SB Nation - Nate Longshore

Pregame Q+A with the California Golden Blogs

Jake Bertalotto — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 19:15:24 -0000

Jahvid Best or Jacquizz Rodgers? Mike Riley or Jeff Tedford? Get all those answers and more in the BtD/CGB pre-game Q+A. (AP Photo/Reed Saxon)

Browse more photos »

The Building the Dam crew got together with the California Golden Blogs crew, and what you see below is the result. The VD Special handled Cal's questions, and those will be posted sometime today over at CGB. Here are the CGB's answers to our questions:

BtD: Cal has had an up and down season so far. After a great start, and a shaky 2 games against USC and Oregon, it appears they are headed on the right track (save for the defense). How do you see the rest of the season shaking out?

CGB: Tough to say. We have the following schedule:

Oregon State
Arizona
@Stanford
@Washington

I see reasons why Cal could win and slash or lose to each of those team. If we go 4-0 there, we'd be 7-2 in the Pac10 and probably in the Sun Bowl. If we go 0-4, we'd be 3-6 in the Pac10 and probably in whatever is the worst Pac10 Bowl available, if anything.

Let's split the difference and say Cal goes 2-2. It's tough to say who Cal would win and lose to, because there are so many variables. But this is an OSU blog, so let's say we beat Arizona and UW and lose to OSU and Stanford (:(!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!). That puts us at 5-4 in the Pac10, a middling team. Certainly, there are a lot of other factors in play, but that probably puts us right in prime Emerald/Vegas bowl territory.

Which doesn't seem to faze our readership much. The Rose Bowl is out. Unfortunate, but true. So, the biggest question on their mind seems to be where to go for the Bowl game. People would rather go to a fun place like Vegas or stay in the Bay Area than head to Texas for the Sun Bowl.

You're the AD at Cal-- would you trade Jeff Tedford for Mike Riley in a heads up trade? Why or why not?

Let's see, with Mike Riley, you're pretty much guaranteed an 8-4 season. For whatever reason his team doesn't get clicking until the third-fourth week of the season and they end up losing one game they shouldn't (Arizona was winnable this season, so was Furd and Utah last year, then ASU and UCLA the year before that...). On the other hand, you're guaranteed at least one top 5 upset every season. Who's ready for the Civil War???

With Jeff Tedford, you're guaranteed 9 wins almost every season, but you almost never lose your home games, you save the majority of your faceplants for the road, and every season provides a 10-15% chance of a Pac-10 title if we can pull out our big games. So far the 90%'s been winning, but one of these days the 10% should pull it out. Right?

...Right?

I might add that one of the things that makes me unlikely to trade Tedford for almost anyone is the fact that Tedford "gets" Cal. While many coaches pay lip service to academics, Tedford understands that Cal, more than most other Division I-A programs, really cares about its academic reputation, and that fielding a team of players that graduate and represent the University well is at least as important as fielding a team that wins football games. Moreover, he's consistently managed to field teams that don't have to choose between winning and graduating.

I might also add HANDS OFF OF OUR TEDFORD!

Has there been any bright spots in particular that have you really excited for next year?

Here is a player we look forward to seeing more of next year:

Isi Sofele.

via media.scout.com

We hope to see less of this:

and more of this:

He is incredibly fleet of foot and packs a real punch. So far, in limited action, he has shown remarkable agility and great vision for the field. He's shorter than most players on the field, but is fearless out there. Certainly, OSU fans can appreciate the short, but stout running back, right?

Keep an eye out for Isi Sofele in the coming years.

We all know about Oregon State's early season troubles, but what explains Cal's late season issues?

If you want a big issue to look at, I'd point to quarterback regression. In 2005, Joe Ayoob, who seemed to be getting it together, fell apart in our final three losses, and the Bears offense ended up losing close games to Oregon State, Oregon and blowing an opportunity to upset USC. In 2006, Nate Longshore rebounded nicely from the Tennessee blowout to roll off 8 victories in a row, but then struggled down the stretch with his accuracy, threw a disastrous pick-six against Arizona and could not locate his receivers against USC. In 2007, Longshore's ankle clearly was never the same after injuring it at Oregon; he wasn't able to plant himself, his arm strength decreased, and he threw some costly picks that put winnable games out of reach. In 2008, neither Longshore nor Riley were very good, showing little signs of improvement, so when we played good defenses, they stacked the box against Jahvid Best and Shane Vereen and forced the quarterback to beat us. They couldn't.

There are a myraid of other issues (goal-line offense, receivers running wrong routes, lack of defensive depth), but if you want the painful reality of our late season struggles, quarterback is what you look at. Quarterbacks don't have to carry you to victory, but they at least need to be competent, and Cal hasn't gotten competent quarterback play in November since the days of Aaron Rodgers.

What is the general public's opinion on Kevin Riley? He's an Oregon boy, ya know. Don't say bad things about our people.

The public opinion on Kevin Riley is that day by day he's washing the Oregon off of him. With each passing moment, he says the word "like" much more often and finds his hair blonder and blonder. Soon, he'll appear less Portland hipster and more Spicolli.

That said, I think the overarching view right now on Riley is talented, but inconsistent. Just this past game, we saw Kevin Riley march down the field twice in the fourth quarter for the go-ahead score. He was hitting receivers perfectly in stride. He had great accuracy.

But, unfortunately, that is not always the case. With mid-range passes, he can have trouble hitting the mark. Even on short range passes, it can be dicey. Against USC, he missed a wide open Jahvid Best 2 yards off the line of scrimmage. Le sigh.

Hopefully, he can continue to build confidence and shake some of that inconsistency. Because if we can see more and more of that end-ASU game Riley, this could be a very good Cal team. But if we get bad Riley, then the D can key in on Jahvid Best and the offense sputters.

What do outsiders REALLY think when they think of Oregon State?

I was unaware that outsiders thought of Oregon State. Gary Payton?

Since 2000, both OSU and Cal have seen unprecedented runs of success. What is the outlook for the next ten years for both teams?

Well, I cannot speak for OSU, because I lack sufficient personal knowledge of the team and the surrounding situation.

For Cal, I can represent that there is a lot of energy surrounding the team. This is due, mainly, to the upgrade in facilities. I'm sure you've all vaguely heard that there were tree sitters up there in the stadium trees and now they are out. That is correct and now that they are out, work is going forward on upgrading the Cal facilities. The facilities are sub par at Cal. And when you are competing with teams like Oregon that offer free Playstations to their players, it can be difficult to recruit the top notch players.

Cal fans are excited that the facilities will be finished early next decade and spark a recruiting renaissance. Certainly, things are going well right now with recruiting, but it can always be better. And hopefully with these new facilities it will be better.

The honeymoon period for Tedford has ended. For better or for worse, the bloom is off the rose. Now, Tedford can work towards hopefully becoming the next Paterno or Bowden. These facilities are the next step in that process.

Should Kevin Riley Have Started All of 2008?

Avinash — Sun, 11 Oct 2009 10:15:23 -0000

via www.dailycal.org

(Don't forget to tell us what you think of us in the feedback report! We crave your validation.)

After witnessing the last two weeks, Cal fans have pretty good right to be worried about their quarterback again. So let's throw out a discussion question.

I'm not going to talk about the 2007 quarterback situation, since the situation has already been discussed ad verbatim. Briefly though, let's visit last season: Having seen Riley play over the first five weeks, do you guys think that Kevin Riley should've been the de facto starter in 2008?

I'll discuss the pros and cons of having Riley start all of '08 after the jump.

So let's say Riley plays all of last season. Let's say Jeff Tedford benches Nate Longshore and he is only allowed in the game for medical reasons (which would've been after the Oregon concussion and the Emerald Bowl).

Pros

State of mind? Everyone's an armchair psychologist when it comes to quarterback, but it's hard not to think about it after the last two weeks. Riley has stated that last year's experience did affect his mental confidence and he tried to be too perfect. He was always looking over his shoulder early during the season, and he was indeed pulled once (Colorado State).

Could that behavior have transitioned into this season? He indeed used the same refrains after the USC game, that he was trying to make the perfect throw instead of the right throw. It seems from the first three games that he's developed quite a bit, but not enough to react well to adversity.

Receiver development has also suffered. The receivers also have had their troubles; their routes have been good at times but lazy at others. It's fair to say our quarterbacks and receivers might not yet be on the same page.

So it isn't out of the question to say our receivers didn't develop as much as we would've liked them to. It takes time to read and react to gain a rhythm with your quarterback, and you could say the shifting between quarterbacks has caused some

Valuable game experience: Riley was brought in for relief efforts against Arizona and USC, two of the toughest opponents Cal faced last season. Imagine if he played all four quarters and got a chance to read and react against tougher road opposition? He only had two true road starts (the Washington State game was more of a scrimmage and he had two relief appearances with mixed results).

Cons:

We might've lost a game or two we could've won. Longshore played an efficient game in two of his starts (Arizona State, Arizona, USC, Miami), and kept us within reach for two others. Although he wasn't exactly lighting the world up (54% completion rate is pretty bad), it is better than Riley's completion rate and his accuracy struggles.

If the struggles cost us wins, Tedford would again have been criticized for stubbornly sticking to a quarterback, which could've led to even further discontent from Cal fans. Our Coach can't win, can he? When he puts in one quarterback and it doesn't work, he gets criticized.. When he tries to mix and match between two and it kind of works, he gets criticized. Safe to say a six or seven win season would've been looked upon less fondly than eight or nine.

The extra playing time might not have helped Riley at all. Playing an extra three games does not guarantee much. Riley was inconsistent through most of 2008. After one strong performance against Michigan State, he did not play well enough the rest of the season to justify the starting spot. In addition, the offensive line wasn't very good last season and is still mixing and matching this season.

What do you guys think? Sound off.

Poll

In lieu of his struggles in 2009, do you think Kevin Riley should have started all of 2008?

Yes, it would've helped him for this season.

146 votes

No, it wouldn't have changed a thing.

121 votes

267 votes | Poll has closed

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

Bouncing Back From Oregon + Why Hasn't Cal Been Able to Beat USC?

Avinash — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 22:25:57 -0000

More photos » by Chris Carlson - AP

Joe McKnight and the USC Trojans are headed to Berkeley. Is Cal ready to respond and beat their big conference rivals?

Browse more photos »

Despite the unfortunate defeat at Oregon, the importance of Cal-USC really hasn't changed. Everyone knew coming into the season that Cal would have to beat USC, and now at 0-1 in the conference they'll be pretty much in must-win mode the rest of the season.

So as a postmortem on Oregon, and for those Cal fans out there playing the role of Dr. Phil this week, let's remember several things about how Tedford's Bears have responded to games like this.

1) The last time Cal was crushed like this on the road as a top 10 team with high expectations, they rallied and went on to win their next eight games, winning by an average of three touchdowns, and winning the first five games after that defeat by an average final score of 43-18. How many games are left in this season? Eight. Hmmm....

2) A Jeff Tedford team has NEVER followed up a blowout on the road with a loss at home. In fact, every time the Bears have lost by more than a touchdown on the road, they've responded with the following results in Memorial: Cal 37, Furd 16; Cal 41, UCLA 20; Cal 42, Minnesota 17; Cal 20, Washington State 17 (okay, this game sucked, but a win is a win).

3) The Bears have only lost twice in home games after tough road losses. And both of those games were with Joe Ayoob as quarterback. Kevin Riley, whatever you may care to call him after last week, is not Joe Ayoob.

Let's man up Cal fans and get back to the habit of doing what we all love Tedford for: Winning. Play this song on loop the rest of the day, and get the hate back in your body.

It's USC's time to feel wrath. Click after the jump to figure out why we've struggled with them.

How do you feel the Bears will bounce back from their loss to Oregon (also vote in the poll)? And what do you think is the main reason Cal has always been unable to beat USC? Ponder these questions in the comments.

NOT the defense. For all the Bob Gregory haters out there (and Lord knows there's plenty of them out there), Cal's defense always provides some of its stoutest efforts against the Trojans, even when overmatched. Take a look at the offensive stats from USC each season, and compare it to their stats against USC.

USC Offense Breakdown	Rushing YPC	Rushing YPG	Comp%	Passing YPA	Total Yds	Pts per game
2009 offensive stats	5.89	216.5	60.6	8.4	424	28.5
2009 vs Cal	???	???	???	???	???	???
2008 offensive stats	5.05	195.6	65.4	8.7	454.7	37.5
2008 vs Cal	4.81	173	60	7.9	411	17
2007 offensive stats	4.97	198	62.1	6.7	434.9	32.6
2007 vs Cal	4.98	239	55	6.5	368	24
2006 offensive stats	4.08	130.9	61	7.6	391.8	30.5
2006 vs Cal	3.87	120	58.1	7.7	358	23
2005 offensive stats	6.44	260	64.9	8.6	579.8	49.1
2005 vs Cal	4	188	62.5	7.7	434	35
2004 offensive stats	4.68	177.38	65.6	8.2	449.1	38.2
2004 vs Cal	1.64	41	60	6.6	205	23

While the Bears have not reached the heights of the 2004-2005 teams that shut down Reggie Bush, excepting 2007 when Chauncey Washington ran all over us, we have held our own, holding USC below their mean in almost every game. Most impressive is last year's performance where USC converted 36% of their 3rd downs as opposed to 45% on average and sacked Sanchez three times when he was sacked an average of 1.3 per game. Most importantly is the point total--USC has only scored more than 24 points once, and their final totals are on average about two touchdowns lower against Cal than their average points per game. In the most important category, Cal's defense has stifled the Trojans.

More talent. USC always puts out a bigger, more physical, more talented team. These issues can't really be argued. Go down the skill positions and the defenses and you'll see the Trojans probably have the advantages at every position, save maybe running back, defensive line and (maybe) the secondary. And you could probably make a strong case either way about quarterback. Offensively, when USC is on, they're usually unbeatable because of the talent of their skill players in cutting and breaking away in the open field, as well as overwhelming smaller defenses. Thankfully for our defense, they're not usually on against us, but eventually they break through.

USC's talent is not only physical but mental, especially on the defensive side of the ball. Pete Carroll's defensive groups always are good not only at chasing you down in space, but also at anticipating play calls, reading the quarterback's eyes, overwhelming opposing O-lines, turning 8-10 yard screens and swing passes into 1 to 2 yard pickups with their reading and recognizing of the system. These are smart football minds who know how to make quick, smart football decisions.

Depth. Lose seven defenders to the NFL draft, lose another dozen to injury, and they bring up seven more guys who have helped held their opponent offenses to 10 points per game (5th in the nation), 1.7 rushing yards per carry (3rd in the nation), and 227 yards per game (6th in the nation).

Cal, by contrast, cannot afford any error in terms of health. In 2007 they lost players to injury all the time and it ended up hurting us, in 2008 it was part of the difference between an 8 win Emerald Bowl team and a 10 win Rose Bowl team.

The Trojans are like the Red Army. They could lose an army of talent and not miss a beat in plowing your team into the ground. Don't underestimate them, even with the plethora of talent that will be sitting on the sidelines or in LA this Saturday.

Bad luck. Let's face it, Cal had their chances to win last year's game. But they were saddled with an incompetent officiating crew that gave the Trojans a crucial 14 point swing: There was the incomplete pass in the end zone that was ruled a touchdown (0:53 in), and that bizarro ineligible receiver/illegal motion penalty that I'm STILL trying to figure out. Reverse either of these calls, and Cal could be down by only a field goal or tied up going into the 4th quarter, definitely putting far more pressure on Mark Sanchez and USC to respond.

However, that's one instance of bad luck hurting us. There have been two relative constants I see in our defeats the previous seasons.

Quarterback. I hate to bring it back to quarterback play, because I know how much everyone loves talking about it. But for a Cal offense that prides itself on its strong passing game, the past four seasons they have come up woefully short against the Trojans.

2005: Joe Ayoob & Steve Levy, 56.5% completion rate, 0 touchdown, 4 interceptions, 5.7 yards per attempt (season averages of 52% completions, 7.2 YPA, and a 1.3 to 1 TD to INT ratio)
2006: Nate Longshore, 44.7% completion rate, 1 touchdown, 2 interceptions, 4.6 yards per attempt (season averages of 60.2% completions, 8 YPA, and almost a 2 to 1 TD to INT ratio)
2007: Nate Longshore, 44.8% completion rate, 1 touchdown, 2 interceptions, 6.9 yards per attempt (season averages of 60% completions, 6.7 YPA, and nearly a 1 to 1 TD to INT ratio)
2008: Nate Longshore & Kevin Riley, 48.4% completions, 0 touchdown, 1 interception, 4.5 yards per attempt (season averages of 52.6% completions, 6.2 YPA, and a 2.5 to 1 TD to INT ratio)

So Cal's passing game has completed about 50% of its passes, which certainly won't get the job done. Winning passing quarterbacks have, over the last five years have completed 60% (Locker), 64% (Moveao), 64% (Dixon), 36% (Pritchard, albeit that was a fluky game), 65% (Matt Moore), 57% (Cowan), and 75% (Young). You'd expect Kevin Riley would at least have to complete 57% of his passes, and certainly around 60% for the Bears to truly get on track on the offensive end.

More disconcerting is the 2 touchdown to 9 interception ratio. With the Trojans likely to focus on Jahvid Best the way Oregon did, Cal will have to establish their passing attack in some way if they plan to win, whether by a balance of playcalling or a quick hitting attack to exploit any USC defensive weaknesses the coaching staff notices.

If the passing attack regresses to its inconsistent 2008 ways, then it could be a very long, tedious night in Memorial.

The Cal offense finishing the game. The biggest difference in our recent meetings has been the fourth quarter; we have held our own until the must crucial part of the game. In the fourth quarter of the last three games in the series, USC has outscored Cal 28-0; extend it to 2005 and it's 35-7. Two of those games were tied (although USC took a 7 point lead early in one of those games); another the Bears were only down by 7. These three games were immensely winnable by the Bears, yet in the fourth quarter they have put up these epic offensive stats.

2006: 1/4 on 3rd down conversions, 3:36 time of possession, 41 yards of total offense, 1 turnover, 29% completion rate
2007: 1/2 on 3rd down, 4:37 time of possession, 83 yards of total offense (78 by Forsett), 2 turnovers, 29% completion rate
2008: 0/3 on 3rd down, 4:23 time of possession, -1 yard of total offense, 17% completion rate.

What you see in these 4th quarters is a Cal offense that struggles to possess the ball, struggles to move the ball, struggles to pass the ball and struggles to handle the ball. That sort of play is a recipe for defeat against any opponent in a close game, much less the class of the conference.

It's likely to be a close affair again this season between two reeling but still very talented teams. Will the Cal offense step down or step up? After last week, everyone has plenty of reason to be worried.

Poll

How will Cal bounce back from their loss to Oregon?

With a vengeance

107 votes

With a determined performance

143 votes

With an average performance

38 votes

With a whimper

19 votes

They won't.

83 votes

390 votes | Poll has closed

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

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

More photos » by Paul Battaglia - AP

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

Browse more photos »

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Now for some Minnesota thoughts:

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

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

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

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

Cal players warming up on the field before the game.

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

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

YOU'RE LETTING THE TERRORISTS WIN!

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

In 2005, Joe Ayoob threw for 49.2%.

In 2006, Nate Longshore threw for 60.2%.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Victory!

Post-game greetings.

50,000 disappointed fans!

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

Roll On: How Cal's Offense Can Attack Oregon's Defense

Avinash — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 21:41:29 -0000

I'm so relieved Pac-10 season is here.

It's not that I don't like the OOC schedule; it's always fun to face new teams, and gauge ourselves to other teams around the country. But it makes things easier for me in terms of figuring out offenses and defenses. There's a familiarity with breaking down Arizona that isn't there with Minnesota or even Maryland. Figuring out what type of coverage packages UCLA will throw your way with their excellent secondary, or whether Oregon State is going to gap-cancel the shit out of you, or how many times Oregon will hit you over and over again with their zone read--these things I can deal with, I've seen them before.

Plus speculating about what an offense or defense might or might not do sucks, since there's a good chance you're going to look real stupid by the end of the game. At least here, there's a much better chance of nailing the general gameplan.

Let's get the ball rolling, shall we? We start with Andy Ludwig's Cal offense versus Oregon and Nick Allioti's hard-hitting, ball-hawking, tackle-missing defense.

(Major thanks to ieeebear for cutting videos for this post, you can see them after the jump! He deserves half the credit for the post.)

Oregon's run defense versus Best, Vereen, and Cal's O-line

I can't really dissect this properly, because one player could be the difference between Cal getting bottled up or taking the Ducks to task. You should see him plenty in the reels after the jump.

Hydro mentioned after last year's game how Allotti loved to bring a defensive back to take out the running back. You can see several times the defensive back (usually the free safety, which usually meant TJ Ward) sizing up the hole, then at the moment he senses run, starts targeting like a heat-seeking missile. One of the times the safety missed was when Best broke free for that long gain, albeit it ended in a fumble.

TJ Ward's health is crucial to Oregon's success at containing the run. You can see from this clip above how crucial Ward was in containing Best and Vereen; his ability to sniff out the run and quickly plug the gap kept the running backs from breaking into space. The dropoff is considerable after Ward, and I don't know exactly how the Ducks safeties stack up behind Ward.

You can also see that Oregon hits hard, so Cal's runners have got to be ready to maintain control of that football. Three rushing turnovers last season nearly cost the Bears dearly.

Although Riley appears to be a much better passer than he was a few seasons ago, I expect Oregon to, at least at the outset, play to contain Best and Vereen I doubt we'll see much difference in strategy from last season, especially on 1st and 2nd downs when the probability of run and pass are approximately equal. For all their struggles this season in various areas, one place the Ducks have remained consistent is guarding the run, and you can see from the video that their front seven has been equal to the task of pushing around Cal's usually solid offensive line.

This season there hasn't been a big dropoff. Yes, Boise State gashed them for 164 yards, but they needed FIFTY NINE CARRIES to get there. Utah, Boise State and Purdue are all upper tier schools in rushing yards per carry, and Oregon held them well under their respective averages.

Oregon has held Cal the last two seasons to an average of 3.38 rushing yards per carry, well below our general rushing average. So they've pulled all the stops to contain Forsett in 2007 and Best in 2008. If the Ducks are expected to pull out the stops against the run, the Bears will have to strip them will have to be won through the air.

Cal pass protection versus Oregon pass rush (or How I Am So Fucking Relieved Nick Reed is in the pros).

Reed was a one man wrecking crew in last year's game. Mitchell Schwartz did well for us in relief last year at left tackle, and Reed just chowed him down like moo goo gai pan.

1) First clip, :11-Reed blows by Schwartz, forces Riley to throw the football like a Thanksgiving turkey. I'm not sure whether Riley's trying the Tim Tebow leap pass here. It's close though.
2) :35--Cameron Morrah probably should've blocked a little bit better on that play before moving into receiving mode, Schwartz didn't seem like he had any chance of taking him up and can only manage a few weak arm shoves before Reed targets Riley.
3) :52--Right side completely collapses. Three defenders get untouched to the quarterback, it's a miracle Longshore even got that pass to Tucker.
4) 1:17--Perfect spin technique by Reed to blow by Schwartz, breaks up what might've been a touchdown to Morrah (although a safety was coming in fast).
5) 1:55--Reed lined up to the bottom against Edwards, and he absolutely smokes him. Plus there was a holding call. Safe to say the O-line was scrambling at this point.
6) 2:12--Mitchell is again caught looking with the spin move. GRAPPLE HIM Mitchell.
7) 2:41--"Sorry Mr. Schwartz, I do not want to participate in this tango." Gets up, screen pass broken out.
8) 3:00--Next play, lines up on Edwards, gets in unimpeded, even if a second too late. Longshore gets twirled like a Twizzler.

Nate Longshore and Kevin Riley were dinged around plenty, as they forced bad throws into traffic, or took sacks they shouldn't have taken. He'll make his mark with the Seahawks soon enough.

This year, the roles are reversed. With Reed gone, the responsibility for pass rush was supposed to fall to Will Tukuafu. So far he's been quiet, with fifteen tackles, but none for a loss. Oregon's pass rush this season has been non-existent. The Ducks averaged nearly 3 sacks a game last season, tied for 9th in the country. This year, they only have four through the first three games, along with only three quarterback hurries. Opposing quarterbacks have had their time to throw so far.

Cal's pass protection, however, has only been slightly better than it was last season (on average in terms of sacks, giving up five sacks and several hurries early on. Hopefully with Tepper and a maturing Schwartz, they can protect damaging sacks on the edge. Kenny Rowe (who has 2.5 of Oregon's sacks from the defensive end slot) seems the likeliest to get pressure, so watch what he does against the tackles.

Oregon's pass defense vs. Kevin Riley and his receivers

Defensive coordinator Nick Allotti is not a favorite of Oregon fans. He didn't look exceptionally good after USC's 44-10 trouncing of the Ducks, where Sanchez burned Oregon for 332 yards, 3 touchdowns on 68% completion rate. Although some of it was cover packages, it was also a case of corners cheating to stop the runs, biting on the play-fakes and getting burned for only putting one free safety in deep coverage.

Luckily, neither quarterback for the Bears could throw that well last season. Against Cal you saw a lot of soft zones, a lot of coverage packages determined to keep Best or Vereen from breaking into the screen. On one occasion when Oregon played close up man coverage they were scorched for a touchdown.

(Note: Understand I'm not an expert on defense. If I made any errors in formation or strategy please correct me and I'll edit them in, and attribute you for the help.)

1) (0:05) I think this is a Cover 4 deep (corners are playing back, safeties too). Best way to attack this is the outside flats (between the hash marks and the sideline), and Riley finds a wide-open Tucker along the out of bounds line. This could also be zone coverage (much like what Gregory runs on passing downs), since the corner seems to be playing a particular zone, trying to make the quarterback complete the throw. Also he could be trying to prevent a long run from the quarterback.

2) (0:36) Again, Riley targets the sideline to Tucker, who makes a great adjustment on the ball

3) (1:02) I believe this is Cover 1 Free (free safety is back to watch both sides of the field, see the replay at 1:19). Oregon stacks. Riley checks off the receiver on the strong side, freezes the free safety (notice him trailing to the top, where Riley's eyes are focused), then goes back and find Ross with a perfect strike. It helps that Wlater Thurmond was slow in recovering to Ross's original move.

4) (1:32) Iffy interference call on Thurmond, who seemed to play Tucker very well on the play, but it does show the benefit of having a receiver who can elevate on a dime and make it tough for the ref to judge whether the defender came too early or not.

5) (1:56) 3-2 Dime package. Six defensive backs and Longshore routinely completes a 4th and 14 on man-to-man? Talmadge Jackson III had some real passive coverage on this one. This play surprised me the most. (Note: Jackson will be Oregon's other corner in this game).

6) (2:23) 4-1 Dime package. Again another great pass to the sidelines to Sean Young, as Oregon's defense seems determined to play their zones and dare Cal's quarterbacks to make that throw to the sidelines. So far Riley and Longshore have converted three crucial 3rd downs aiming at the outside flats, two that broke down the zones in the right places (one was just a great adjustment and catch by Tucker).

7) (3:02) This should be noted for all Nate-haters out there, but Longshore KILLED Oregon. He didn't have achieve greatness by any means (13 for 27, 1 TD), but over his career he threw for a solid 57% completion rate, 6 touchdowns and 1 interception. You can get a sense of how he did it from plays like this; his ability to break down zone defenses and read coverages was impeccable. Danzig has more on his 2006-2007 exploits here.

8) (3:50) Another break down of the zone coverage at the sidelines to Tucker. I'm guessing we might see this play a bit.

Note to self: Watch Verran Tucker (who I assume will be the #1 receiver) versus Walter Thurmond, who I'm guessing will be assigned to him. This is a critical assignment for Thurmond, who must bottle up Tucker on man packages so the rest of the coverage can focus more on Marvin Jones and Ross.

The Ducks have played aggressive, breaking up 19 passes (top 10 in the nation!), including four interceptions, but I'd be very surprised to see Aliotti utilize a man-on-man strategy and not go back to deep coverage zones. Riley isn't Sanchez 2008, but he has been capable of throwing the deep ball properly this season. Expect plenty of cover schemes on obvious passing downs, in addition to the base 4-3 Oregon runs.

If Ludwig can show the multiplicity that he displayed in last week, will Oregon's secondary be able to read and react? The last three seasons the Ducks have lost the Bears game in spite of slowing the run game. It's been their touted corners and safeties who haven't been able to finish off Cal's receivers.

If Kevin Riley can throw a precise, 63-65% completion rate against Oregon's zone coverages, or open up the deep routes, which will in turn force more defensive backs into the game, which will in turn allow the offensive line easier blocking...it's Duck season.

Coming soon: Breaking down Oregon's zone read.

Poll

Who has to be the best offensive performer for the Bears to beat Oregon?

Kevin Riley

145 votes

Jahvid Best and Shane Vereen

81 votes

The receivers (Tucker, Jones and Ross)

32 votes

The offensive line

111 votes

369 votes | Poll has closed

What Are the Greatest Golden Bear Running Back Performances?

Avinash — Mon, 21 Sep 2009 20:00:20 -0000

More photos » by Paul Battaglia - AP

2 months ago: California quarterback Kevin Riley (13) hands-off to tailback Jahvid Best during the first half of an NCAA football game against Minnesota, Saturday, Sept. 19, 2009 in Minneapolis. Riley was 16-25 for 252 yards as California won 35-21. (AP Photo/Paul Battaglia)

Browse more photos »

VOTE FOR JAHVID BEST FOR AT&T ESPN ALL-AMERICAN PLAYER OF THE WEEK (click here for instructions)!

"Jahvid is a speed reader. He finished Atlas Shrugged in an afternoon." ~JahvidBestFacts

Rushing isn't all about yardage. Well, okay, it is all about yardage, but yards in some game mean more than they do in others. Jahvid Best's five touchdown performance on Minnesota might not have brought as many highlight reel passses the way the first two games this season have, but it's the biggest of his three because of the circumstances. Cal hasn't won a road game, Cal is a bad road team, Cal chokes when it matters, etc. etc. This time, Best played great when we needed him, getting the touchdowns to put us up early and late, at both the goal-line (pleasant surprise) and in the open field (not surprising at all).

So this afternoon, before we gear up for Oregon, let's pause and take a look at your Cal history banks. What Cal tailback performances have stirred up similar feelings of clutchness and productivity?

Share and debate your favorite Golden Bear running back performances. Rec your favorite posts/performances in the comments and we'll summarize the performances with the most recs at a later date!

Here's my personal top 5 (keep in mind my Cal fandom only extends to 2004; I'd love to see plenty of performances from before that time). If you like any of these ones a lot, feel free to copy the performances I share below in the comments, we'll probably see some overlap.

via graphics.fansonly.com

5) Justin Forsett, 31 carries, 164 yards, 2 receptions for 45 yards, 1 TD, USC 2007 (first 1:15).

Yeah, it was in a loss, but it was the first time I ever really thought, "Wow, Forsett could actually be a pro back." I'd always though he'd max out in college before that game, but his ability to elude and break what were essentially pro tacklers in USC's front was so impressive I . Not to mention he was able to block blitzes from those powerful Trojan linebackers for the ailing Nate Longshore. Niners fans got a taste of the havoc he will soon unleash yesterday.

I really didn't feel any hope we'd win this game after our performance the previous four weeks. But Forsett (and a little bit of Hawk) made me feel otherwise.

Here's the top 4 after the jump!

4) Marshawn Lynch: 25 carries for 189 yards, 3 catches for 13 yards, 2 touchdowns, Oregon 2005 (:45 to 1:06)

When you go 52 yards for a game tying touchdown in the 2nd half, when your quarterback is playing with his hands wrapped tightly around his throat, when you're trying to win for the first time in Autzen in nearly two decades, and you go for nearly 8 yards per carry, you're definitely worthy of the top 5.

3) Jahvid Best: 19 carries, 201 yards, 3 receptions, 35 yards, 3 touchdowns, Big Game 2008 (Best/Vereen highlight reel of the game; note: no audio)

This was about the time Jahvid Best took over our 2008 offense. Our season could've 2007ed if Jahvid didn't decide to make this game his. Big props to Alex Mack and Will Ta'ufo'ou for opening up big enough holes for Best, and Tedford finding creative ways to either misdirect the defense to focus on Best or get him the ball in ways that eviscerated the defenders who could not cut and jive their way with him.

via 2.bp.blogspot.com

2) Marshawn Lynch: 21 carries for 150 yards, 4 receptions for 53 yards, 2 touchdowns, Washington 2006 (2:06 to 3:11)

Twist references this game as The Passion of the Christ. He leaves out the part about Jesus rising to heaven on a tripped out injury cart.

via www.eteamz.com

1) JJ Arrington: 31 carries, 261 yards at Southern Miss 2004. (3:21 is the only clip I can find from that game, sorry for the terrible quality)

This was the biggest clutch performance I've seen from perhaps any Golden Bear the past five seasons. The Bears were about to get Longhorned out of the Rose Bowl, and Arrington made the case not only for Cal to get to Pasadena, but also for him to enter the Heisman discussion. He ripped apart Southern Mississippi when the passing game started to falter, Geoff Macarthur broke his leg, and Aaron Rodgers was having trouble completing half his passes.

You can tell a true Cal fan from a poser if you ask them who the most important player on that 2004 team was. Their answer should incorporate the number 2018 into it.

Honorable mention: Jahvid Best: 26 carries, 131 yards, 5 touchdowns, Minnesota 2009; Justin Forsett: 26 carries for 156 yards, 1 catch for 49 yards, 1 TD, Tennessee 2007; Jahvid Best 20 carries, 186 yards, 2 TDs, Emerald Bowl 2008; Marshawn Lynch 25 carries for 152 yards, 3 catches for 17 yards, 2 TDs, at Wazzu 2006; JJ Arrington 29 carries, 205 yards, 2 TDs versus UCLA, 2004.

My history of Cal football is exceptionally short. Old Blues, enlighten me and other youngins about the greats that preceded us!

Roll On: How Cal's Offense Should Attack Minnesota's Defense

Avinash — Fri, 18 Sep 2009 11:51:20 -0000

For those who want to look at a breakdown of Cal's defense versus Minnesota's offense, click here.

(Note: I tried to bold sentences that you should pay attention to in this preview, so if you just want to quickly hit through the main points, focus on the bold stuff. Like this.)

Here are the three distinct ways an offense attacks any defense:

1) Establishing the run and testing the ability of the front seven, which will help set up the pass.

2) Establishing the pass by testing the secondary, which would help set up the run.

3) A balance of playcalling between the two areas, where neither pass nor run have a huge emphasis in the early going.

Against most teams, many Cal fans would probably opt for the former. Cal's run blocking has been a cornerstone of their success and this offensive line has proven that they're equally as capable as their predecessors. Jahvid Best and Shane Vereen can break games wide open by accumulating huge yardage in big chunks, turning close games into wins.

I'd also expect a majority of Cal fans to go for balance. It's the logical move. You really want to keep the opponent guessing and adjusting play-by-play, and I figure that this will be the option the Bears end up taking Saturday morning.

Me on the other hand? At the outset, I'd like to risk it and try out the second option. I'll elaborate why (with video evidence) after the jump.

How do you feel Cal's offense should operate versus Minnesota?

I wish I could put some hard-hitting analysis on Minnesota's defensive scheme and come up with a great and innovative way to beat them. I can't. They run a pretty simple defense, as The Daily Gopher discussed in our Q&A yesterday.

The defense is basically the exact same thing as a year ago. Cosgrove came in as co-defensive coordinator and inherited a defense that was bringing virtually everybody back, so the plan all along was to keep things as similar to 2008 as possible. We run a 4-3, we are strong at DT and LB as those guys have done a nice job against the run through two games. The secondary has a couple solid corners and then the safeties so far have been better against the run than the pass but they haven't been tested all that much yet.

Ugh. Boring. Looks like I'll have to resort to our favorite cliches, "Talent" and "Execution". We have plenty of talent. Can they execute?

Running

Indeed, Minny's run defense has been pretty solid. They're allowing 3.51 yards per carry through two games, and although they gave up 261 yards total to Air Force, that's pretty average for the triple option crazy Falcons. It's not crazy to think our running duo of Lightning and Lightning will have a much tougher go against the Gophers front seven, which, as of last week, sports all seniors, including the fierce Lee Campbell down the middle.

Here's a video of their tackles for loss against Air Force.

You can see how big that defensive line is. The average weight of a Gopher D-linemen is around 280 lb, which puts them a little bit over the mean of Maryland's linemen. Based on the decent pressure the Terps got on Riley in the first half, Minnesota should have their opportunities at rushing Riley out of the pocket; it'll be up to him to make the right decisions when he's on the run.

As for run blocking, I doubt we'll see too much variation from the tactics we saw against the Terps. Hydro clarifies the type of run schemes we showed against Maryland.

Against Maryland in 2009, Cal used both zone running and used some of its classic power running game too. The amount of zone runs and power run plays were roughly equal so I suspect that Cal will be a more balanced run team in 2009 with respect to whether they are using zone or man blocking.

I'd be interested to see if Ludwig will set up plays for Best so that he maximizes his speed against the lumbering Big 10 defenders, or if he tries to put him in a power back situation and matches power with power. Given the creative ways they've showcased his abilities the past two weeks, I doubt we'll see him revert to a pure down and distance runner.

Look for a few wrinkles early on, like Jahvid lined up at the LoS or streaking down the sidelines. Nothing is really conventional with the Jet. Let's hope Minnesota isn't the first team to expose weaknesses in our O-line and a possibly groggy Brian Holley.

Passing: Get Kevin Riley into Carl Spackler mode.

Let me get back to why I like option #2. One reason is tactical, the other is strategic.

I've always liked the maxim of hitting your opponent where they're at their weakest. I'm always a big fan of this, especially in college football, and it's a bonus if it's early in the season. Oregon did this to perfection in last year's Civil War. They ran to the edge, met little resistance, and continued to do it unfettered the rest of the night.

In this case, the Golden Gopher front seven is stronger than their secondary, so I'd like to direct our attention away from that area. In this case, play action is the way I'd go.

Play-action is one of my favorite plays in football, and it's one of my favorite plays of the Tedford offense. Aaron Rodgers is probably one of the best play-action quarterbacks in the NFL thanks in part to Tedford's tutelage. Nate Longshore wasn't too shabby himself, and Kevin Riley isn't far behind.

A weaker secondary begs for play action or play fakes. If you can get the secondary to bite on the fake, whether you're selling the run or pumping for a screen or intermediate read, you can own them. When your running attack is as good as Cal's, it leaves the secondary vulnerable, and Minnesota's secondary is vulnerable.

When you watch the above vid, you can see the corners biting on either the first read (like Paulus on his touchdown throw), or on the playfake (the two Air Force plays). If Riley can sell the playfake early on with Best (and Minnesota's defense will be aiming to stop Best, they'd be foolish not to) in the back, I feel he might have a chance to nail Jones or Tucker downfield for a few quick scores.

You also see Minnesota's corner playing well back on the second clip--if this is any indication, Minnesota drops back in their coverage on long down situations in order not to give up the big play. If Cal can get away from the strength of the defense and hit the secondary over and over, that'll force the linebackers to drop into coverage more.

As for grand strategy-wise? This game could also tell us whether Kevin Riley is capable of leading the Bears to early scores.

For all of Nate Longshore's deficiencies, he was competent at leading the Bears to an opening first quarter score, or at the very least getting the Bears offense clicking early on (it was later in the game that was the problem, but we've discussed that enough). Riley has thrown three touchdowns in the first quarter in his college career, and only one of those was on a true scoring drive (vs Oregon in the rain). The other two came off a long Best kickoff return (Oregon St.) and an interception by Syd'Quan in the red zone (Washington State).

The Jet has been responsible for many of Cal's early scores the past fifteen games, and we should be thankful for having the luxury of a player who can make our offense look great with just one or two plays. However, when Best gets stuck against a physical defense that can seal and contain, it's been up to quarterback play to bail him out. There was precious little of that help last season.

Thus, it'll be crucial for Riley to develop his rhythm and timing from the opening kickoff rather than working his way in as the game goes along. His ability to get Cal's offense moving early and often will be critical to our success later in the schedule, because Pac-10 defenses have seen us too much to be overwhelmed by our running game. You need balance to win a conference championship, and Riley has to start providing that balance for Cal to gain those accolades.

If he can start showcasing an ability to pick apart secondaries game-by-game, it'll go a long way towards making him just as deadly as Best in the backfield. Remember the last time we had a duo like that? Think it was five years ago...

This strategy does have its flaws (if Riley struggles our offense could be mired in mud longer than it needs to be), but if it works, it could pay off huge dividends going into conference play.

via blog.pennlive.com

And that's all she wrote.

Poll

How should Cal attack Minnesota on offense to start the game?

Establish the run first.

42 votes

Attack through the air.

57 votes

A balance of both.

74 votes

I'd like to see them try something else.

8 votes

181 votes | Poll has closed

On The Road Again: How Can Cal Overcome Their Away Struggles?

Avinash — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 10:00:21 -0000

via photos.oregonlive.com (Image by Thomas Boyd of the Oregonian)

5-11. That's Cal's record in their last three seasons on the road.

Of those five victories, three were double digit decisions. Another involved an onside kick and garbage time scores. Only the Oregon win was a true road victory. On the flipside, the Bears have had a good chance to win over half of the games they lost.

Winning on the road has been the difference between Pasadena and purgatory. Things are going to have to change in 2009, or we're headed for the middle level again.

Why do you feel Cal has struggled on the road? Do you believe our road struggles will carry over to this season too?

After the jump, let's take a look at some things Cal can do to start winning away from Memorial.

Running the ball efficiently
Converting on 3rd down
Closing 4th quarters

So what can Cal do to perform better on the road? Let's break down each key in the most boring way possible--with numbers! (all stats again courtesy of the wonderful CFBStats):

via www.dailycal.org (Image from Nathan Yan)

The Bears want to average five to six rushing yards per carry

California is a simple team to figure out. When we rush the ball well, we win, and when we don't, we lose. As HolmoePhobe pointed out in his excellent fanpost, the Bears are 0-8 when we don't rush for 100 yards. Although it feels like a bit of a "duh", if you dig deeper you can find similar useful points. Ragnarok has talked about how one such point concerning rushing success rate, I'll be looking at a more generalized stat, the YPC.

Rushing yards per carry is one of my favorite simple football stats (right along with completion percentage) because it can tell you a lot about how well a running game is going in terms of overall process. 300 yards is nice, but if you rushed the ball 70 times to get to that it's probably not as impressive. Cal has been very good at not just production but efficient production, getting their yards in huge, game-changing chunks.

Since 2006, the Bears are 12-0 when they hit six yards per carry, and still 17-1 when they hit five yards per carry. The graph below indicates the relationship between point differential (how much the Bears won by) and rushing YPC.

However, on the road the past three seasons, the Bears have managed to average over five yards per carry only THREE times. One came against last year's impotent Washington State team; another came against 2007 Colorado State, who let Desean and Jahvid streak for long runs on them, and another came against 2007 Washington, where the Bears run D was more porous than the Huskies. Not exactly promising results.

(By contrast, the peaking 2004-2005 teams averaged under five yards per carry only three times, bust still won two and nearly won the other, the famous SC '04 game! It should be noted that those 2005 teams that averaged over five yards per carry in every game didn't necessarily win either, but ineptitude in the passing game invalidated most of those offensive balance numbers from that season.)

So should we be comforted by the fact at how well Cal's backs have run the football to start the season, blazing at over seven yards per carry? Of course, but it really has no bearing on how well Cal will play in Minneapolis. In 2007, Cal averaged 6.22 yards per carry against Tennessee and 7 yards per carry at Colorado State; they only reached 5 yards per carry three times the rest of the season, and once during the Pac-10 schedule. In 2008 the Bears averaged 7.8 yards per carry in their first two games, but only reached 5 yards per carry twice in the next eight games.

If Best and Vereen can get solid run blocking these next two weeks (and it really all comes down to run blocking, it was the difference between good run game and bad run game in 2008) and find the right holes, then maybe we can start seriously considering the Bears as true contenders. Until then I'm monitoring those three to four yard carries with gritted teeth.

via imgs.sfgate.com (Image from Kurt Rogers)

Converting on 3rd down

There's really no getting around how bad the Bears had gotten at converting 3rd downs last season. Take a look at the last set of stats on 3rd down conversions and how home and road percentages have diverged.

2006--44.71% at home (26th), 40.28% on the road (38th)
2007--48.19% at home (16th), 38.1% on the road (57th)
2008--36.14% at home (92nd), 23.1% on the road (119th)
2009--56.5% at home (12th), ??? on the road

Yeah, you saw that. We were next to last in the country at keeping road drives going. That's some serious FAIL right there folks.

There are some positives. It should be noted about last year's painful 2008 3rd down numbers is that they had to pass a lot on those downs. The Bears passed 113 times on 3rd down but only ran the ball 47 times. It was for good reason. 88 of those 3rd down situations required getting seven or more yards for a first down.

Why is 3rd and 7 so important? Well, Cal generally rushes five-six yards per carry a season, so you don't expect them to run the ball in situations greater than that because a first down isn't likely (they only ran it fifteen times last season, picking up the first down twice). Defenses can generally sit back in the pocket, drop their linebackers and look for the pass.

The early stats for 2009 are encouraging. The Bears have only rushed for 14 yards on 9 carries, but they do have a perfectly respectable four first downs and a touchdown. Even better, on third down the Bears have converted 8 of 14 3rd down passes for first downs, which places them somewhere in the top 20 so far.

	3rd down 1-6 to go	3rd down, 7+ to go
Rushing 2008	13 for 32, 40.6%	2 for 15, 13.3%
Passing 2008	15 for 40, 37.5%	14 for 73, 19.2%
Rushing 2009	4 for 6, 66.7%	0 for 3, 0%
Passing 2009	7 for 9, 77.8%	1 for 5, 20%
Total 2008	28 for 72, 38.9%	16 for 88, 18.2%
Total 2009	11 for 15, 73.3%	1 for 8, 12.5%

Although the numbers on 3rd and long are about the same, you can see the drastic improvement in short yardage situation. Even better, you can see that the Bears have gotten the majority of their downs in 3rd and short/medium yardage. So while we're seeing the same limited success in long yardage situation, the frequency of 3rd and long situation seems to have signifcantly dropped off.

If we can keep those stats going the rest of the season against tougher opponents, Golden Bear fans will be impressed with how smooth our offensive engine hums.

Speaking of Riley...

via photos.oregonlive.com (original image link)

Closing the game

The most sobering fact about the road losses is that they haven't really been blowouts, or decided early. Cal has lost many of those games in the 4th quarter.

In their last sixteen road games, Cal has won the 4th quarter scoring battle a mere five times, and only once did it result in a Cal come-from-behind victory (Oregon 2007). One of those was a loss (a mere field goal put up in the Big Game 2007). The other three were blowouts for us (Wazzu 2008), or padding points to make the scoring margin look respectable (Tennessee 2006 and Maryland 2008).

Also in those sixteen games, the Bears were involved in a close game (seven point margin either way) in ten of them (In 2008: OSU, USC; in 2007: Furd, ASU, UCLA, Oregon, CSU; in 2006: USC & Arizona) but won only two. 2-8 in close road games? That's not gonna get it done.

So if Cal gets into a close matchup (and you'd expect at least one of these next two to be close), it's likely to be on Kevin Riley to bring Cal back.

“This year, we have way more experienced players,” Riley said. “We kind of know what to do going into it. We’ll be ready for this game. I have no question about that, especially after last year, going to the East Coast and coming out flat and playing a bad game overall (against Maryland). We’ll come out ready to play from the first snap.”

Although we'd like to say he has comeback ability based on an exhibition bowl game and his impressive performance against Oregon State 2007, and that he's thrown seven touchdowns and two interceptions in the 4th quarter...he's only won one game coming from behind.

Additionally, he's only completed 46 of 97 passes in the last fifteen. That's 47.4% of his passes. JaMarcus Russell threw a better percentage on Monday Night Football. And JaMarcus Russell ~~sucks~~ isn't very good yet.

It doesn't look that much better in come-from-behind situations. Riley's 2007 stats were incredible when Cal was trailing (76% completion rate, 5 TDs, no picks) but his 2008 stats were just the opposite (48% completion rate, 4 TDs, 4 picks). And his road stats last season were equally bad--46.2% completion rate, 5 TDs and 4 picks.

Obviously the dropoff in receivers had something to do with that, but it's clear his mechanics had something to do with that too. Now, we've seen plenty of Riley this season to know that his mechanics have taken a step up, but he has not been impressive in the first quarter, and we haven't seen him face a deficit all season. There's a good chance that in the next two weeks, against decent offenses and putting up bad first quarters, they'll be playing from behind.

So if defenses are able to stifle the run game, can Riley lead them back? That's a question all Cal fans should take into account these next two weeks.

So let's just say I'm more concerned than most Cal fans seem to be about this game. I guess it's what happens when the Bears are on the road again.

(For more Cal-Minnesota coverage, check out SBN's gamepage)!

Poll

How many wins will Cal get on the road this year?

Six

132 votes

Five

82 votes

Four

31 votes

Three

13 votes

Two

3 votes

One

1 votes

Oh. Dear. God.

36 votes

298 votes | Poll has closed

2009-2010 Season Outlook and Some Magic Numbers

HydroTech — Thu, 03 Sep 2009 10:00:24 -0000

by Marcio Jose Sanchez - AP

View full size photo »

When people give their "keys to success," they'll often say something like "Team needs to not turn the ball over," or "Team needs to shut down the opposing runningback and make the offense one-dimensional." While these comments are somewhat insightful, I also find them sort of obvious too. In other words, it's sort of like "duh." Of course teams should not turn the ball over to win the game. Of course teams should try to limit the offense's offensive production.

To me, I don't really care how a team does it, so long as the goal (winning the game) is reached. Regardless of how a team reaches success, their success can often be seen in their statistics. I do admit, I've been a big critic of statistics because they can hide the true story (for example, and perhaps the biggest statistical myth of recent Cal Football fame is the whole Longshore 4th quarter touchdown to interception ratio - a lot less can be derived from that stat line than the typical lay fan will think). But when you look at statistics over the entire year, as opposed to a single game, the disparities are averaged out, and the team's overall success is fairly apparent. For example, teams who only average 50 rushing yards a game typically only have 3 wins a season. And teams who average 200 yards rushing a game typically have 10 wins a season.

So how many wins will Cal have in 2009? In most years, when I think about Cal's season outlook, I generally just made a prediction on how many games Cal will win because I can guesstimate the team's rushing abilities, passing abilities, and defensive abilities. But this year I am troubled because I cannot make that same prediction. I can't predict how many games Cal will win this year because frankly I just don't know how good Cal will be this year. The big question in my mind is "how will Cal's passing game develop?" I think that same question is the big question in 99% of Cal fans' minds. Without answering that question one can't really predict how the team will perform.

So I think the only way to really make any sort of prediction is to make the predictions couched in conditional phrases, such as "if Cal's passing game turns out to be great, then Cal will have a 10+ win season," or "if Cal's passing game turns out to be dreadful, then Cal will have a 6 win season." (Note, those aren't my real predictions, I'm just giving examples of conditional statements).

But how do you define "great" and "dreadful" and everything inbetween? Well, that's where I like to use stats and magic numbers.

In making my 2009 season outlook predictions, I'm going to use two assumptions. First of all, I'm going to assume that the Cal defense is going to stay just about as dominant as it was last year despite the loss of three starting linebackers. I'm thinking that our new linebackers are talented enough, and the eventual starters have gained enough experience from playing time last year to fill in adequately. Second, I'm going to assume that Cal's running game is going to stay at about the same level as it was last year. In other words, as crazy as it might seem to say this, but I still expect Jahvid Best to average approximately 7.5 to 8.0 yards per carry (which is a ridiculous number). Perhaps Jahvid Best's numbers will drop down towards the 7.5 yards per carry range since defenses will clearly be focusing on him rather than Cal's passing game, but for the most part I don't foresee it dropping any lower than 7.0 yards per carry.

Now, about that passing game. As I said earlier, I believe this is the biggest question to be resolved of the 2009 Cal Football team and its the performance of the passing game that will be determinative of Cal's season. It's because I am unsure as to how good (or bad) Cal's passing game will be that I must use conditional statements. But before I get to the conditional statmeents, let me briefly describe what constitutes good numbers and bad numbers for a QB.

When looking at a QB's statistics, the three most important numbers are his (1) completion percentage, (2) yards per attempt, and (3) interception percentage. Some hardcore statisticians believe that the yards per attempt is the king of the QB's statistics because it incorporates not only completion percentage, but yards gained per completion. Nevertheless, I still like looking at all three of the categories.

Completion Percentage

So what constitutes a good completion percentage? Par for the course is about 65%. If your QB throws a 65% completion percentage over the year, that's darn good! That's a good number. If he throws for 67%, that's great! If he's up in the 70%+ range, well he's like Tom Brady and that's freakin fantastic. On the down side, a completion percentage of 60% to 64% is okay. Anything less than 60% is unacceptable.

Just to throw some comparisons out there:

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

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

In 2005, Joe Ayoob threw for 49.2%.

In 2006, Nate Longshore threw for 60.2%.

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

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

(Note: I am not including Kevin Riley's stats from 2008 because due to the QB switching and substitution into must-pass situations such as the USC game, his stat line is not accurate)

Yards per Attempted Pass

What makes a good yards per attempted pass? A yards per attempt of about 7.0 is par for the course. Once you get into the 7.5 yards per attempt range, that's certainly above average and pretty good. Anything above 8.0 yards per attempt is ridiculous. On the flip side, 6.5 yards per attempt is sub-par, and anything less than 6.0 yards per attempt is fairly pitiful.

To throw some comparisons out there:

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

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

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

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

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

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

Interception Percentage

What makes a good interception percentage? A low one. As low as possible. But generally speaking, about 3% is acceptable. Anything more gets to be not good very quickly. When you're at about 2.5% interception percentage, that's great. Less than than 2% is ridiculous.

To throw some comparisons out there:

In 2002, Kyle Boller's interception percentage was 2.37%.

In 2004, Aaron Rodgers' interception percentage was 2.53%.

In 2005, Joe Ayoob's interception percentage was 5.51%.

In 2006, Nate Longshore's interception percentage was 3.45%

In 2007, from the start of the season through the Oregon game, Nate Longshore's interception percentage was 1.23% (!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

In 2008, Oklahoma's Sam Bradford's interception percentage was 1.66% (!!!!!!!!!!!!!!)

Summary Thoughts

As you can see, the stats (more or less) don't lie. When the Cal QBs had a good stats, such as in 2004, 2006, and through the Oregon game in 2007, the Cal teams did great. When the stat lines suffered, such as in 2002 and 2005, the teams didn't do so well.

2009 CAL FOOTBALL SEASON OUTLOOK

So now that we've had a look at some examples of ideal statistics, here is my personal 2009 Cal Football season outlook couched in conditional statements.

I'm only going to use completion percentage because, while it certainly doesn't include yards per completion like the yards per attempt stat, it also isn't subject to skew such as the yards per attempt stat by an offense that completes really long passes. In other words, a team can have a pretty good "yards per attempt" stat by completing a couple of really long passes more often than not and hiding a low completion percentage. A perfect example of this is Georgia's Mathew Stafford in 2008 (#1 overall draft pick in the 2009 NFL draft). He had a fantastic yards per attempt of 9.0 yards per attempt, but had a very mediocre 61.4% completion percentage. In plain English, his completion percentage wasn't that good, but his yards per attempt numbers were great because he had great down-field threat WRs, and completed more longer passes than most QBs. But what matters to me the most is the completion percentage stat because I want to know if the QB is completing passes. If he's completing passes, I'm going to assume he's also gaining at least the average amount of yardage per pass too.

So finally, here's my outlook on the 2009 Cal Football season:

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.

For the past few months, I've been saying in the DBDs that Cal's magic number is probably 60% completion percentage. By that, I mean that if Cal's QB can throw greater than 60% completion percentage, Cal has a great chance at a 10+ win season. But upon further thought, I think that magic number has to be increased from 60% to something a little higher, such as 62%. The following is my reasoning why.

Months ago, when I first was pondering Cal's 2009 outlook, I did a little stat comparison with previous Cal QBs. Most notably I looked at the 2006 team. During that year, Nate Longshore passed for 60.2% completion percentage and Cal almost went to the Rose Bowl. The 2006 team and the 2009 have a lot of similarities so I began thinking that 60% seemed to be the magic number, hence that is the number I've been reciting for months now.

But upon further thought, I began realizing that the reason why the 2006 Cal Football team's passing game was so successful was because of Desean Jackson. He provided a great deep threat for Nate Longshore, as well as being a superb special teams threat. Defenses truly couldn't really focus on Marshawn Lynch without giving up on pass defense and giving up scores to Desean Jackson. But this year, Cal doesn't really have a wide receiver to be Desean Jackson. Cal doesn't really have a really speedy deep threat that will command the attention of the defensive secondary. So to make up for the lack of deep gains and quick touchdowns that Desean Jackson was able to give the team in 2006, the Cal QB and WRs are going to have to complete more passes than normal. In other words, in 2006 Longshore could get away with a 60.2% completion percentage because Cal had a superb deep threat (evidenced in Longshore's 8.01 yards per attempt), but in 2009 since Cal has no deep threat, Cal's starting QB will h ave to complete more pass attempts to make up for the lack of yards per attempt.

Conclusion

By no means are these numbers a 100% indicator of things to come. Cal's QB might be able to throw a 60% completion percentage and Cal could still go 11-1 on the season with some luck and superb play from the other parts of the team. But for the most part, I do see Cal's season riding on the hand of the starting QB.

Some of you may be wondering what the heck the difference is between 60% and 62%? Well, in 2006 Nate Longshore threw 377 attempts on the year (I'm using 2006 because I think the 2009 team most resembles the 2006 team). Assuming Cal's starting QB this year throws for the same amount of passes, then 60% of 377 is about 226 passes completed. Alternatively, 62% of 377 is about 234 passes completed. That's only a difference of about 8 passes. So some of you may be thinking that isn't a significant difference? Well, perhaps it's not. But sometimes, football games come down to one play - one passing play. Perhaps it's a touchdown pass to seal the game, or a crucial first down which eventually leads to a go-ahead field goal to win, etc. But while it's just one pass, it's still a pass. Those eight passes may not seem like a lot, but perhaps three of those eight passes are against USC. Perhaps those three passes are passes that most QBs won't make, but somehow Cal's starting QB nails the throws and Cal gets two critical first downs to burn the clock and one touchdown. That's all Cal may need to win the game. So while a mere eight passes extra might not be a lot - I contend that it could be the difference between winning and losing (theoretically) up to eight football games. Every throw counts.

In sum, I believe that Cal's starting QB needs to have at least a 62% completion percentage for Cal to have a good chance at a 10+ win season.

Poll

What's the minimum completion percentage required by the QB and WRs this year in order for Cal to have a 10+ win regular season?

68% or higher

13 votes

66%-67%

13 votes

64%-65%

44 votes

62%-63%

35 votes

60%-61%

75 votes

58%-59%

14 votes

56%-57%

5 votes

as low as 55%

7 votes

206 votes | Poll has closed