this we will be unlucky sometime and lose a game we really should have won. I hope this doesn't happen and we finish 10-2 but only time will tell.

rocksndirt - Just win, baby.

Beastmode - A road win is great no matter how it happens. First win in Arizona since 2004. And, makes Tedford 6-1 against ASU. This win also makes Cal bowl eligible and sets us up for the opportunity at a very good season. That said, the weak running game is troublesome and the passing defense only got slightly better. Both better improve with OSU, Arizona, and Stanfurd in consecutive weeks.

BatmanSF - The team had not been in a close game all season. Therefore, I can't be too disappointed that they rallied when necessary to pull it out. I still have the nagging feeling that coaching is holding this team back as much as anything, but I admit I don't have the answers....its a bit of an odd season, so far, isn't it?

OhioBear - There is no such thing as a bad win, especially on the road against a team that is far from terrible. This is the type of game we would have lost during the Holmoe, Mariucci, and Gilbertson years. Hell, we hadn't won a game on a last minute win or lose FG since Coach Snyder's Citrus Bowl season in 1991 (if memory serves). So we should characterize this one as "good" for grading purposes. But we need to play better. Much better.

minesweeper - Generally an ugly game with lots of penalties, turnovers, and missed FGs, but not every game's going to be pretty, and to win an ugly one is almost more satisfying than a scrimmage win against the likes of EWU or WSU. Riley, Tavecchio, and the rest of the team showed a lot of guts and maturity regrouping after some early miscues and pulling out the victory.

Earlier in the season, when our expectations were much higher, I'd be focusing on everything the team didn't do right in this game. Now that our expectations are more modest, we can focus on what went right, and after all a win is a win is a win, and I'll take 'em any way we can get 'em.

And hey, we have the same record, overall and in conference, as USC now? Say what???

Kodiak - I'm sure there are plenty of fans screaming about how bad we are. Geez. Shut up already. We're Cal fans. Our teams are supposed to give us coronaries every now and then. This is the winnable/favored game that we blow every year...but somehow didn't. I'm happy with the resolve that the team, and in particular, that Riley showed. The ball doesn't always bounce your way, but good teams find a way. We're not a great team, but we're learning to be good. I also absolutely loved the call to pass out of the Wildbear at the end of the game. That's the call Tedford makes in his first year when he was bold, dynamic, and played to win. There's been too much of playing not-to-lose, and playing scared the last few years. As a program, we need to get that mean, hungry, no-nonsense-I'm-going-to-beat-

you-down-and-step-on-your-throat edge back.

Is Cal's Defense Underachieving?

Avinash — Tue, 27 Oct 2009 17:30:26 -0000

More photos » by Ben Margot - AP

Cal's pass defense struggled again. Are we going to see this all year long?

Browse more photos »

DEFENSE, BEARS...DEFENSE???

Most of the postgame reaction has been focused on Cal's lamentable defensive effort, especially against the pass. It's been discussed everywhere, and I figured I'd throw myself into the fire. Literally, since I figure 80-85% of Cal fans will disagree with my next statement:

Outside of Autzen, Bob Gregory hasn't done that much wrong.

Now before all of you start hollering about Prince and Tuel lighting us up, I understand where you guys are coming from. Like many people, I assumed that the depletion of our linebacking corps would be offset by improvements in the defensive line and the secondary, with everyone having starting experience coming back.

Unfortunately, it doesn't work like that. Units don't just revamp at certain areas and expect to get by because the front and the back are supporting them. The linebackers are the core of the defense, especially in a 3-4; take them away and the middle is open to exploitation.

Think of an army with great tanks and experienced soldiers but no aircraft, anti-aircraft or flak. You might have the power and the wherewithal to take out your opponents, but a good enough air attack can blast all that heavy weaponry and veteran savvy out of the park. So it is with the passing defense this season, where the weakness of the linebackers has been felt by the rest of the lineup.

Cal is returning seven but we're missing those four BIG TIME. Let's rank the top players on our defense last year.

1) Zack Follett
2) Syd'Quan Thompson
3) Tyson Alualu
4) Anthony Felder
5) Worrell Williams
6) Mike Mohamed
7) Darian Hagan
8) Rulon Davis (when healthy)

So those four who are gone are in the top 8, and the three linebackers in the top five. Big big losses.

Rulon Davis might never have been as healthy as we'd have liked him to be, but when he was, he was ON. Cameron Jordan is a jolly guy from what I've seen, but at the moment he really hasn't stepped up to replace Davis's raw ability. Don't be deceived by those 6.5 sacks--3.5 came against really bad teams. He's on pace for 2008 numbers, and he's playing probably 50% more than last season after splitting time with Rulon in 2008.

Derrick Hill has performed well, but centers can still battle him one on one, leaving one side to double, triple team Alualu at will. So that means that extra one or two guys blitzing or moving in on the line of scrimmage has to step up, rush in, and hit the quarterback.

Unfortunately...

Cal does not have a pass rushing linebacker. When Cal put that linebacker at the LoS on passing downs last season (usually Follett), it collapsed the pocket, overwhelmed the edge and forced the quarterback into the errant throws, incompletions or sacks. Not this season. Young, Mohamed, Kendricks, Bishop, Holt, none of these guys have been able to fill that mantle. Jarred Price might be the guy to show it, but what he has in pass rush (2 sacks) he lacks in consistency (4 season tackles)

Follett had 10.5 sacks and 4 hurries on his own last season; through seven games, the ENTIRE Bears linebackers corps has combined for 7.5 sacks and 4 hurries.

Note: Interestingly enough (as you probably saw with some of the highlights), Gregory tinkered with a four down linemen set on passing downs to gain extra pass rush, although I'm not sure how much of it had an effect on slowing down Tuel. I'd been pondering a similar idea considering the weakness of our linebackers to add an extra defensive lineman (our strength) for more pass rush, and it seemed Gregory was thinking along the same lines. We'll see how it bears out when Cal plays formidable/weaker offensive lines down the road.

Cal's linebacking corps is still learning the pass defense ropes: Probably the biggest mistake I made in my predictions was asking this question: "is Mike Mohamed capable of becoming Cal's greatest linebacker of the Tedford era?" Whoops. Desmond Bishop, you keep the title.

Don't get me wrong, Mohamed's been good, still the best all-around linebacker for the Bears (he has picks, a forced fumble, a sack, and 61 tackles). Nevertheless, he seems to be suffering from the Rajon Rondo syndrome--he looked like the best linebacker last season because guys were always throwing in his direction to avoid Felder and Williams. Unlike Follett or Desmond, he lacks that game-changing ability. Maybe that'll change, but right now he's merely good when Cal needs great.

Devin Bishop and Eddie Young are okay, but as BWNQ noted, they probably lack proper football instincts, as they've been duped on several important occasions by doing bad things on the field. No matter how good the coaching is, it's REALLY hard to undo instinct.

As for Kendricks and Holt, they have promise, but as sophomores they're still not fully polished. We can probably expect better things from them...in 2010. Right now we can only hope they're given the time to grow and mature so they can come back and smash next season.

Finally, the secondary. This is probably the most mystifying of the three units, even to a guy like me. Last season these guys were ballhawks, and now they're getting pumpfaked, beat at the point of attack. What's going on??

Syd'Quan Thompson has done his job, but the other side, plainly, has not. Darian Hagan got pump-faked out of the starting lineup in Minnesota. Josh Hill got the Oregon start and got picked on, over and over and over. And then both have been taking their turn even though they've been playing more man coverage. Although both are improving, it does leave you a little frustrated, especially with Hagan, who looked so promising last season. The safeties have been competent--Ezeff and Johnson are good at delivering hits, and Cattouse has also shown great promise, but for whatever reason they've been beat a lot.

So why has the secondary regressed? A few possibilities:

1) With the linebackers having trouble defending their zones and tackling afterwards, the secondary has to edge toward the middle of the field to be prepared to support...which in turn opens up the flats and sideline throws. And it doesn't necessarily secure the middle either.

2) The secondary might be more experienced, but given the depth of gamefilm, there is plenty for opposing teams to scout on them. Cal's secondary is not like USC's, whose weaknesses are harder to pinpoint and exploit. Even Syd'Quan might be lockdown one-on-one, but he's still undersized--tall physical receivers can do damage against him if given the proper time. You can only imagine how many more double moves and pump fakes against Hagan and throws to the flats against Hill we'll see this year.

3) PAY ATTENTION. This is the big one...

There are a lot of good quarterbacks in the Pac-10 this season.

Four freshmen have shown great promise--Foles, Luck, Barkley, and, yes, even Tuel (don't forget he also went about 67% against USC too). Add in three guys who've been here before (Masoli, Locker, Canfield) and that's SEVEN Pac-10 quarterbacks who are at the very least competent. That's the most depth the conference has shown at the quarterback stable this decade.

Compare it to the Pac-10 QBs we saw last season: Sanchez was pretty good but still developing, Willie Tuitama had his ups and downs, Masoli was in his first year escaping the shadow of Dixon, Lyle Moevao had his moments although he was carried by the Rodgers brothers, Rudy Carpenter was digesting turf thanks to his awesome offensive line, the Kevin Craft Interception Show missed no stops, Tavita Pritchard was a placeholder, the Washington/Wazzu quarterbacks we faced were bad, bad, bad.

Masoli has quietly worked his way back to a solid 60% completion percentage. Canfield and Foles are horrifyingly good at finding their receivers, hovering at 70% and putting them in the top seven in the conference. Luck isn't as accurate, but he throws touchdowns and not many picks (kind of like Riley-lite). Locker is the most dangerous player in the Pac-10 if he faces a defense that gives him cushion. And Barkley is only going to get better.

They're so good that they're not just beating Cal's zones, they're beating Cal on man. Tuel's two touchdown throws came against man coverage, where he fit that ball in just the right place for the receiver to get it and the defender had no chance to play the ball. Kevin Prince had excellent throws that burned a few guys with excellent man coverage too. Surprisingly, they played pretty well against Barkley after spotting the Trojans ten points. Of course the big fail was Masoli where the Bears played mostly zone, but even when they played man they got beat.

Now the solution would be to be aggressive in the pass rush and send more guys. But who? Cal's linebackers haven't shown they're able to speed their way. Not many of these guys have the ability to stunt or delay the way our group did last year--maybe Alualu, but again he's facing constant double teams. Plus with the quarterbacks being better this season, sending more guys leaves the Bears vulnerable to a precise pass going for six.

So pick your poison. So pick your poison. Do you key in on stopping the run and not allowing big plays and risk giving up easier underneath throws, or gamble with a pass rush or man coverage and take the risk of quarterbacks connecting on long strikes? This is the quandary Gregory is in, and we’ll find out what he comes up with these next few weeks. (HT Hydro for the rephrase)

Is Cal's defense underachieving, overachieving, or performing as expected?

Reactions to defense.

More reactions: AERose has some interesting numbers on 1st/2nd half stats, Rocky63125 wants Gregory to go, royrules had thoughts about Cal's D against UCLA.

Gary Peterson, San Jose Mercury News:

Then came the part no one expected. When Tedford had finished dousing his defenders in lighter fluid, linebacker Steve Fanua set them on fire.

"He's a young buck, a redshirt freshman," Jordan said, smiling. "He has fire in his veins. He gave us a nice little talk."

And this was received how?

"That only amps you up more," Jordan said. "Here's a guy, barely 18 years old, letting us know what this means for him. He's a young kid. He's hungry."

So was Cal's defense when it returned to the field. Jordan recorded two of his two-and-a-half sacks, and three of his six tackles in the second half. One sack defused Washington State's first drive after the intermission. Another, coming on fourth-and-10, ended a Cougars drive at the Cal 18.

Jimmy Tran, Daily Cal:

One of the points emphasized was tackling.

Arguably the most noticeable player guilty of missed tackles was cornerback Darian Hagan. Despite coming off one of his best performances ever last week against UCLA, Hagan struggled to make several key tackles in the open field and gave up a couple big passing plays against WSU.

"He needs to be more consistent, no question about it," Gregory said. "Very poor game today, and we just got to keep working with these kids to grow and mature."

Cal @ UCLA Post-Game Thoughts

HydroTech — Wed, 21 Oct 2009 10:15:09 -0000

More photos » by Reed Saxon - AP

Browse more photos »

(1) Riley played well. I can't really remember any bad passes off the top of my head. He looked pretty sharp today. His passes to Marvin Jones were right on the money. His pass to Best was perfect. There was even a quasi throw-away pass that Riley threw on the run which was perfectly placed where only the wide receiver could catch it (although the pass ended up being incomplete). I was really impressed with Riley's ball placement today. He wasn't just making the throws today, but also was placing the ball very well too.

Riley showed pretty good pocket presence and would scramble when things started breaking down. His gutsy play on his QB scrambles and QB draws was inspiring. He just seemed calmer and more poised today than in previous games. Perhaps it's mental, or perhaps it's because the offensive line wasn't sucking like it did against Oregon and the offense wasn't facing USC's defense. Riley's completion percentage today was 60.1% - which is fair, but I think Riley played better than his completion percentage suggests.

(2) Cal's inside zone runs tip off the defense to which side the offense is going to run to before the snap. These are the plays where Cal motions a WR who stops on the backside (the side of the offense that Cal is running away from) to block the backside defender. When Cal does this, it's obvious it's a run as since Cal doesn't playaction out of the inside zone (we have in previous years but we really haven't seen it this year). It also tips off the defense as to which way the run is going.

I guess Ludwig likes the inside zone as since it has become the blocking scheme that Cal has used the most this year. Last year the outside zone was our most-used blocking scheme and it was pretty dominant. I actually like the outside zone better because it doesn't tip off the defense as to which way the run is going and because it gives Best and Vereen more options on where they can run. However, the fact that Cal isn't using the outside zone runs this year must mean Ludwig feels we're not quite suited for it. If that's true, that must mean he's thinking our offensive line this year doesn't have the quickness and athleticism to get moving laterally very quickly - as is required with the outside zone. Anyways, I wouldn't mind seeing more outside zone runs rather than these telegraphed inside zone runs. But maybe I'm making too much out of this issue. In previous years, Cal's power man blocking schemes always telegraphed which way the run was going because Cal ran its power scheme to the strong side of the offense like 98% of the time. Even when Cal let the defense know which way it was running its power scheme, our run offense was still pretty dominant and we would average like 6.0 yards a rush anyways.

(3) Cal's running game was pretty inconsistent. Case in point: Jahvid Best had 102 yards on 18 rushes, 93 yards of which came from one run. That means Best gained a whopping 9 yards on the other 17 rush attempts. Yeesh. This isn't a diss on Best, but moreso a diss on our offensive line. I know UCLA's stellar defensive tackle Brian Price was blowing things up left and right, but still. If it wasn't for Best's and Vereen's big play potential, I don't think Cal's offensive line had enough in them to sustain a drive. Thankfully, Cal's passing game showed up today and it didn't put too much of a burden on the Cal rushing attack. Cal's blocking still has to get stronger at the point of attack. Right now, it's pretty lacking no matter what scheme we use. Power hasn't been that great, inside zones haven't been that great, outside zones have actually sucked this year, and the outside toss sweeps haven't been great. Best's sick Reggie Bush-like touchdown run came on a toss sweep, and if it wasn't for Jahvid Best being so sick (in the "awesome" slang sense, not in the influenza sense), that play would have been stopped for a loss because UCLA was on that play like white on rice. I'm a little surprised we didn't see more outside zone runs today and toss sweeps to get the ball away from Price as since he was blowing everything up in the middle.

Overall, I think this year's offense is fairly mediocre despite our Heisman runningback. The run blocking hasn't always been there (but Best's and Vereen's big play potential makes up for it sometimes), and Cal's passing game has been off and on. When both the running and passing are working, Cal's offense has enough firepower to put games away. But it's when one isn't working when things start turning south. Cal's offense is going to have to turn things around this season to win out.

(4) Gregory continues to use more man coverage in pass defense. In the first three games of the season, Cal used zone defenses perhaps on 90% of the plays it ran to defend against passing plays. After Oregon destroyed our zones with pump fakes, Gregory switched to more gutsier man defenses against USC. Gregory still used the man coverage pretty often against UCLA. I think the amount of man and zone that Cal is using now is perhaps closer to 40/60 man to zone. I suppose this will please most Cal fans as since it appears that many of us react very negatively to zone defenses - although nobody was complaining about the zone defenses last year and in 2006 when we were intercepting balls left and right. I think it's good that Gregory is mixing up the man/zone coverages up more. I think that by mixing it up more often that the opposing QB doesn't quite get in that rhythm of always knowing he's going to see zone and knowing what he has to do. I mean, the opposing QB is almost always going to know what coverages Cal is playing before the snap. So it's not so much that mixing up the coverages is confusing the QB - it's just keeping him out of that mental and dropback rhythm of timed passes.

Also, the benefit of using zone coverages is that it allows the cornerbacks to get more involved in run defense. When cornerbacks are playing man coverage, they're looking at the WRs they're covering instead of the QB and the ball, and are often "run off" the play by the WRs. But with zone coverages, the cornerbacks are watching the QB and the ball, and can tell whether the play is run or pass, and therefore help in run support if it's a run.

So there's advantages and disadvantages of using man or zone. The reason why Syd had so many great run stops early this season was because Gregory was playing zones a lot and it allowed Syd to peek at the QB and the ball to see the play. If Gregory continues using man coverages, you're probably going to see the offenses get more easy runs to the outside where the WRs are running off the cornerbacks (because the cornerbacks don't know if the play is run or pass because in man coverage they're looking at the WRs).

(5) Cal's pass rush was pretty weak. Outside of Tyson Alualu, our guys on the defensive line really aren't doing that great of a job getting pressure on the QB. Jordan has had a very quiet year thus far and I think he's been a bit over-hyped by the Cal fanbase. I mean, there were some people saying he was going to go pro early. No. Not gonna happen. He's been largely disarmed from game to game by individual offensive linemen. Cal really lacks a dominant pass rush on the whole from both the defensive line and the linebackers. I think this problem will continue throughout the year and come back to bite us.

Seeing who is good at pass rush is pretty easy. The top two things I look for are (1) explosion off the line; and (2) penetration (a product of good technique, quickness and sheer power). Alualu gets off the line very fast and gets penetration very quickly. As for our other defensive linemen... eh, not so much.

(6) I would have liked to see Cal use the delayed blitz a little earlier, or perhaps twist the defensive ends in. As I said in my previous point, Cal's pass rush was pretty weak. UCLA was blocking for Prince very well on pass plays. Prince was stepping up into the pocket to avoid the deep Cal defensive end pass rush. Naturally, the next step to counter good pass blocking and a QB that steps up into the pocket is to delay blitz, and twist the defensive ends in. Gregory finally got around to using the delayed blitz late in the game and it led to a nice Eddie Young sack which stopped a UCLA drive on a critical 3rd down. But we never quite saw the defensive ends twisting in. By that, I mean, the defensive ends would take a step up the field as if on their normal pass rush, then cut back inside behind the inside pass rushers. Well, since Cal uses the 3-4, the twisting would probably be done by one of the DEs and an outside linebacker rather than both of the DEs. By twisting, the outside pass rushers are relocated to the inside and right into the area where the opposing QB will be stepping up into the pocket. Not quite sure why we didn't see this today. But what do I know? I'm just a couch potato.

(7) Vereen fumbling kickoff returns a bit too much. Okay, so this has only happened twice. Once against USC, and against UCLA, but it's a bit concerning. Today against UCLA, Vereen wasn't even looking into the sun (the sun was behind Vereen). But Vereen just fumbled the catch and destroyed any chance of a return. Fumbling these kickoff returns is also dangerous because that's a live ball. If the ball gets away from Vereen it can be recovered by the kickoff coverage defense for a score, or perhaps a safety if Vereen bobbles the ball, steps out of endzone, then has to go back into the endzone to recover the ball. Clean catches is just one of those small things that can't go wrong because there is huge potential for losing the ball or getting backed up against your own goalline.

(8) Kickoff coverage continues to suck. I'm a pretty tolerant guy. While most Cal fans have been calling for special teams coach Alamar's head on a silver platter for like the past 7 years, only now am I finally getting fed up. I even had a dream on the Friday night before the game that he had been fired. Anyways, here is where UCLA started their drives this game:

36, 48, 48, 39, 24, 27, 22, 38, 20, 20, 33, 23, 16, 32, and 47.

That's an average of 31.5. So UCLA was starting at their 31.5 yardline on average. If you take out the touchbacks, then UCLA is starting at their own 33.3 yard line. In other words, the opposing offense only needs to go about 30 yards to be within field goal range. These starting field positions cannot be so advantageous. I'm not quite sure what it is about or kick coverage, but it just doesn't cut it.

(9) Whether a punt returner decides to fair catch or return a punt depends on the quality of blocking by the punt return team, and the decision is up to the punt returner. I'm not trying to pick on people here, but I think I have to talk about this - not because there was an argument about this in the live thread, but also because I've heard people at games saying really ridiculous comments regarding punt return. I guess how punt return works is not common knowledge (just like it's apparently not common knowledge that liquid dish washing soap cannot be used in dish washers!).

Whether the punt returner decides to return the punt or not, is a choice purely up to him. The coaches do not tell the punt returner prior to the play whether to fair catch or not. This may seem obvious, but against USC two weeks ago, I heard someone in the stands say "why do the coaches always tell Syd to fair catch??? They should tell him to return it!!!" I had an epic face-to-palm after hearing that comment.

So basically, as the punt is in the air, and as the punt returner is watching the ball in the air, the punt returner uses his peripheral vision to "see" whether the punt return coverage is good enough to allow him to catch the ball safely, and return the ball.

That's it. It merely comes down to how good the punt return blocking is, and whether the punt returner feels he can make the catch and return the ball upfield, or not. Nothing is pre-determined. The coaches aren't telling the punt returner prior to the play to fair catch or not. The punt returner doesn't fair catch because that's what he likes to do. The coaches and the players want to return punts. They do! Believe it or not, they do! The coaches are not going to pull a punt returner from the game because he fair catches too much. As I said, sometimes the punt return coverage sucks and the punt returner has to fair catch. Sometimes the scheme dictates that the punt returner will have to fair catch. For example, if the punt coverage team is trying to block the punt (as in a full-out block rather than the usual punt scheme which sends some defenders on punt block and punt return blocking), then the punt returner will more than likely have to fair catch because all of the punt return coverage men went for the block and didn't block the defenders.

It comes down to the punt return coverage, and the punt returner. The quality of the punt coverage (and sometimes the scheme itself) that will essentially influence whether the punt is returned or fair caught, but nothing is predetermined. The coaches prefer that all punts are returned if possible.

(10) Ludwig breaks out the split backs formation. If you watch the team in pre-game warmups, the team uses this formation quite a bit. We've never seen it in the games itself, but it finally got used today. Cal passed out of this formation which is pretty normal as since split backs is a fairly weak run formation.

(11) Ludwig pulls a guard on playaction for added deception. On the touchdown pass to Best, and on another play action play, Ludwig showed off a new blocking scheme. This scheme pulls a guard across the formation (on the TD pass to Best the left guard pulled to the edge of the right side of the offensive line) to set up on the edge for pass blocking. The purpose of guard pull is to make the play look more like a run play to the defense. Defenses often watch, or key in, on the movements of the offensive line (against Cal, defenses especially key in on the guards because Cal likes to pull its guards) to determine whether the play is a run or pass. If a guard pulls, the play is usually a run. For example, Cal's power man blocking run schemes pull guards. So by pulling a guard on a playaction pass, it really makes the play look like a run. Indeed, Cal had the UCLA defense fooled pretty bad. UCLA's safeties bit HARD on the fake.

Cal has hasn't really used pulling linemen on pass plays. The only time I can really remember this happening was in 2007 against Oregon State. On that play, Cal pulled center Alex Mack on a non-playaction passing play.

(12) Cal uses both the number/wristband system, and the hand signals system to send in plays. There is apparently some confusion about this. Perhaps I am also to blame for this confusion because I've talked about this a few times and I think my statements have varied (although I'll explain why below). If so, I apologize.

The number/wristband system is what Cal used since (at least) 2006. I'm not sure what system Cal used in 2005 and prior. But in 2006, under former offensive coordinator Mike Dunbar, Cal would use the number/wristband system. This system would have the sideline QB (only one QB sending signals) signal in a hand signal corresponding to a number to the QB on the field. The QB on the field would read what number was sent into him, and look on his wristband for the corresponding play.

The hand signal system uses hand signals to signal in the entire play. There are no numbers used. The hand signals say EVERYTHING. They say the formation. They say what the play is going to be. If you can figure out these hand signals, you can know what play Cal is going to run before they snap the ball (you also have to figure out which QB is live and which is the dummy).

I know for a fact that Cal was using the number/wristband system from 2006 to 2008. I know this because it was in 2006 that I learned the hand signals and began watching the sideline QBs. This year (2009), Cal started off the year using mostly the hand signal system. Actually, Cal used both the hand signals and the number/wristband system, but used the hand signals more often. Perhaps 70% hand signals and 30% number/wristband system. Now though, half way through the season, things have flipped, and it appears as if Cal is using 30% hand signals and 70% number/wristband system.

Why has there been this change? Well, I don't think it has to do with simplifying anything for Riley, as was suggested by a commenter. Afterall, whether the team sends in plays via numbers or actual hand signals doesn't influence whether the play is any simpler for Riley or not. The play is still the same. It's merely the form that the play is transmitted to Riley which has changed. Instead, I think this just goes to show that Ludwig is just calling more plays that he expected to call in the game. You see, the plays that Ludwig expects to call, usually go on the wristband. Plays which Ludwig perhaps doesn't expect to call, and that don't make it on the wristband, are signaled in via hand.

So what's the point of using numbers/wristband versus hand signals? The most obvious reason for using the number/wristband system is that the number/wristband system is near impossible to pick. At the very best, if you astutely observe the numbers being sent in, at the very most you can say "they're going to run play number 23 again!" If you remembered what play number 23 was when they ran it the first time, then you will be able to know what they're running again. But the number/wristband system is impossible to pick unless you have the wristband to see what plays correspond with what number.

But I think the real advantage of using the hand signal system over the number/wristband system, is that such a system allows the offensive coordinator to call the play that perfectly fits the situation at hand. The wristbands only hold 150 plays (300 if you want to count the flipped version of each play). Sometimes the play you want, isn't one of those 150 plays. But with the hand signal system, it's not a problem. The offensive coordinator just tells the sideline QBs to run XYZ play - the play that the offensive coordinator wants but isn't on the wristband, and the sideline QBs will signal in XYZ play. Voila!

(13) Cal's new 10 man defense is probably due to all the subbing and player injuries. It was widely reported that Cal did a lot of subbing against UCLA because of the heat. Not surprising, Cal did its first ten man defense this game too. It happens. It shouldn't. But it does. It gets even more confusing when you have injuries. Once you have guys that are injured, as well as lots of subbing, it gets crazy confusing on who is in and out. Yes, the coach in the box could have seen this problem. But at the same time, I think it's almost understandable if he doesn't because he's dialing up the next play and also watching the offense to see what the offense is doing. He doesn't really watch the defense because he knows what the defense is doing (or more correctly: he assume he knows what the defense is doing). So the blame really comes down to the players themselves (those on the sidelines and in the game) for not adequately notifying their substitutes to go in, and the sideline coaches for not making sure they were getting one for one substitutions as oppose to one for none substitutions.

2009 Cal vs. USC - The Presnap Chessmatch

HydroTech — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 10:00:44 -0000

More photos » by Ben Margot - AP

2 months ago: Southern California's Damian Williams, left, is pushed out of bounds by California linebacker Mike Mohamed during the first half of an NCAA college football game Saturday, Oct. 3, 2009, in Berkeley, Calif. (AP Photo/Ben Margot)

Browse more photos »

Based on the feedback from those of you that participated in our Golden Feedback, it appears as if many of you really enjoy game film play analysis. I'm sorry for not providing more game film analysis on a regular basis, but school has once again kept me fairly busy (15 units and 6 classes: Mediterranean Cuisine, French Sous-vide, Advanced Sauces, Delicate Desserts, Unusual Proteins, and Dangerous Foods Preparation). I will try to provide a little more analysis here and there. Please bear with me in the following analysis as since I no longer have Photoshop on my laptop and I had to use Paint instead.

While watching the Cal vs. USC game between practicing my Julienne cuts and while waiting for some creme brulee to finish cooling down, I noticed something pretty interesting. I noticed USC's QB Matt Barkley make a fantastic pre-snap adjustment to take advantage of the Cal defense. At the college level, it doesn't seem like a lot of QBs are allowed to make pre-snap adjustments. Some offenses merely have the entire offense look to the coaches on the sidelines before the snap, to get signals from the coaches which will dictate whether the offense will run the original play or run a different play. In these offenses, the QB is just a stupid mindless automaton that directs the offense under the command of the sideline coaches. Other offenses allow the QB some control to change direction of runs or change the play to a few select pre-determined plays (Cal's offense). And then there are only a few QBs at the college level are allowed to pretty much do whatever they want (if I recall correctly, I think Boston College's Matt Ryan was given the freedom to change the play at the line of scrimmage to any play he desired - don't quote me on that but I could have sworn I read that in an ESPN Magazine or something). USC's QBs are either the second or third option, meaning they definitely can change plays around and perhaps they can even do whatever they want with the offense.

Above is the pre-snap look. USC has 11 personnel on the field (1 RB, 1 TE, 3 WRs). They are facing a 2nd and 17. USC comes out in a formation that has the TE to the offense's left, bunch WRs to the offense's left, and the RB to the QB's left. Cal lines up in its 3-4 defense with only two defenders defending the bunch. USC's QB Matt Barkley sees that only two Cal defenders are in the immediate vicinity of their bunch WRs (if playing 7 and 8 yards off is even really in the "immediate" vicinity). Barkley then instructs the RB to Barkley's left, to move to Barkley's right. This subtle change in the pre-snap formation is key to this play's success against the Cal Defense.

Above is the pre-snap look after the subtle change in the offensive formation. Now the USC offense is showing a distinct zone read formation because the runningback is in the "weak" position ("weak" position is to the opposite side of the TE). The USC offense has now strengthened its running threat ability because if the play is a zone read run to the offense's left, the runningback will be running behind to the strength of the offense (the general rule is that the strength of the offense is the side which the TE is on) which is the offense's left because the TE is on the left.

Prior to the change in the pre-snap formation, USC's formation seemed to suggest either a bubble screen or a pass. There wasn't really a threat of a zone read because most pro-style offenses that occasionally use the zone read (such as Cal and USC) won't run a zone read to that side of the offense unless there is a TE on that side. But now, by moving the runningback to the other side of the QB, USC's formation suggests either a bubble screen or a zone read left. I've shown the zone read left with a red arrow.

It's this change in formation which threatens a zone read which puts pressure on the backside defender (the "backside defender" is the defender who the offense is running away from). In this case, the backside defender is Cal's strong-side linebacker, Eddie Young, who I've circled with a yellow oval.

Cal's SLB (strongside linebacker), Eddie Young, knows he has the zone read to look out for and will probably bite in on the zone read to help defend the run.

Of course, USC's QB Matt Barkley was planning this all along. Barkley purposely moved the RB before the snap to give the distinct zone-read look to get Eddie Young to bite, even if a little, on a zone read fake. The play is really a bubble screen to the bunch WRs (shown with the red routes). Barkley would rather run the bubble screen instead of the zone read, because there are 8 Cal defenders in the box defending Barkley and the RB run. On the other hand, there are only two Cal defenders on the screen defending the 3 USC WRs (presumably another Cal safety is off the screen helping defend the bunch but he's so far away from the bunch that he's not in prime position to stop a bubble screen).

Above is the play post-snap. Barkley has given a slight fake to the USC RB who pretends to take the ball on a zone read (the red arrow). This causes Eddie Young to bite down on the play fake (the yellow arrow). Because Young bit on the play fake, it has created a larger void (the "bubble") than if he hadn't bit on the zone read fake. Also, notice how big of a buffer zone the two Cal defenders have given the bunch. I know it's 2nd and 18, but the large buffer zone they've given up is like at least 5 free yards of run-after-the-catch.

USC's Matt Barkley passes the ball to WR Damian Williams who has a huge "bubble" of protection and tons of uncontested yardage to gain. I've put a thick yellow circle where Cal SLB Eddie Young was lined up before the snap. As you can see from this picture, the zone read fake has caused him to move away from the bunch WRs and towards the QB, thus putting him further away to stop the play than if he had just stayed home at his pre-snap position.

In this picture Damian Williams has caught the ball and has begun picking up tons of easy yardage. I have placed the initials "E.Y." in the picture above by Eddie Young so you know which player he is. Alternatively, I guess I could have said he's the defender who is trailing Damian Williams and behind the play. Eddie Young probably wouldn't have been trailing Damian Williams and be behind the play if it weren't for the subtle pre-snap change in formation orchestrated by Barkley.

Here is the Youtube video of the play in its entirety (special thanks to ieeeBear who created the video for me):

Conclusion: What really made this play interesting was the fact that it appeared to be either a bubble screen or a downfield pass from the formation pre-change, but then Barkley changed the play to a bubble screen with a zone read fake based on how the Cal defense was lined up. The zone read fake was critical in creating an even bigger bubble area for the WR. Overall, this is an excellent example of the pre-snap chess match between the QB and defense.

Many teams, including Cal, run plays (similar to the one above) which have the zone read slash bubble screen option (the QB can either hand off the ball or throw the bubble screen). It's not a totally uncommon play and it works really well because it puts the defender between the offense line and the bunch (such as Eddie Young in the play above) in a bind because he has to beware of the zone read run which pulls him away from the bunch, and he also has to be aware of the bubble screen which if he chooses to defend the screen then that pulls him away from the zone read run. So either way, Eddie Young was pretty screwed on this play and it wasn't his fault - it was just really good chess by USC's Matt Barkley.

CGB Report Card: Grading Cal's Performance Against USC

Avinash — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 13:49:37 -0000

via calbearsonline.com

Let's start with the gameday experiences of Cal fans. Since this one didn't involve an extended roadtrip of fail and instead a leisurely trip to Homecoming, I'm guessing you guys had plenty of fun this time.

trojanbear: Loved being on campus and being surrounded by Cal fans after spending 4 days last week with Duck fans. I loved the initial energy the crowd provided, but I think our fans let the team down just as much as the team let us down. When Oregon turned the ball over at the begining of the prior game, autzen became louder. When Riley threw the interception the Coliseum on our first drive became the masoleum (aka LA Colisuem before PC).

SoCal Oski: Cold beer, awesome carne asada, and good friends.

pyunny: It was my first Cal game outside of the student section and I've got to say our fans suck. Can we make some noise? People were staring at me as if I were crazy. I used to think that we were pretty good as a student section but even the student section seemed quiet. I understand it's hard to cheer when we don't have much going for us but isn't that when we need it the most?

royrules22: The CGB tailgate was fun?

Nasty_Nate: Nope! Nothing at all!

bluehenbear: USC Band = douchebaggery at its finest

ososdeoro: It was cool that the bowl was filled up a half hour before kickoff. It was cool that it was a sellout. It's going to be awhile before we get another, though.

Berkelium97: Traveling 450 miles to Berkeley was almost worth it to see Tepper hurdle a USC linesman.

Also, one of the roving concession guys (the one with the Kid-n-Play haircut with the bleached front) was walking around, dislocating his shoulder/elbow from their joints and letting his arms flail wildly. This helped make the 4th quarter more tolerable.

sec119: When the fourth quarter cleared out most of section RR (or whatever is right next to the band), and there were about 20 empty rows ahead of me, my buddy turned to me and said, "I wouldn't come here if I were a 5 star recruit."

Oh wait, cool experiences? Pre-game cheeseboard pizza and Racer 5 IPA.

DougOLis: I fell asleep during halftime and woke up a minute or so into the 3rd quarter. That was fun.

CALumbus Bear: I got to see my Dodgers clinch the West! Whoo hoooo blue crew!! It was fun to watch after all that scotchy scotch scotch scotchy scotch scotchness

Kodiak: I had severe food poisoning/stomach flu prior to the game. I had to go to urgent care where they forced me to pound six huge glasses of vile contrast liquid so that they could scan me to verify that my appendix wasn't about to burst. So, I ran the gamut of nausea, vomiting, and crapping out radioactive contrast liquid. Looking back, it was a much more pleasant experience than watching the game.

Manwich: I started taking shots at 7, drunk by 8:30. All courtesy of USC alums at the bar, at least they're less likely to be dicks (only slightly) outside of the school.

jocko: Wonderful crowd, terrible game.

HOUSE66: Teppers screen play, then going home and drinking to another Emerald bowl victory thats sure to come, Passing out and forgetting why i felt so miserable when i woke up, then i remembered...

Jr. Bear: Getting drunk. Some Alumni have a negativity that can be frankly just tiring. Being in the Cal Spirit DeCal class, I know firsthand that this extends to the faculty. It's hard not to think that some of this doesn't extend to the team. I bet Tedford is getting tired of DURR HURR BAD KARMA UND RUSS BOAWL

aznpursuit: My goal for this team was to score one touchdown. They failed me.

Silver lining: Girlfriend was going to surprise me with tickets to this game, but decided against it. Saved us $150 on tickets, an hour driving up to Berkeley, 3 hours of suffering in a cold and windy stadium, and another hour of driving back home. PRICELESS.

BeastMode: Flew in Friday. Had a great weekend with friends. Got drunk. Twice. Game? What game?

BerkeleyChris: I think Kevin Riley's superpower is not being able to hit open receivers.

1988goldenbear: None.

Spazzy McGee: Really, today was an all around shitty day other than the burger I ate for dinner. It continues to be shitty right now, in fact.

GBB4188: Blondie's was pretty good today. There was a huge pile of vomit on one of the BART cars. I just ate some nachos.

rollonubears: Me and my sister were having a competition to see who had the worst day. She broke up with her boyfriend and got stuck in an elevator. I attended the USC-Cal game.

I won.

Dexter1715: none

jsnell: My wife and I left the game at halftime and went to a lovely asian restaurant in Marin County for dinner. We shared a satay platter. Tasty. And much better than watching this crap game.

polarbear91: I got 4 boxes of Cheerios on sale.

Maisbikkja: I found an onion ring in my fries during the game. I love surprise onion rings.

jpeng: Had to get up at 7:20am in Taipei to watch the game (15hours ahead). Located a bar catering to expats (Brass Monkey) showing the game. Arrived 7 minutes into the game and met some cool Cal alums. Bar was packed with USC fans (why can't you get away from them?)

VN: Turning the TV off. That was nice.

rurata: None.

Ohio Bear: I didn't commit suicide after watching the game.

arkangel99: NONE

California Pete: The best part of my day was probably the fact that I had the game paused on my DVR as I missed the start returning from an afternoon party. By allowing me to skip over the commercial breaks and between-play huddles, this at least turned three hours of agony into something more like two hours. Even Mike Silver can't save me from this post-game depression.

MadBum: Not cool. A good friend of mine called me asking me what the score was...I hung up on him

WTFFF!!!!!!!!: Fuck you.

Yep. Definitely better!

Quarterback: 0.589 (D-)
Running back: 2.004 (C)
Receivers: 1.570 (C-)
Run Blocking: 1.296 (D+)
Pass Protection: 1.393 (D+)
Run Defense: 1.867 (C-)
Pass Rush: 1.178 (D)
Pass Defense: 1.063 (D)
Special Teams: 1.104 (D)
Coaching: 0.856 (D)
Overall: 0.778 (D)

I'm guessing if this is a Cal class, they'd probably be kind enough to give you a P. I think. Thanks to the 45 commenters who took the time to put their thoughts into this one.

WTFFF!!!!!!!!, MadBum, yorzepol, California Pete, arkangel99, Ohio Bear, rurata, VN, jpeng, Maisbikkja, polarbear91, jsnell, Dexter1715, rollonubears, iVinshe, GBB4188, Spazzy Mcgee, 1988goldenbear, BerkeleyChris, BeastMode, aznpursuit, coolingfan, Oaktown123, Haas8388, Jr. Bear, sycasey, HOUSE66, jocko, CaliforniaCMB, BTown85, Manwich, Kodiak, CALumbus Bear, DougOLis, sec119, Berkelium97, ososdeoro, bluehenbear, Nasty_Nate, royrules22, Oaklandishbear, pyunny, SoCal Oski, Sinbad, trojanbear

Awards and best comments are after the jump.

For the second week in a row, our graders agreed on the overall performance, with a standard deviation of 0.708. Position-wise, the agreement was on quarterback play.

The special teams streak is broken! The biggest disagreement was on the receivers, with an SD of 1.048. Special teams was the runner up.

Steven Chu Award

via calbearsonline.com

Commenter/alias name	Total standard deviation
CALumbus Bear	1.141
trojanbear	1.239
Kodiak	1.335
sycasey	1.427
Oaklandishbear	1.637

CGB Supreme Court Ultra Super Justice CALumbus Bear (that's what we call him, right?) shows he is really a man of reason. Here is his full report card, which should be viewed with grave seriousness.

Quarterback (D-): You are entering Overthrow City, population 1. Mayor: Kevin "Throw Harder" Riley. Motto: "We don't win big games." Voted one of the most frustrating places to live 2 years in a row.

Running back (C): Best looked decent when he was given the ball. But we couldn't afford to do it often enough.

Receivers (C-): Would have been a D but for the tight ends. They apparently didn't do a good job getting open, and they didn't make any great catches.

Run blocking (D): Dear O line: WTF?

Pass protection (D): Dear O line: see comment above.

Run defense (C): I think we got tired, and there were some pretty bad tackles. They did make many a play, though, so that kinda evens out the bad-tackling-for-big-gain instances.

Pass rush (D): Need mor sax lol

Pass defense (D): Welcome to USC Receiver City, where we're open all night! Need to improve your TE stats? Play Cal.

Special teams (D-): I thank Oski that no FG/KOs were returned for touchdowns. I also thank Oski that no punts were returned for TDs and that we didn't muff any punt receptions. Oh, wait, fuck.

Coaching (D): Defense coaches get a C, which kinda balances out the Fs and Ds that abound elsewhere.

Overall (F): The only thing that kept the overall grade from being an F was the Oregon game. But this game was at home. You know, I'm gonna go ahead and change the overall grade to F. Yup, they deserved it. Perhaps we should have an "EP" grade for Epic Phail.

Old Blue Award

via calbearsonline.com

Commenter/alias name	Average score (out of 4)
MadBum (T-1st)	0
rollonubears (T-1st)	0
BerkeleyChris	0.182
coolingfan	0.303
jsnell, BeastMode	0.545

From four bagels last week to two. We can build on this!

MadBum & rollonubears give you your weekly dose of pessimism. You've already heard rollonubears sad story up top; here are samples from the former.

Receiving: Too many drops...part of the blame falls on the QB, but they weren't open enough. Our RBs were better wideouts

Run Defense: We seemed to be giving up big runs too often in the 1st quarter. Stepped it up in the 2nd and later, but I think that was SC taking some pity

Special Teams: That missed field goal almost made me cry

Overall: I HATE MY LIFE

Golden Sunglasses Award

via calbearsonline.com

Commenter/alias name	Average score (out of 4)
jpeng	2.636
BTown85	2.242
pyunny	2.182
Manwich	2.167
Jr. Bear	2.091

I'm glad to hear I wasn't the only optimistic one coming out of this one. Leading up the charge is jpeng (although Manwich cracks the top 5 for the second straight week, keep the love coming!), who has more faith in Kevin Riley than anyone else out there!

Quarterback (B+): Riley overthrew his receivers quite a few times but with USC's pass rush always breathing down his neck I think he didn't do as poorly as his numbers had suggested, he avoided being sacked SEVERAL times throughout the game and was disciplined enough to still look down the field. He may have looked awful to some, but I believe he played decently given the persistent pressure. When our receivers were covered well, Riley even had presence of mind to pick up a couple using his feet.

Running back (B): If our OL can't open up holes, it'll be tough for any back to put up tremendous numbers. Sure JB got chased down a couple times (Mays runs like a 4.29?) but Jahvid and Shane played at a satisfactory level given the very talented defense they were up against.

Run defense (B): Two words, missed tackles. Many times our guys got to the runner, but couldn't bring them to the ground. Sure USC has some shifty backs but many times I watched our tacklers slow down and pull up before attempting to wrap.

Coaching (B+): I liked the improvement over last week. Cal utilizing the wildcat and pulling a couple reverses kept USC on their toes. The trick play with Vereen on the very edge of the field was an AWESOME call. It's a shame he wasn't able to catch it in bounds (overthrown) cause that probably would've been an easy 6.

Overall (B-): I hate USC so much, many times I was wishing season-ending injuries to their playmakers but alas we were outplayed by a VERY talented team (whats with the 5/4-star depth?). Sure we had a chance to beat them, but damn... they're good. which makes is so much easier to hate on them.

Best of the comments

And finally, the most memorable or insightful of the comments. Considering how negative things have gotten in here, I'm starting to wonder if I should put a disclaimer: These comments do not reflect the opinions of Marshawnthusiasts or the Jahvidtician.

Again, I tried to include everyone as much as I could. Really sorry if I left any of you out.

via calbearsonline.com

Quarterback

Maisbikkja (D): Riley had confidence on his first series, and he threw like it. He took command of the offense and got the Bears down the field and then OH MY GOD HERE WE GO AGAIN... My only advice would be to give Riley a heavier ball that might bring his passes down to a catchable level. You have the talent man, it's there! UNLEASH THE FURY!

Beast Mode (0): He still overthrows the ball way too much. He is not seeing wide open receivers even with decent protection at times. I just don't see the development with Riley. Honestly, I was never very impressed with him, even taking into account OSU and Air Force in 2007. Let's face it, there's a reason he couldn't hold off Nate Longshore.

Mansion or Sweeney deserve a shot here, for the future of this program. It really can't be much worse than what we've seen, even against two good defenses. Riley's errors were not a function of those defenses, they were his own.

GBB4188 (D): I don't know if it's subconscious memory-blocking, but I can't think of a worse QB performance in recent times. This is coming from a Bruin who just sat through a year of Craft.

Berkelium97 (F+): I was very impressed with Riley's scrambling. He really surprised me with his elusiveness (this is why he earned the "+" in F+). Besides that, it was probably the worst performance by a Cal qb since Ayoob against USC in 2005. I don't know how he can be so wildly inaccurate. He was overthrowing, throwing low, throwing left, throwing right, all about 4 feet from where the receiver could catch it. What's particularly troubling was that even when he had time and a wide open receiver he'd blow the pass. The Sneaky Vereen would have gone for 6 had he not missed the throw.

He only has a few more games before I start chowing down at Beau Sweeney's Family-Style Canjun Eatery

Jr. Bear (C-): Too many overthrows, of course, by Riley. But then it's hard to settle down when he got as much pressure as he did. Or perhaps we are seeing shades of Steven Threet of Michigan, throwing to his imaginary 11-foot tall friend. I STILL LOVE HIM, SO DREAMY. I see him at the Golden Bear Cafe all the time, bein' a regular ole goofball with Will Kapp.

Kodiak (F): The demon spirit of Ayoob has clearly possessed Kevin Riley. And unlike the D-movie with Megan Fox, the results ain't pretty. He's clearly lost his swagger and confidence. I think last year's debacle has thoroughly messed with his head to where his competitive psyche is the now equivalent of a boxer with a glass jaw. He has the skills when everything else is rolling, but throw in any adversity and he becomes a weird hybrid of Mr. Magoo and post-Nolanized Alex Smith.

I know the biggest jump in skill is supposed to be between Jr -> Sr years, but it's bluidy ridiculous the skew that jump by setting the bar so low it's underground.

SoCal Oski (D-): Riley appears to be completely mentally ripped apart. His passes are like flinging half-cooked spaghetti against a wall - he's just hoping one or two will stick. Even with time and an open receiver he seems to be forcing things, with way too many overthrown balls - always a sign of a hurried throw. Maybe Tedford/Ludwig need to treat Riley the way Ucla treats Craft: no long throws and only tiny dump-offs.

Running back

via calbearsonline.com

ososdeoro (C): Well, you can't really blame the running backs for the speed of the USC linebackers, can you? Still, while Best clearly showed how to run against USC (run hard until you see the hole, or don't, and NEVER hesitate in the backfield). Vereen was clueless. Hopefully, he'll learn.

California Pete (D): Couldn't get things going for the second straight week. Some of this is on them, and not being able to pick up that first down against a hobbled Taylor Mays is a major punch in the face for our erstwhile Heisman front-runner.

I'm still inclined, though, to fault the O-line and the overall game plan which is not nearly stubborn enough. Cal's attitude must be: load up the box with 8 or 9 guys, because we're still going to run it down your throats. Riley should not be throwing the ball 30+ times a game. Period.

trojanbear (C-): Given the lack of blocking the backs did as well as expected. It's not easy to gain positive yardage when the oponent has 9 or 10 guys in the box. I liked the wildcat, however, one of the backs has to throw from that formation or it's useless ploy. Maybe they can line Isi, Jahvid and Shane in the backfield and snap it to a different back each time.

jocko (C): Great talents, if they were playing for USC.

yorzepol (B-): Best was not going to get going without a viable passing threat, there was none. He juked and jived for all he was worth, but he could not get anything going. I expect every team from here on out is going to stop Best at all costs and if he can not get help we will be in for a LONG season.

coolingfan (D-): Jahvid's overrated... He's just a speedy back, who needs a LOT of help from the O-line to get himself in the open field, but won't produce much otherwise. He's not creating his own plays like Marshawn did years ago.

Receivers

via www.latimes.com

iVinshe (D-): Welcome back, dropsies. I think we need another rainstorm. (at least there weren't any unsportsmanlike conduct penalties? Yay bright side!)

jpeng (C+): Although I wasn't impressed by our receiving corps performance, I don't blame them for being hesitant about going up for the ball. I'm sure taking a licking form Taylor Mays were in the back of their minds every time they had to haul in a higher-than-ideal pass. That aside, we've seen what Jones/Ross and Tucker can do, they're very talented athletes who just didn't play at their full potential today.

Ohio Bear (B): Along with red zone defense, this was probably the bright spot of the night (and there are slim pickings for "bright spots"). Marvin Jones picked up some first down catches and it really seemed like the WRs were generally open. Riley just didn't hit them. Very few (if any) drops that I can remember.

1988goldenbear (D): Some drops when Riley got the ball in a catchable spot; Miller was a bright spot; nice to see Jones out there too.

sycasey (D): Riley's throws were awful, but the WR corps is looking more and more indifferent with each passing game. They don't lay themselves out for passes, and they drop balls that hit them in the hands. At least TE play has been solid.

DougOLis (C-): They weren't as bad as last week, but there were a few poor passes that could have been catchable. It would have been nice to come down with a few of those. The receivers got open for the most part but it's not their fault Riley couldn't hit them.

Run blocking

via calbearsonline.com

GBB4188 (C-): Hard to really judge how well the blocking is going when you play a team with so much size and speed on defense.

aznpursuit (D-): Best was surrounded by white jerseys all game like white on rice.

BTown85 (C+): Where are the holes? It's tough when you're facing so many in the box, but it seems like the last two weeks the O-line has been bullied. This is the key to our success; if the O-line can open it up, JB can run and Riley gets more time. O-line NEEDS to win the battle.

Haas8388 (D): I know there are 8 and 9 in the box, but the run blocking is still pretty anemic. Why not go to zone blocking more? Why not run the stretch play?

bluehenbear (C): O line getting blown up. Coaches obviously have no confidence in Oline when we decide to punt on 4th and short on own 40 late in first half, the play call for Best to the outside (against Mays, see above), and the overthrown screen on 4th and 2. Yes, SC has superior athletes, but would we have tried to power it up the gut against other teams? Championship teams need to be able to get the 1-2 yds on a 3rd/4th and short (a la USC's multiple first downs) when ABSOLUTELY needed. This is missing from Cal's repertoir right now, especially near the goal line. PUNCH THE DLINE IN THE FACE AND GET THOSE COUPLE OF YARDS! We're soft, and it's showing.

Pass protection

via calbearsonline.com

Kodiak (D+): For the next two weeks, the entire offense should have to play buck-naked. That way, at least everyone is equally exposed.

Yeah, sometimes Riley just plain did the deer in the headlights thing and held the ball. But I also saw a basic 4-man rush blow through a line that had a TE or back held back more than once.

Starting to wonder more than a little about how big a loss it was that Coach M hit the road.

WTFFF!!!!!!!! (D): I can't even bare to answer any more questions. (Author's note: That was indeed the last question he answered)

HOUSE66 (D-): Pretty consistaint pressure on Riley all game, gave up two sacks, but the hurrys an hit coloum were also pretty high up there. The running backs blocking comes into play here, as they are the last line of defense for the QB and need to step it up when the pocket starts to break down.

royrules22 (D): Better than Oregon but still miserable. Best is a liability out there. Tepper isn't all that great. Guarnero is no Alex Mack. Etc, etc.

Spazzy McGee (B-): Not half bad. Riley would have plenty of time for a 3-step drop, then wait...wait....wait....until the pocket collapsed and he had to escape.

Rush defense

via calbearsonline.com

sec119 (D): I'm grateful I had the chance to see future Heisman winning running back, Joe McKnight.

Manwich (B): A few lapses. Have I said that I hate the term bend don't break. Because if you bend enough, eventually you break, always. I want to see a little bit more aggressiveness.

BerkeleyChris (F): Bradford looked like a bulldozer and McKnight looked like... well... Jahvid. We couldn't stop their run game and it was absolutely killer.

Jr. Bear (B): Not bad on runs to the inside. Outside wasn't that great, but I don't remember any real long runs outside of their first touchdown. I was very upset when Jarred Price was brought in for a goal line stand. Logic dictates a jam middle against their HB Dive, which I don't believe he has the size to accomplish as well as his counterparts.

polarbear91 (C-): It could have been worse considering that they were up against SC's line and got little help from the offense. The effort was better this week. They did a fair job of keeping SC out of the end zone although they gave up a lot of yards.

Pass rush

via calbearsonline.com

Haas8388 (C): The weakside LB has not been getting it done in pass rushing. They just don't have a threat like Follet off the edge. Alualu gets through from time to time, but it is asking alot for a 3-4 DE to be the leading pass rusher. At times, Eddie Young looks like a better blizer than MM or kendriks.

Jr. Bear (C): Very bleah. Alualu was the only source of consistent pressure, and the only one to get real penetration. The D-line is very good, but with only 3 rushing on coverage, there's not a whole lot they can do. I don't think it would have been entirely possible, but I would have gone with the 4-3 this year to match our talent. Also did I see a corner blitz with Syd'Quan? That dude should ALWAYS be on a receiver.

pyunny (D): Awful. Or maybe the $C O-line was just too dominant. It felt like Barkley had plenty of time to let the play develop and to throw. When we got into the backfield we couldn't seem to bring him down either.

trojanbear (D): Alualu. Can anyone other than Tyson rush the QB? What happened to Cameron Jordan?

Kodiak (D+): Considering that the stated goal coming in was to pressure/harass/confuse the true freshman QB, I'd have to consider it a miss. Nothing out of the base package. Didn't get anything off the edge. Again, big disappointment from our touted defensive ends and "athletic" linebackers. I think the next time I want to cuss someone out, I'm going to tell them they have potential.

Pass defense

via calbearsonline.com

Kodiak (D): We still can't cover a tight end. We stopped one bubble screen for about 3yds. The rest of them went for at least 7, including one that would have gone for 18 yds except for a penalty. Our cornerbacks are playing too soft and scared. Our linebackers remind me of that Charles Barkley quote, "Run like deer, jump like deer, think like deer." But hey, we got an interception on a really bad underthrow...because our safety was too far out of position to actually cover the receiver for an on-target throw, and our "stud" cornerback didn't turn around to look until it would have been too late.

aznpursuit (D-): Actual conversation by Cal defense:
"I bet you $20 he won't catch the ball."
"You're on."
"Ah, shit."

At least we got one interception.

sec119 (D): Ezeff got burnt several times playing off the open receiver. IIRC, there was one play in the third quarter where SC had 2nd or 3rd and long, and they lined up THREE receivers in an obvious screen play formation. TWO defenders lined up at the LOS while Syd played 10 yards(!) behind the first down marker. Naturally, USC got an easy eight yards.

SoCal Oski (D-): Someone needs to inform Bob Gregory that it is not a mortal sin to teach your defensive backs to look for the ball instead of just staring at the receiver while waving their arms spasmodically. And once again, short & middle passes were completely uncovered.

trojanbear (D): Not enough pressure on Barkley. He's a freshman so we should ahve shown him multiple looks and not allow him to just set in the pocket and pick us apart. Did we ever try a corner or safety blitz. Syd was money but we aren't getting enough out of the rest of the secondary. I think Cal plays way too far off the receivers giving them way too much room underneath.

Special teams

via calbearsonline.com

Berkelium97 (F): Why is Syd even returning punts? Cal blows the outside coverage every time, so one of the guys out wide can sprint downfield and be in Syd's face by the time he catches the ball. He's dropped two punts already this year. He has only returned two, maybe three punts all year. I don't want to see him get hurt out there and would rather see someone else calling fair catch and not returning punts (since that's what they're going to do anyway, right?). More frustrating was D'Amato's missed chip shot, Anger's inconsistency, and that soul-crushing punt returned for a touchdown.

iVinshe (B): I think I want to trade back our ST for Offense. I think I'd rather complain about ST than anything else.

1988goldenbear (F): WTF is going on? Scholarship kicker is 50% and our (former) potential Ray Guy award winner boots a line drive to one of the better return guys in the conference and then shanks another; still, better than last week.

Maisbikkja (D): That FG in the fourth ruined SC's shutout bid...

Manwich (B+): Remember Nick Harris? I do, and I'm rooting for Anger in the same way. Anger for Heisman, Anger wins the Ray-Guy Award! D'Amato, reminds me of Mark Jensen, I would hold my head, and pray everytime he came on the field.

Coaching

via www.latimes.com

ososdeoro (F): EPIC FAIL. No matter what else may have been done well, not attempting another play before halftime with 12 seconds left was inexcusable. Waiting 15 seconds to call timeout after USC's previous failed third-down conversion was just as bad. And I'm wondering what Ludwig has against the pitch out, and why Gregory thinks two DBs will stop three stacked receivers. I'm also curious as to what Ludwig has against his own game plan. We killed them with Miller on the first drive....then he was never used again until mid-second-half. What happened to try something until they stop it?

Oaktown123 (A): Tedford had good ideas

VN (D): The offensive plan was a joke. Why would you only run Best 14 times? Especially when you KNOW Riley has trouble?

sycasey (F): For the second straight week, it was awful. It wasn't the scheme this time (the play calls actually got receivers open), but rather the total lack of urgency or emotion on the part of the Cal players. Despite the fact that they were getting worked for the second straight week, Cal players were smiling and laughing after making bonehead mistakes. Even Shelley Smith reported during the TV broadcast that the Cal sideline was just plain dead after the first drive ended with an interception. That sounds to me like the coaching staff has lost this team.

OaklandishBear (F): Offensively predictable, again. Wildcat is interesting, but to call it for an entire series? Not taking another shot at the end zone with 12 seconds left in the first half was giving up, in my opinion. Playing scared and just wanted to get some points - and look what that accomplished.

Defensively, the Bears played OK but this year's team seems to be intentionally playing softer in the zones than in the past. It wasn't working with the minimal pressure we put on Barkley, so why not switch it up to Man?

Ohio Bear (D): At risk of letting emotion prevail over analysis, the offensive game plan seemed clueless to me. I didn't get the sense that we really knew what we were doing on offense. The frequency of the Wildcat was weird and the call of the outside pitch to Best on 3rd and short, against a defense with THAT much speed and discipline, was epically bizarre. JT's decision to go for the FG with 12 seconds left in the half was also strange and sent the wrong message to his team going into halftime. We're afraid to make a bad play (i.e., sack) that would run out the clock so we're not going to try to take one more shot at the end zone? Weak.

yorzepol (C-): I think we had a plan against U$C that, if executed well, would have won us the game; the problem was we didn't execute. We also threw the playbook at the Trojans and still couldn't get anything going. How much of that falls on the coaches? How soon do you wait for your QB to get hit his stride before changing the game plan? How many miles must a man walk before they call him a man?

Overall

via stanfordreview.org

Nasty_Nate (F): Was like watching your son come back from rehab and swear he was going to give up the peruvian powder and then the next morning you have to pick him up from jail.
Eventually you have to cut the little bastard off.

Dexter1715 (D): Season's done for me. I can't take it any longer. It's taken too much to watch this humiliation at the hands of SC and other, weaker teams.

I'd bench KR and start working on a QB who loves to compete and is strong under pressure. Gregory needs to get the Defensive to be more intimidating - we're still too soft.

The O-line was embarrassing the past two games. They looked like doormats.

California Pete (F): I remain hopeful, because the schedule makes a nice rebound quite possible, starting with a very welcome bye week. Physically, this team is still pretty healthy, and it's just a matter of guys regaining confidence. The UCLA game just might be the biggest in Tedford's career. Win it, and the Bear's might have a shot at reeling off a bunch of wins and making the Holiday Bowl. Lose it, especially if they do so in ugly fashion once again, and then who knows? Oregon rebounded nicely from its dreadful 2006 season; but there's no guarantee the Bears would bounce back from a bowl-less 2009.

trojanbear (D): I didn't think the players gave up. I also did not see SC having that much of a talent advantage. They executed better. I must be a glutton for punishement becasue I attened both the Oregon and SC games. Having seen both teams. I think at this moment Oregon is actually superior. If we had executed the plays and Riley had been just mediocre instead of horrible this game could have been competitive. There were opportunities we just did not take advantage of them.

HOUSE66 (D-): The first time since ive been a cal fan that i had quit on our team before the 4th quarter. But i also had a good time in the stands joking about how bad we are playing, making it feel like the old days. I DO NOT LIKE THE OLD DAYS, i like being worried, pissed off, not okay with whats happening. The team was just not executing the plays, and alot of them were there. Missed opportunitys early cost us, and now we have two weeks to get back on form.
GO BEARS

CGB Report Card: Grading Cal's Performance Against Oregon

Avinash — Tue, 29 Sep 2009 19:00:23 -0000

via calbearsonline.com

Hey these ladies look happy! Maybe we didn't do so bad after all!

Quarterback: 0.9722 (D)
Running back: 1.713 (C-)
Receivers: 0.7160 (D-)
Run Blocking: 0.8333 (D)
Pass Protection: 0.4290 (F)
Run Defense: 1.086 (D)
Pass Rush: 0.7191 (D-)
Pass Defense: 0.5093 (D-)
Special Teams: 1.779 (C-)
Coaching: 0.3302 (F)
Overall: 0.3611 (F)

Shit.

Let's start with your awesome game day experiences. Have anything cool at all happen this Saturday?

California Pete: No.

BeastMode: None.

MadBum: I watched in horror. Not cool

atomsareenough: the rest of my day was pretty shitty as well, thanks for asking.

Kai: Sitting in front of my TV laughing incredulously at how badly Cal was getting beat

bluehenbear: Gouging out my eyes with an ice pick.

rollonubears: I watched my favorite team get castrated on the field. I guess that can be counted as a cool experience. Never thought I would see a castration. Definitely never thought I would see one on National TV. Guess I can cross that off the list of "Things I never ever ever ever ever want to see".

GBB4188: As I write this Cal and USC are tied with Wazzu for last in the Pac. Cool stuff.

sec119: After the game was over, I walked my dog. He's a great dog. I wish Cal had played Oregon as well as my dog plays being a dog.

ohsooso: Well, the women's volleyball game is about to air on TV. Since we know the outcome, it's bound to be a cool experience.

ohlordshootmenow: God no.

rollonyoubearsdad: Shame... All I got to say is redeem yourselves next week!

Kodiak: Can't really use "cool experience" in the same context as this game. Much beer was consumed. It did not help.

YleeXOtee: Cool Experience? Yes, if its cool that my 3 year old watched me curl up in the fetal position on the couch with a beer and cry uncontrollably.

HOUSE66: With another cal fan, drinking more and more as the game went on, ever since being in permanent state of depression.

katster: Sitting numbly in front of my television and providing two-thirds of the comments on Ken Crawford's site.

slaphancock: My buddy and I liveblogged the whole thing!

bearathustra: I watched the game on the back deck of the Washington Hotel. Built in 1857 in Washington, Ca.,the deck overlooks the South Yuba River and between plays I was able to watch trout jump and feed about 25 feet below me. Little micro hatch of calabatas or some such. Would have been really enjoyable if.................

vonjewstein: WASTED MONEY FLYING UP TO WATCH THESE A-HOLES BUT THE WEATHER WAS NICE AND BURGERVILLE IS GREAT

berkeleychris: Can I invoice Jeff Tedford for the HDTV I broke while watching that absolute shitfest of a performance by our team?

WTFFFFFFF!!!!!: Spent the day talking to friends about the epic beatdown while drowning myself in a choking sense of ennui.

racsan: I'm just going to cry myself to sleep :(

jelster26: no

Manwich: Pounding my head, and getting commiserations from other football fans whose teams had lost this Bloody Saturday.

MavRIck: Drank too much to drown the sower of being embarassed by an inferior team.

Brian Anderson: Just being a Cal fan and staying with the team from kick-off to the final second is a cool experience. Win or lose.

highwireact: The only cool experience on Saturday was turning off the television when the game was over.

1988goldenbear: Listened to the first half on the ADF enroute from Fullerton to Hayward in a Cessna 182. Almost had to use the airsickness bag. More than once.

Berkelium97: The "fire Tedford" camp is really, really, really annoying. Same with that "next level" nonsense. Has any other team in the Pac-10 made it to the "next level" since Pete Carroll arrived? Nope. Tedford is not the problem.

polarbear91: I did a trail run in the morning.

royrules22: From the "who needs a hug" thread:

I woke up at 3AM, got ready got into the car at 4AM, entered the address for a parking lot in Eugene into my GPS and it said it would take me 10 hours to get there. WTF?! I looked at the step-by-step directions and it was telling me to go to Seattle (from Bellevue where I’m at), take 1-5 N to Vancouver, take a u-turn and drive back to Eugene. WTF!? I asked it to skip the I-5 N part and it gave me a more sensible 5:30 direction which asked me to go into Seattle and then swing back down. At this point, I ran back in, turned on my PC, looked at Google Maps and went like a normal person down south and merging with I-5S near Renton instead of Seattle.

And then I witnessed the worst fucking game of football that was played.

And then I drove back with traffic jams near Eugene, Corvallis, Salem, Portland, Tacoma and Bellevue. It was 10:30PM when I finally went to bed. What a long day.

Sounds like a blast!

Let's move onto commenter awards (most rational, most homerific, most dour), and the best of the community grades after the jump. (And if nothing else, check out Cal Bear Online's awesome photos interspersed in between the comments, some of them will even make you smile).

Thanks to the following commenters and readers for participating in this sobering duty:

California Pete, BeastMode, omnizzle, sycasey, MadBum, atomsareenough, Kai, sf49giants, bluehenbear, rollonubears, CaliforniaCMB, GBB4188, sec119, Berkelium97, ohsooso, F, rurata, ohlordshootmenow, iVinshe, slaphancock, wayangila, angelsfan, rollonyoubearsdad, Kodiak, YleeXOtee, blueandgoldrollon, Cf251, LEastCoastBears, katster, coolingfan, jporee, Oski4Heisman, HOUSE66, bearathustra, vonjewstein, jsnell, berkeleychris, WTFFFFFFF!!!!!, avsrock90, racsan, jelster26, Oski's my Dad, Manwich, MavRlck, D-, yorzepol, Brian Anderson, highwireact, 1988goldenbear, beson, royrules22, AnonyCal, polarbear91, Oaklandishbear

Steven Chu (Golden Rationality) Award

via calbearsonline.com

Cheers for you! Too bad Takimoto didn't participate in this.

Commenter/alias name	Total standard deviation
Kodiak	1.261
racsan	1.326
blueandgoldrollon	1.463
bluehenbear	1.469
HOUSE66	1.490

Rationality is always appreciated, especially after this type of performance. The ever prescient Kodiak gets it this week. Here's his full report card!

Quarterback (C-): Didn't get any help. Missed some throws, but was running for his life all day. Delivered some decent balls that got dropped. WR's didn't show up. Oline owes him dinner and should all donate some blood for him. Put in a tough spot by the gameplan and play calls. Proved that he's not good enough to carry a team. May not ever be that guy.

Running back (C): Did sort of okay against a swarming D that sold out to stop the run. Didn't get too many chances. No holes. Lack of an air attack made it really tough.

Receivers (D): Tucker might have singlehandedly changed the outcome of this game between his early drop and then idiotic taunt that negated pass interference. Both of those brain-farts killed drives that might have led to TD's. Someone needs to run his *ss this week until he pukes. Didn't really see much out of this unit.

Run blocking (D): Didn't open holes. Missed key blocks. Did have to run against a stacked front...but didn't get anything going.

Pass Protection (D-): Tepper got abused by Rowe. Not going to be a good time in the film room. Riley's lucky to escape uninjured and without any picks.

Run Defense (D): Didn't do too bad early, but got gashed and abused later on. Outside backers had a really rough day.

Pass Rush (D): Non-existent.

Pass Defense (F): Leave it to the Bears to re-ignite the Scud Man, Masoli.

Special Teams (C): Would have been nice if Anger could have pinned them deep when he had the chance. Decent KR returns, better distance and coverage on kicks. Complete fail on their early 2-pt conversion...gee...almost like they weren't coached properly.

Coaching (F): Worst performance of the Tedford era. Outprepared and outcoached on both sides. Offense was predictable and did not account for what we all knew - Oregon would sell out to stop the run and dare Riley to pass. Defense did what three teams couldn't do - leave enough obvious openings to get Masoli back in rhythm.

Overall (D): Reminded me of pre-Tedford days. Pretty miserable, but if this is the kick in the pants that the coaches and players need to buckle in from here, I'm all for it. It's a long season and this year suggests more parity than in past years. Knock of 'sc and we're back in it.

Golden Sunglasses Award

via calbearsonline.com

Maybe this guy was our coach this week.

Commenter/alias name	Average score (out of 4)
coolingfan	2.100
Manwich	2.061
CaliforniaCMB	2.030
wayangila	1.545
D-	1.500

coolingfan is your winner here! We need all the optimism we can get, and this grader gives the Ducks a lot of credit for the win. Here are some of the best marks.

Running Back (B): Jahvid gets an average grade because we can't evaluate his performance -- he never had a chance.

Pass Rush (B-): Probably deserves a worse grade than this, but Oregon's O-line deserves a lot of credit. Masoli had all kinds of time and space to work with.

Special Teams (A): They are the only reason why we have 3 points, not 0.

Overall (C): Frustrating!

But I know the team will bounce back. Go Bears!

Old Blue Award

via calbearsonline.com

These commenters want refunders, names, Commies, you name it. It's a Gold Scare!

Commenter/alias name	Average score (out of 4)
atomsareenough (T-1st)	0
BeastMode (T-1st)	0
MadBum (T-1st)	0
sf49giants (T-1st)	0
rollonyoubearsdad	0.091

Wow. Four bagels. Never thought I'd see that during the Tedford era.

sf49giants didn't leave any comments, so we'll look at the other three. atomsareenough summed it up in his overall thoughts.

worst game i have seen in the tedford era. simply embarrassing. shameful. everything about this game was horrible; oregon's 2 point conversion, the 4th down conversions, easy oregon 1st down after easy oregon 1st down all day long, THREE points scored total by our offense, not taking advantage of our early opportunities with oregon turnovers. everything about this game was pathetic and disgusting.

BeastMode's report card comments were something to behold in terms of simplicity and frankness.

QB: Shitty.
RB: Shitty.
WR: Shitty.

...

Special teams: Shitty
Coaching: Really Shitty. (It should be noted Beast Mode didn't give an F here, but an FFFFFFFFFF)

Technically MadBum had the worst grades, since he was handing out F-s rather than Fs, but they're all zeros here. Anyway, this probably was the best insight he handed out.

RB (F-): I don't care

It should be noted that all of these grades were submitted about an hour or so after the game concluded. Maybe I should consider postponing Grading the Bears on occasions when Cal loses by 39 to Sunday.

Grades by position.

Most people agreed on the overall grade, with a standard deviation of 0.5624. You can probably figure out why.

For the fourth week in a row, most people disagreed on the special teams, with a standard deviation of 1.143. Mostly because our graders were confused as to whether they were good or bad. No such problem with almost every other unit.

Even in defeat, there were a lot of good opinions, too many to pick from, and I tried my best to moderate the most irrational posts out. That being said, 42-3 is hard to cover up. Tried my best. I'm really sorry if I left off any of your comments, please let me know and I'll try to straighten it out next week.

Quarterback

via calbearsonline.com

Brian Anderson (D): QB Kevin Riley lost composure late in the 1st quarter due to dropped passes, poor play calling and an overwhelmed offensive line. Kevin then began trying too hard, forcing throws and making poor decisions. Kevin is a good athlete in a scheme that does not take advantage of his mobile skills and he may never be a great pocket passer in a system that does not have great recievers.

highwireact (D): I haven't had the heart to go back and rewatch the game, but my initial impression was that he held the ball too long, was off on many of his throws, and wasn't picking out the right man to throw to. Of course, he got little help from the line or the receivers, so I couldn't fail him completely.

Running back

via calbearsonline.com

polarbear91 (D): The running game will not be effective if the passing game is not a credible threat.

ohsooso (C): Considering the offensive line play, the running backs were okay...RUNNING. Best is supposed to be a good blocker but I saw him at least once go up inside to block no one while the defensive end blew right by.

jsnell (C): The stats make it look terrible, but is it the running backs' fault that the offensive line blocked terribly and the play calling failed to use them properly? I didn't think so.

MavRIck (C-): Where was it? Bring on the backups to spark the starters to compete with enthusiasm. Cal has the best in Best, but didn't use him properly. The running game sets up the passing game, not vice a versa. Best needs to hit the holes and keep running like he wants it...He showed slowness in the Minnesota game after the first quarter and continued through the Oregon game, he is not a Heisman candidate with his lack of intensity displayed.

F (C+): Hard to grade when it seemed that the Oregon D was reading almost every play, but there were many whiffs in pass blocking and very little in the way of breaking tackles, arm tackles at that.

yorzepol (C): The Ducks did a fantastic job of containing Jahvid. I can't and wont blame him for his short yardage, there was only one occasion I can remember where he had a hole and slipped for a loss where he could have had a gain. He is still the best running back I've ever seen at Cal, the O-line just did not do their jobs in getting him the blocks he needed. The reason I gave him a C is that he whiffed on blocks all day and left Riley exposed pass after pass.

Receivers

via calbearsonline.com

beson (D-): I don't know if its poor playcalling, poor routes, bad balls, or what, but why can't Cal just make the "easy throws" like quick slants and what not? Is it just because that's not our offense? In the Maryland game, I loved the quick slants to Jones, what happened to those?

Cf251 (F+): I guess in a real grading system the + doesn't mean anything for a fail, but I'm going to give them a plus for catching some passes and raising our hopes once or twice that we might score a touchdown. Other than that, they failed.

WTFFFFFFF!!!!! (D-): More Offensive ineptitude. Stop jawing and get back to work.

royrules22 (F): First and foremost I have special request to Verran Tucker to NOT TAUNT WHEN THE OPPOSING PLAYER GETS FLAGGED FOR PASS INTERFERENCE. We would've have been at the 2yd line (Editor's note: it would've been a 15 yard penalty, NFL rules for PI do not apply) and probably could've punched in the ball for a TD and the game would've been a little bit closer.

Other than that the recievers were shoddy. No separation from what is supposed to be the weakest secondary in the conference (wazzu aside), dropping the balls, poor blocking for Best and Vereen, etc.

berkeleychris (C-): Largely absent throughout most of the game, they appeared out of sync with Riley and out of focus with the game. Tucker made some huge plays but also missed some plays. The most frustrating thing about our wide receiver corps is that we know the talent is there but they just aren't clicking. My, how far we've come from the days of having a dangerous passing attack that would make opposing defenses have to pick their poison: stop the run or stop the pass. Now all defenses have to do is sell out to stop the run and our ineptitude in the passing game takes care of the rest. Let's just hope Pete Carroll wasn't watching today's game.

jelster26 (F): disgusting. terrible. ive taken shits with more life than our recievers exhibited today. from verrans drop on the early crossing pattern (scared of a DB 6 yards away??), jones letting them hit his hands, ross getting called for multiple bubble screens against an 8 and 9-man box? really? who let the writers from HOUSE playcall the offense---too predictable, too little to late (but i do love house).

Run blocking

via calbearsonline.com

California Pete (F): Worst offensive-line performance by a Tedford-coached team. Ever.

rollonyoubearsdad (F): Swiss cheese

GBB4188 (C-): Best and Vereen were hit in the backfield on numerous occasions, how can we expect them to produce if they are forced to make great plays just to reach the LoS?

berkleychris (D): The O-line appeared overmatched, and the downfield blocking was notably absent. To be fair, a lot of this is on the defensive scheme, which was designed to minimize the impact of Best by stacking the box. But our O-line ought to be able to make some holes and least give us 3-4 yards per carry. Alas, they seemed unable to do so.

bluehenbear (F): I'm speechless.

LEastCoastBears (D): Where were the holes?

Pass protection

via calbearsonline.com

Berkelium97 (F): Running backs and the O-line couldn't stop the rush. Riley must have been hit on every pass attempt in the first drive of the third quarter. Best is turning into a liability out there. Sure he's small and isn't great at tackling/blocking, but sometimes defenders run right past him as if he didn't even see them coming.

YleeXOtee (F-): If they are keying on the run, how is there also pressure on the QB ALL game long. Not to mention they ran screens up the ying yang which is supposed to help relieve pressure, but nooooo

katster (F): Riley just didn't have any time back there. Not sure if that was scheme or Oline or receivers, but it was bad. Since I failed the receivers, I'm failing the pass protection too.

racsan (F): MEGA F! This was the reason our offense died. You cannot allow a four man rush to get to your QB in TWO seconds EVERY TIME. And when they blitzed, I feared for Riley's health. Words cannot describe how bad our O-line was today.

sycasey (F): Total breakdown. Oregon recognized our weakness against the blitz and pounded at it all game long. You'd think our OL had never seen a blitz before.

ohlordshootmenow (F----): Jesus wept.

Run defense

via calbearsonline.com

sycasey (D+): This was actually looking good early on, as we seemed to recognize the option plays quickly and react to them. Once Masoli showed he had learned how to pass, though, it didn't matter, and the run D broke down.

rollonubears (C-): Alualu is the only reason Cal does not get straight F's. I actually think this wasn't too bad at their best, but they were completely worn out because of the giant shit that the offense laid on the field. Plus, if you run it 52 times, eventually you are going to get a lot of yards. This grade is relative to the team.

Fail (to a lesser extent).

yorzepol (C+): I though we actually did well considering that Masoli ran the Duck offense perfectly. There was very little the Bears could do to stop the run when the pass was working so well. That being said, there were many runs that could have been stopped for a short gain or a loss IF THE DEFENDERS WOULD HAVE WRAPPED THE RUNNER UP. I haven't seen such lackadaisical tackling from the Bears in a long time. Duck were bouncing off tacklers for 10 extra yards too often for a better grade. The only reason this isn't lower is the excellent play of Alualu, he was the saving grace of an otherwise pitiful Cal effort.

Kai (C): Pretty solid in the first quarter, due to continual good penetration in the backfield. Eventually got worn down due to a good passing game and staying on the field too long. Lots of missed tackles.

royrules22 (F): How did our D-line that was supposed to be one of the best in the conference if not country get pushed around by the same O-line that got crapped on by Boise? This is an inexperienced O-line and the RB was the 2nd stringer earlier in the year.

Oski's my Dad (D): At least early in the game, the run D seemed to be holding up, forcing Oregon into third down situations in which they could then victimize the porous pass d with a wide open Dickson. And then Oregon's young backs started seeing some day light and racked up a whole lot of yards. I'm not sure if they were on the field too long or they just didn't have the heart any more, but after a while they were just getting pushed around like Rishi as a HS freshman.

Pass rush

via calbearsonline.com

Manwich (C-): No pressure on Masoli, this is one of the few times where I feel the 3-4 doesn't do it's job. The front 3 weren't getting through and somehow the corners and safeties weren't covering their men. That gave a really shaky Masoli enough time to make the reads and find the open man. I kind of want us to switch to the 4-3 like most college teams just to have an extra man for pressure.

bluehenbear (F): We make another pedestrian QB look like a freekin all American. No pressure.

GBB4188 (F): Masoli was back there eating crumpets and reading the funnies.

iVinshe (F): If I had as much time to study ochem as Masoli had behind his O-line, I think I would actually pass the class.

ohlordshootmenow (F): Masoli doesnt have to wash his uniform this week.

1988goldenbear (F): Never seemed to get heat on Masoli and Oregon's game plan with the quick short hits never allowed for much of a rush.

Pass defense

via calbearsonline.com

Even Oski is shocked and appalled!

ohsooso (F): Worst game by the secondary since Tedford has been coach....even worse than Texas Tech. Our "star," SQT, made multiple egregious coverage errors. Ezeff's (editor's correction: Josh Hill) fumble after recovering a Duck fumble was beyond stupid, and was one of the three magic plays that lost the game early. The linebackers are utterly worthless in coverage and boy howdy is it now apparent how much we miss Zack.

berkeleychris (F): Cal's DBs (especially the safeties) are going to have nightmares about Ed Dickson for at least a few months. It's almost like our coaching staff decided that it was just not fuggin' possible for Oregon to throw the ball well so we're not even going to try to defend it today. You know what, let's just take the day off, grab a drink, kick back and OH GOD DICKSON JUST TOOK IT TO THE HOUSE

highwireact (F): This doesn't all go on the players. The scheme we were playing would have been fine if Masoli was still having problems hitting his receivers - but he wasn't. Adjustments needed to be made and they weren't, allowing Masoli to toy with our defense.

rurata (D): I don't know if Masoli was just throwing perfect passes all day or what, but our D wasn't able to do anything to stop him.

Oski's my Dad (F): Another area I would like to give a grade lower than an F. Masoli completed over 80% of his passes. That's insane for a guy who isn't very tall and has a bit of a scatter shot arm. But he had hours to make his reads and passes, and had receivers who found nice holes in the zones. For the second week in a row the opposing teams best player was a huge factor. With Decker, I could at least tip my cap to him and say he had a great game. With Dickson, while his stats were awesome, he was so wide open on so many occasions, how could he not have a good game? It was just shameful

slaphancock (F): Our zone looked as porous as the local pubescent Burger King employee.

Special Teams

via calbearsonline.com

jsnell (C): That first field goal to put Cal up 3-0? Man, that was AWESOME. Good times. I had to shut my TV off after that but I assume Cal went on to win 300-2.

Oaklandishbear (B-): D'Amato gets a bit of extra credit for the 47-yd FG, and being the only Bear to score. Nice turnover on the opening kick, kick-offs were better, and Shane had some good returns.

The only drag on the grade is really Anger's sub-par punting, and poor coverage/lack of luck on potentially downing a couple of punts inside the 5.

Berkelium97 (B+): Best unit of the day! I cannot believe it, but we were kicking into the endzone, covering the returners (how about Sofele's fumble-creating hit!), and generally not sucking. Vereen was on the returns and set us up for what should have been several successful scoring drives. D'Amato barely missed a 40-something yarder but was impressive with that 47yd FG. Anger had a case of the Tavecchios and seriously muffed a couple punts, but that was the only major flaw today.

F (D): Only the kickoff returns prevented this from being a F...every single other aspect was poor, punting was terrible - arguably Anger's worst game ever - punt returns were pretty much an incomplete; gave up the trick 2-point conversion; 1-2 on field goals.

Cf251 (A-): Not perfect, but I'm going to grade on a curve here, and special teams was stellar compared to the rest of the team. Personally, I'll take our solid offense and defense back in exchange for a mediocre special teams. I mean, really, the special teams put us in position on the first play of the game to start with a lead, and the offense lost yardage! Good thing wee hit that 47 yd field goal.

GBB4188 (C): I don't know where to peg this one. The kickoffs are definitely improved from where they were, so that's good. Anger had 4? great punts that I remember and 2 horrible shanks (his latter shank would actually put him at a pretty average punt for an average punter). However, the punt coverage team failed to down 2 punts that were inside the 5, so it's pretty much a moot point. Missed a long but not impossible FG, a clutch kicker would have made that. Made another. I'm going with "meh"

Coaching

via calbearsonline.com

sycasey (F): Not ready to play, no adjustments to Oregon's smart gameplan. Played the same zone coverages on D and got picked apart all game long. Hard to say how good the offensive playcalling was with all the terrible blocking up front. Bottom line, we should not have been dominated at the line against Oregon, but we were; that's lack of preparation, and on the coaches.

atomsareenough (F-): we weren't at ALL ready to play today, and when it was quite apparent from the outset that we needed to adjust the gameplan, we didn't. whatever adjustments we made at halftime were completely useless, and there was no fight or spirit from the team at all. you could tell chip kelly was pumped for this game; even when they were up by 30 points he was yelling and bouncing around... our whole team was just flat and looked like they didn't want to be there.

jporee (F): Very tired of Tedford not getting the bears ready for a big game. This is especially frustrating when he is essentially asking fans to go into their wallets for 4x as much cash for tickets. If I'm going to pay that much for the new seats, put a good product on the field or at least a group of guys that give a sh*t.

HOUSE66 (F-): Hate to say it, and its probably cause im still bitter, but Tedford isn't going to be the guy to get us to the next level. Today just proves that hes the kind of guy that will win you a couple mildly big games, but never win the big one and choke when the pressures on. Ludwig finally showed us what everyone was telling us, that hes predictable as ever, and our offense was worse than it was last year. What was our game plan? Adjustments? Piss poor the entire game.

Brian Anderson (D): The coaches showed up but did not adjust well on offense or defense. There must be reason Cal performs poorly on the road and maybe coaching is part of it. In the Oregon game the coaches apparently were out coached and therefore could not help the players who were outplayed.

sec119 (F): Ludwig's playcalling was slight variations of runs through the tackles, with an occasional playaction. THERE ARE OTHER WAYS TO MITIGATE STUFFING THE BOX BESIDE A PLAYACTION!

Gregory's 3-4 was essentially slight variations of getting confused who has the ball and giving up 4 yards at a time. Tedford's motivation and attention to detail were quite the opposite.

MavRIck (D): Coaches: Fire up your players!!!!! They are playing like pros, going through the motions, with no Emotion!!!! This is college ball, they should be fired up and enjoying the game. Let them play. You got beat by an inferior team, because the Ducks wanted it more!!! That is what wins college games - Emotion and motivation!!!! These are college kids, not robots that can be programmed to perform as instructed. The coaches better know that is their most important purpose - know how to get in the college kids heads to be motivated, excited, and want to win the game from start to finish!!! The kids know how to play the game, they want to win, they want to excel, let them, encourage them to let it all hang out and leave it on the field!!!!
After the kickoff fumble, Cal should of ran the ball down the Ducks throat and scored a convincing touchdown to establish their dominance and intent to win the game because they are the best team. Instead, the Ducks survived and showed the Bears they wanted it more and continued their dominance for the rest of the game. No adjustments the coaches provided worked, therefore, they failed in properly preparing the players for the game and did not have them properly motivated to come out, establish your superiority and dominate the game. Last year's excuse in Maryland holds no water now, it is obvious the coaches lack motivating the players to came into a game and play with their hearts and enjoy the love of the game!

Overall

via calbearsonline.com

California Pete (F): Horrible. The only good news is that the next two games offer an opportunity to turn this thing around very quickly. I no longer think this team is near as good as I thought they were this morning. But I'm also quite sure this team is not near as bad as it displayed today. A victory over USC in seven days, especially if followed by a defeat of the Bruins after the bye week, would quickly ease the pain of this one.

CaliforniaCMB (C): I think they tapped into our phone/communications system and knew what we were going to run because DAMN! we got handled from snap to whistle.

LEastCoastBears (F): Hard to find any silver lining from this game except we are hopefully physically healthy to bounce back. Now we get to play the underdog role again next week vs. U$C.

racsan (F): I came to Cal in 2006, not knowing anything about college sports. So the loss at Tennessee didn't do me much harm. But I grew to love my Cal Bears. I am one of those youngin's that hasn't witnessed the pain of the years of futility, but I can still fell the pain of crumbling dreams. I try to temper my expectations, but its damn hard when everyone around you is bursting with excitement.

I was there for every home game in 2007, and I never thought I'd feel more shocked and disappointed than OSU. More frustrated than USC. More embarrassed than UW. More shameful than Stanfurd. But damn this loss hurt.

It only counts as one L though, and the Pac-10 is still wide open.

Oski's my Dad (F): Embarrassing. Ultimately, it is one game, and if this was pro football instead of college football, it would be easier to brush off. But nationally televised embarrassments like this can impact future rankings and recruiting, IF, the season does not turn around. I think the big question is how this team reacts and responds to this game. What I saw today was a team that seemed to think that because it was the 2009 version of those guys with Cal written on their helmet, that things were going to fall into place. And after the quick start, they just seemed shell shocked that everything else didn't come as easily. And instead of responding, digging in their heels, and putting in some serious fight, they went through the motions and just got punished. This team so far this year has done things close enough to good, with things falling their way, that they have appeared better than what their performances really showed. And this week, that simply didn't cut it. Because when you do things close to good or close to perfect, but not perfect, then those flaws show against better competition. They were out coached, out hustled, out physicalled, out executed, out everything.

It's up to the team to show heart in working to run routes crisper, catch everything that hits them, make the proper reads, set all the necessary blocks, tackler, cover, coach, blah blah blah exactly as they are supposed to, not simply close to how they are supposed to. At that point, the results will live up to the potential. If not, it will be probably a bigger disappointment than previous seasons, simply because of the talent and the promise.

yorzepol (D+): Let's have a little perspective here, Masoli basically had the game of his life; I don't think anyone could have beaten the Ducks that day. Also, I said last week that I thought we were overrated at #8 (that was before the polls came out.) It was also highly unlikely that Cal could have navigated the Pac-10 gauntlet unscathed. That being said, I we gave a very poor effort and made the Ducks look better than they really are. I still think that Cal is a contender for the Pac-10 crown and that this could be the best chance we have of going to the Rose Bowl for a long time. Can the Bears regroup in time for U$C? If we do well in the next few games that will determine our season, not the Oregon debacle.

beson (F): As an alumni from the Holmoe era, I've experience the worst of the worst, but at least back then, we knew the team was bad. All my friends, other Holmoe victims, were very pessimistic coming in to this game but I told them the night before, this is a different team. Tedford is handling things different this year. We are taking everything seriously.

Well apparently not. This loss was the most embarrassing loss I've ever witnessed. The way we just gave up and died is inconceivable.