The longest continually active Cal Bear blog

Archive for the ‘Game Commentary’ category


2nd winnable game lost

(Admin note… I wrote most of this on Sunday, but got sidetracked and forgot to publish it.)

Another disheartening loss, ugh! However (and before I get into the details) I think it’s important to remember there are different types of disheartening losses. There’s the “lost opportunity” loss… a game we expected a loss but the game was distressing close. There’s the blowout loss… a game where it was never competitive. There’s the “never should have lost to X” game… any loss to a team well below Cal. And finally, there’s the “woulda, coulda, shoulda” loss… a loss where victory seemed achievable minus a few mistakes/problems. Note that this is different than the “lost opportunity” in that it was a game where a win was far more likely to begin with.

And of those 4 types, the “lost opportunity” and the “woulda, coulda, shoulda” games, while just as disheartening in the immediate, shouldn’t be as discouraging for the rest of the season. The pieces are there. The team just hasn’t put them together yet. Of course the fear is that they never will, but one doesn’t have to be perpetual optimist to have reasonable hope that things could improve.

Big picture that’s where I see this Cal team right now. Onto the specific thoughts for the game:

  • If one wants the simplest explanation of why the Bears lost it was their refusal to just take the points given them. Both teams scored 5 touchdowns and nothing else. But going for 2 so early in the game was a *HUGE* mistake, as was not taking the field goal on the first drive. It’s a simple rule: No 2 point conversion attempts before the 4th quarter. Why is that so hard for Wilcox?
  • But just to make it blazingly clear, assuming everything else goes the same (a risky thing to do), the Bears would have been up 9-0 when they missed the extra point, if they had kicked the field goal to start the game. Then the next time they’re not tempted to go for 2, and are up 16-0 after the pick-6, and 23-7 after the teams traded TDs. The halftime score would have been 23-14. The Bears would have still been ahead, 23-21 after the TCU TD to start the 2nd half and up 30-21 after their early 4th quarter score. After TCU scores again in the 4th, TCU probably kicks the extra point to be down 30-28 and again when TCU does ahead 30-35 later in the final quarter. But the Bears go back up somewhere between 38 and 36 to 35 with their final score depending on whether they go for 2 on that last one to try to extend to a field-goal lead. Thus they’d win the game (minus a final FG attempt by TCU that should be considered as a possibility). But long story short, the game would have been so much easier to win with that early field goal.
  • A subject I’m not hearing discussed in many quarters is poor tackling, but as far as I’m concerned it’s one of the biggest problems on the field. The defense is being saved from themselves on that front by their exceptional rallying to the ball. When the first guy doesn’t get the ball carrier, they usually slow him down enough for guys 2, 3 and 4 to finish him off. Luckily guys 2, 3 and 4 are quick to arrive. But it’s leaving lots of extra yards on the field.
  • To get specific, the final 1st down by TCU was a result of poor tackling. The Bears might have had one last shot at a go-ahead field-goal if they could have made that stop. Additionally one of the two long TD runs, there was a tackle opportunity missed both early and late. Even the late one might have been enough to turn a TD into a field goal.
  • All of this is a long way of saying, I think more tackling drills are in order.
  • Some good news: Our punter is delivering. In the prior game against Nevada, I was pretty impressed with their punter who had really high punts (reminded me of Bryan Anger), so I wasn’t watching our punter all that carefully. But watching on TV against TCU (where unfortunately one can’t watch the height of the kick), it was clear how much hangtime Sheahan was getting.
  • Of course like everyone I was very happy with the deep-ball passing, particularly in the 1st half. But I will say this… in the first half it felt like the Bears chose to go deep at tactically wise times, but in the 2nd half, it felt more random and often poorly chosen moments. In particular, there was far too much of it on 3rd and not all that long. While I’m not against it to keep the defense honest, it is just too low percentage of a play to do over and over.
  • Back on the bad news side, what was with those two long runs by TCU? Never in my life have I seen a guy with so many defenders in their proximity somehow never manage to get a hand on them. And then the same thing happened TWICE! And because we had the 6th string TV crew who’s ability to get us multiple angle replays with any consistency was lacking, I never felt like I had a good understanding of what happened. Why couldn’t the Bears get a hand on them?
  • Speaking of which, I’m a little concerned about defensive team speed. There’s been just a few too many plays that didn’t go well because the defense couldn’t keep up. In particular, the cornerback Gamble has been exposed a number of times on 1-on-1 deep balls (although thankfully not all of them have been completions). And then the above mentioned long runs could have been secondary team speed issues. I’m not 100% convinced yet, but it’s something to keep an eye on.

As for the general situation… I kinda feel like there’s talent on this team, that the pieces are there, but the plan for staying sharp and succeeding through the pandemic was weak. While other teams had a year and a half of good practice, the Bears didn’t quite know what to do with their usual week-to-week routines so discombobulated. Having to make such massive adjustments in week 2 is not a sign of a well prepared for the season team.

But, for those who want to see the good news in that, teams that start the year underwhelming often have some of the biggest improvements as they figure out what’s wrong. That’s my hope moving forward despite how disappointed I am with this 0-2 start that should have been 2-0 based on the talent of this team.

Ouch! So painful I had to wait a few days…

Well that was not a good football game. I knew I had two choices for my recap post:

  1. Immediate raw rant
  2. Give it a few days for some perspective

I decided to do the latter. In any case, here are my thoughts:

  • Why does Cal ever schedule Nevada? They’ve been a thorn in our side for decades now. We only seem to play them when they’re at their best and it’s an all-downside affair. If the Bears miraculously were to ever win, the team wouldn’t get much credit for the victory. But Nevada is good enough the downside of losing to a “lower” team is ever present. Let’s not do this anymore… OK?
  • Nevada’s QB was exceptionally smart. Every blitz the Bears ran was easily defeated by his quick recognition of it and his strong knowledge of where to go with the ball due to the particulars of the blitz. Gotta give him credit.
  • At the same time, I think the Bears should have recognized this earlier and gone with ‘drop 8’ more often. The front 3 were getting good enough penetration that it would have been better to make the QB hold the ball waiting for an open receiver due to 8 in coverage. Instead they’d bring 5, who wouldn’t get there all that quickly all things considered, and give the QB plenty of throwing options.
  • I think this is particularly true because Nevada had a couple of WRs who were faster than the assigned DBs. When that’s the case you have to switch to a scheme were safeties are responsible for deep coverage and that generally means having more guys in coverage.
  • As for offense, I have to disagree with the consensus that the problem was the Bears didn’t run enough. Yes, it was more successful than the pass. However, we needed the variety for the run game to be successful. I think too much more running wouldn’t have been successful.
  • More concerning was the choice of pass plays. Not nearly enough that stretched the field and *WAY* too many that were trying to be “cute”. This seemed particularly true in the redzone.
  • I feel like Garbers is not really comfortable with this offense yet. He held the ball a long time quite often. He was staring down a lot of receivers. He took too long to get through his progression.
  • What’s with the plays were Garbers wasn’t in the shotgun? Was there some reason to tip off the defense it was a run play? (I don’t think they ever passed from under center.)
  • Tackling was a real problem. The Bears were good at flowing to the ball and making sure there was more than one guy there to make the tackle… but at the same time it was depressing how often it was the 2nd or 3rd guy who actually brought the Nevada player to the ground. The result was a number of plays that had a few too many “free” yards.
  • The last two offensive sequences were so atrocious that I think this might be part of the reason why so many of us are so upset. What was with that interception? Garbers way under threw it and the receiver made very little effort to come back to the ball, nor to do anything to prevent the interception. It was so bad that it was hard to believe that it could get any worse. But those last 4 plays did their best. Did nobody know they needed to get out of bounds, including Garbers who threw underneath on 2nd down? And it was the perfect cap that on 4th down the WR dropped the ball. Ugh!
  • But perhaps what was most concerning was the lack of energy. I’m concerned that the team is really missing Evan Weaver and other emotional leaders that help this team have such heart in years past. Last year they felt low-energy as well, but I was content to blame that on the pandemic. Now I’m starting to wonder if it’s something more fundamental to the team.
  • But to be fair… it could be that we’re still seeing some sort of “covid hangover”.
  • For another perspective on this, I think it’s important to remember that this team is nearly entirely made of players who weren’t around for the end of the Dykes era. We might be starting to lose the hunger of knowing what it’s like to be a losing team with little upside.
  • As much as the game was a real let down, I don’t think all is lost. There’s talent on this team. While the execution of the offensive scheme wasn’t great, I don’t think the scheme itself is without merit. The defense is still reasonably strong (particularly if they clean up the tackling) and I saw hints of their ball hawking ability of the past. Perhaps this will be the wake-up call they need.

OSU game thoughts

Well that was… ummm… interesting. Here are my thoughts:

  • This game was so very winnable. And I’m not just talking about the final failed drive. The simple fact is that minus 3 plays, well 4 if you include the final long run after it was already over, the Bears dominated this game both on the score board and statistically.
  • But what was also clear, and those above 4 plays are evidence of this, is that the Bears are still quite rusty. They seemed to have faired worse for the time off and the delays in playing than other teams on both sides of the ball. One would think that a team that was installing a new offense would have been helped by extra time to prepare, but it appears that there’s no substitute for in-game experience.
  • Speaking of the offense, can someone find the playbook and rip out all the pages with these rollout passes? They were a disaster every time they ran them. Garbers was constantly under pressure and the receivers were thoroughly covered. And to make matters worse, his options were few as he only had one side of the field available to throw to.
  • What I’m most pleased with is the growing depth of this team. The failures didn’t seem to be related to missing players, just rust. The make-shift offensive line (do the Bears have any other kind of offensive line… that’s the question) was awesome and opened great running lanes. The RB depth is good. Same for the defense as a whole.
  • Back to rust, the worst unit, and this is no surprise all things considered, is the defensive line. Those few plays that they gave up huge runs were atrocious. But even some of the lesser plays, the defense line would get moved around a lot. I’ve never seen QB sneaks that go for 4+ yard before.
  • The other rusty area of note was the punting unit. Boy that was a rough day for them. 2 of the 3 easy scores were due to extremely short fields due to the block and short punt. And one of the other scores was a short field due to a long punt return.
  • While on special teams, Cal didn’t get the best breaks on the penalties on their own returns. One was marginal, but probably technically a foul. The other wasn’t a foul at all (and too far away from the play to matter), but the refs fell for the flop.
  • Cal did get a few makeup calls on pass interference though, some at critical times.

Overall, I find myself both frustrated by the opportunity lost in what should have been an easy win, but at the same time optimistic about the remainder of the season and beyond. Rust can be cleaned up (as we saw from week 1 to week 2). And the depth this team is building will serve it well in the years to come.

Apparently I wasn’t as ready as I thought

I knew that what I needed was to get Cal football out of my mind to get some emotional distance.

Of course, having a win over WSU makes it easier to come back, but I think it wouldn’t have mattered. I would have been ready either way at this point.

http://excusemeformyvoice.com/blog/?p=4216

Apparently that wasn’t as true as I thought. The USC Game re-sucked the life out of me. I just wasn’t expecting that sort of loss. I think I would have been ready for a low scoring but close loss. I also think I would have been ready for a low scoring but multi-score loss because the Cal offense could get nothing going. I might have even been ready for Cal losing a multi-score, but high scoring affair loss (at least the offense would have shown some promise).

But I was not ready for the blowout.

Thinking back to the last time I was so disheartened this long, the worst part of the end of the Tedford era was when the team just wasn’t competitive against the best teams. When Cal would go play Oregon, Stanford, USC or Washington and just get crushed like an FCS team gets crushed. From first snap to final whistle the team just didn’t have the players or the scheme to compete.

What has been so uplifting about the Wilcox era until last Saturday was we could walk away from the game thinking that with a couple changes, or perhaps a couple of good recruits (like perhaps a 4-star QB recruit who delivers on his hype), or even just a few less injuries, that even the worst losses could have gone the other way.

That is not how I felt after I walked out of the stadium early in the 4th quarter against USC. I felt like Cal was manhandled from start to finish and was in no way competitive. And most troubling, it was the Cal defense that looked overwhelmed… something we haven’t seen until the Utah (and that was just glimpses) and now USC games.

And so yet again, I needed to take a step back. Even though I had the equipment in the car, I didn’t record a OTRH podcast. I couldn’t see any value in ranting, particularly considering that’s what my last podcast (OSU) had been.

But I’m back today. (more to come shortly)

My Ole Miss replay rant

OK, it has been a while since I’ve gone full rant-mode… and this whole “controversy” with the Pac-12 refs has grown into something ridiculous. When the ESPN recap during later game half-time shows is mostly them bashing the refs, it’s ridiculous. This is particularly true because THE REFS GOT IT RIGHT!

It’s extremely frustrating to me how little so many people know about the rules of football and particularly the rules for replay. College football reply was specifically designed to be as unobtrusive as possible. (Side note: whether they’ve accomplished that goal is a separate issue) The rules gods decided they didn’t want what the NFL had with red flags and challenges and all the machinations that go along with that. The specifically wanted to create something that as little as possible affected the game.

That’s why “every play is reviewed” automatically. But we have to understand what that means. It means that there’s a separate ref from the refs on the field who after every play (key word: AFTER) reviews the replays to see if there’s something that looks like it was likely called wrong on the field. If so he ‘buzzes’ down to the field to stop play so that a more thorough review can be done.

The on the field refs are not supposed to in any way change the flow of the game until the replay-ref buzzes down. They’re supposed to continue on as if everything is correct until they get notified by the replay ref.

And that’s exact what happened. The on the field refs made the best call they could on the field. (For a moment, you can ignore whether the ref made the correct call, I’ll get to that later.) That call indicated the receiver was just short of the endzone. As such, the clock continues to roll and it’s 4th down. The refs rushed to get the ball set so that Ole Miss could run a play as soon as they were ready. They did it exactly right.

As for the replay ref, since he doesn’t start looking at a play until after the play is over, it’s not reasonable to expect him to reasonably make a decision to review a play in a handful of seconds. He needs at least 10 maybe 15 to be able to watch a replay and properly judge whether a full review is justified. So there’s no reason to complain that he wasn’t able to do it before Ole Miss had to snap the ball before the clock expired.

To get even further to the point: Ole Miss doesn’t deserve an extra free timeout just because the play was a close one. I don’t know why people seem to think they do. The clock was running. Reviewing the play without specific justification (something that takes 10 to 15 seconds to come up with) would be unfair to the defense. Why should Ole Miss be given extra time to think through what they want to do on 4th down? That’s not fair either. If they wanted that time, they should have picked a play that wasn’t going to result in the player being tackled in-bounds, or had better timeout management earlier in the half so they still had one at this point in the game. It’s not Cal’s fault nor the refs fault that Ole Miss didn’t have that timeout and called a play that risked being down in-bounds.

And here’s what makes all of the above even more important: It appears the refs not only made the correct procedural call, but likely made the correct call on the field:

Here’s what I see in that bottom video by Emily Van Buskirk:

  • When the receiver reaches out to catch the ball, his feet and lower body are in the endzone but his upper body and hands (including the ball) are in the field of play
  • As he falls to the ground, the majority of his body drifts back into the field of play
  • But amidst that, the receiver transfers the ball to his left arm, bringing it very close to being in the endzone just as his first knee hits the ground. Whether it is in the endzone is nearly impossible to tell as the angle is not straight down the line (but it’s apparently the closest to down the line that exists). But I’ll admit it is very close and could possibly be a few inches over the line. No one can say for sure.
  • Then as he falls to the ground, the majority of the remainder of his body drifts into the field of play, including the ball now clearly being back in the field of play.
  • Finally, well after his knee is down, the receiver rolls back into the endzone and the ball at this point clearly breaks the plane. But of course, his knee has been down for a while now and it doesn’t matter if the ball crosses at this point.

So to summerize, the ball is caught outside the endzone, is transferred to his left arm where PERHAPS for just a moment it gets into the endzone, and then clearly returns back to the field of play as his knee is hitting the ground.

I’ve seen a lot of plays that more or less meet that criteria (ball perhaps crossing momentarily before returning to the field of play) and almost universally, unless it is VERY clear, refs generally don’t call it a touchdown. And for sure, if it is marginal as that one, the review booth would leave the play as called on the field. They for sure wouldn’t overturn that call based on the evidence we have.

So, to summarize:

  • The ref on the field likely made the correct call live.
  • The refs on the field did the right thing and didn’t assume a replay would be done. They continued as they are supposed to and properly spotted the ball quickly so Ole Miss could run a 4th down play as quickly (or slowly) as they desired.
  • The replay ref just didn’t have enough time to review the play to decide whether a full review was warranted and thus it is very reasonable that no replay was done.
  • But even if he had called for a full review, it appears the result would have been a “play stands as called on the field” result.
  • As such, it would have been unfair to the Bear’s defense to give Ole Miss the benefit of the doubt and do the replay and thus effectively give Old Miss a free and undeserved timeout to review a play that wouldn’t have been overturned.

Thus this “controversy” is a complete joke. Anyone who’s read all my content and particularly listened to my podcast knows I’m no defender of Pac-12 refs. But just because the conference’s refs have made plenty of mistakes in the past, doesn’t mean they made a mistake here. Best I can tell, they did everything right on this one.

Quick post Ole Miss game thoughts

  • It seems pretty clear at this point, by the end of this season we’ll all know whether there’s anything wrong with our hearts. They’re going to be stress tested every week.
  • There’s no doubt the defensive injuries are having a pretty big effect on the defense. Let’s hope what the announcers said is accurate and the team will likely to get Paul and Goode back next week. The team really needs them.
  • The offensive line, while not great, seems to be surviving its injuries at this point. They looked reasonable in the 2nd half, even opening a few more running lanes against what was clearly a stacked box. (It’s part of why Garbers had so much room to throw.)
  • It’s been a long time since I’ve seen cornerback Cameron Bynum get beat over the top. Although that late throw that got the Rebels down to the 10 yard line was a well placed ball and a very good catch, making it very hard to defend, Bynum was not his usual lock-down self on that one.
  • Seeing Modster on the field as QB (admittedly just while Garbers was injured) clears up that he’s finally now eligible to play. Perhaps that’s just what Garbers needed to open up his passing game: Someone who might challenge him for the starting spot who is actually eligible to play.
  • By the way, great play call choice for Modster’s first pass (A jailbreak screen). Not a run like Ole Miss was assuming, but also something pretty safe with little downside and a lot of upside.
  • I’m still getting used to the idea that punting on 4th and 1 at mid-field with 2 minutes left and up by only 1 score, is the right call. With Dykes it was the absolute wrong call. While it was tighter than anyone would have liked, punting worked out. Woohoo defense!
  • That 3rd down play, no matter what announcer Ryan Leaf said, was most likely not a touchdown. The WR’s nearly entire body landed on the field side of the endzone line. My guess is if they review it (which they didn’t have time for), it would have been a “stands” if not “confirmed” call. Give credit to the line judge for being in exactly the right spot and being decisive about making the call as he saw it.
  • How just is it that Weaver made the final stop on 4th down?
  • And as a reminder, remember the Bears don’t lose if that TD is scored. Not only do the Rebels need to convert the 2-point conversion, even then it just goes to overtime. And I like the Bears chances in OT.

More later…

Ole Miss halftime thoughts

  • Starting with the positive: Way to go Garbers! Finally throwing the ball with some authority and picking some good reads.
  • Although I don’t think Garbers reads have all been right. There’s clearly been some missed reads (including the interception). But I’ll take what we’ve been getting this week every time over the past.
  • Last offensive thought: The offensive line is getting man-handled on run plays. Really need to turn that around. Too many injuries is making it too hard for them to hold up.
  • The defense is in a tough spot themselves with injuries. Missing both Tevin Paul and Cameron Goode at linebacker? OUCH! That hurts a LOT, LOT, LOT!
  • And that might be part of the reason the Bears are really struggling at reading the read-option. Nobody seems to be assigned (or at least that’s how it looks) to the QB keep option.
  • And when they manage to cover the QB keep, they’re not ready for the RPO option of passing over the top of the linebacker who’s going to make the QB tackle to an open reciever.
  • Those two plays have been the backbone of Ole Miss’s offensive success. The hope is they figure out a way to schematically clean that up in the 2nd half.
  • Happy to see the Bears leading (albeit by 1) at half-time, particularly getting the ball to start the 2nd half.

UW game thoughts

My boys were surprisingly joyful yesterday in reminding me how wrong my prediction was. I’ll give you guys the same answer I gave them: I couldn’t be more happy to be wrong.

Now that I’ve got that out of the way, here’s my thoughts on the game:

  • It was quite clear that Garbers was told to be VERY conservative with passing the ball. Did he throw a single ball over the middle? He looked there a lot, but just about every time he either went to an outlet receiver or ran the ball. I’m convinced he’s been told to not lose the game by turning it over.
  • Speaking of which, Garbers numbers were ho-hum (only 111 yards), but exactly what this team needs him to be: 60% completion percentage, over 6 yards an attempt, no interceptions and 40+ yards of scrambling runs. (Although it would be nice to see more downfield throws and fewer than 3 sacks.)
  • Garbers also had a key block on Cal’s 2nd TD. Dancy doesn’t get in without Garbers block.
  • The two headed monster of Brown and Dancy is looking really good. Neither one of them is too one dimensional they can’t be used in most situations nor tip the team’s hand to the defense for what they should expect.
  • My biggest concern is the defensive line. They got pushed around quite a bit by the UW offensive line. It’s the reason every time UW ran the ball, they always fell forward for what seemed to be at least 3 yards. The defense as a whole was able to be effective because the d-line took just enough attention from the o-line so that the linebackers and secondary could wreck havoc and create enough negative plays to stop UW from grinding out TD’s all game long.
  • Another concern: Punting. Not only did Longhetto and Coutts (who might be still hampered by injury) not kick the ball very well (avg 30 yards per punt) the coverage team has been very suspect. They’re suspect on kickoffs too, but luckily Cal has a place kicker with a strong enough leg to force a touch-back most of the time.
  • Returning to the positive, I continue to be more optimistic about the wide receivers, particularly Kekoa Crawford. For one thing, he’s got an awesome last name. But even if you ignore that, he’s fast, runs good routes and also has a penchant for yards after the catch.
  • The last drive of the game still has me wowed. It was exactly what it needed to be. The WR screen that got the ball deep in the redzone was a great call. How long has it been since Cal won on a last minute drive? (answer – excluding OT – 11/28/15 over ASU)
  • I will say, I was a bit surprised by the 3rd down play call on the final series. Why would you waste a play on 2nd down to center the ball and then on 3rd down go for the TD, and thus de-center the ball? I can see both decisions (going for the TD vs. centering and kicking the extra-point like FG) as being reasonable, but the odd combination of both seemed a bit odd.
  • I said to my eldest son as the weather delay was wrapping up, looking at that mostly empty stadium, that the game was going to be won by the team that wanted it most. When I said it, I felt pretty good about what that might mean. This Cal team has shown time and again to hit above their weight class by shear will, and sure enough, they did it again Saturday night/Sunday morning.
  • That said, unlike last year, I feel that if this game was played multiple times, the Bears would come out on top the majority of the time. I’m not quite as confident that would be true without the weather delay, but I still likely think it is true, and here’s why: The breaks didn’t exactly go the Bears way. Neither turnover resulted in points nor really kept points off the board. The penalties slightly helped the Bears, but they were valid/clear cut penalties. This game was pretty straight up and the Bears won it that way too.
  • And the most important part: This was a good UW team, make no mistake. Beating them on the road means that Cal can compete with any team in the conference, even in their house.

Disgusted

(A pre-rant caveat… I missed all the 2nd quarter and part of the 3rd, so I missed all 3 of Garbers INTs.  However, I think what I’m about to say still stands)

How could this be Cal’s strategy?  The Bears are throwing too many interceptions… so you switch QB’s and go with a QB who hasn’t seen any meaningful playing time in his 5 years at Cal.  SERIOUSLY!?!  I don’t care how bad Garbers was playing.  He’s your guy at this point.  Instead the right decision is to reign him in so he won’t keep shooting the team in the foot.  You sit him down at halftime and say… “OK, we’re up 7 to nothing.  You’re having a rough game.  Stop forcing it.  When in doubt, throw it away.  What we’re going to do is run a lot and when we do pass, you’re going to play it REALLY safe.  You’re also going to run it more.  We’re going to pick passing plays that make your job easy.  And when those are blown up, don’t sweat it, just throw it away.”

What you DON’T do is put the ball in Forrest’s hands and create even more risk.  You’re telling TCU, load up against the run and see if Forrest can beat you.  If they’ve scouted Cal at all they know Forrest can’t run at all, so they no longer need the spy, they no longer have to worry about the read-option.  Cal gave TCU a *HUGE* advantage by tipping their hands at what the 2nd half strategy was going to be.  It would have been wiser to leave Garbers in but use him differently.

For what it is worth, that’s what TCU did once their QB was injured.  After one disastrous series while he was getting medical treatment, they  trotted him out there and had him hand it off over and over.  He threw one pass just to show he wasn’t completely incapable and the defense had to respect his throwing a little, but mostly he just handed it off.

THAT’S what Cal should have done with Garbers.

But let’s even pretend that going with Forrest is OK, the entire end of the game was *STILL* pathetic.

Cal get’s the ball at their own 10 with 7 minutes left, and go with the run the ball strategy for the 4 consecutive following plays:

  • 6 yard run
  • 8 yard run
  • 8 yard run
  • 3 yard run

It sure seems like it’s working… and since Forrest has shown no feel for throwing the ball (he was 3 for 11 at that point), why would you have him throw, in particular something where he has an option to come back over the middle!?!

And thus Cal throws their 4th interception. ARG!?!

OK, on to the next possession (after Cal dodges a bullet and TCU can’t convert 4th and short just outside of field goal range)  Cal goes with a safe outside pass to the flat (that’s the sort of pass play to use to keep the defense honest) that Mo Ways powers his way to the TCU 40.  The Bears are in striking distance.  Woohoo!  Next they try WR screen to McMorris… a good idea, but he drops it.  Then they run on 2nd and pick up 5 (see the run is working!).  And while the following decision is debatable, I say the right call is to run it on 3rd and 5.  There’s not much trust in Forrest to read the defense and he threw an INT the last time he had to make a serious read.  Why not play it as a 4-down series and use two downs to get a 1st down running the ball? (It’s been working recently after all)  Heck, with some luck, TCU is not expecting run on 3rd down and Cal doesn’t even need the 4th down.  But nevertheless, if they get that 1st down by running on both 3rd and 4th down, then Cal could pound the ball to pick up 6 to 8 yards on the next series and all of a sudden Cal is in field goal range with little time left.  Even if they miss, they have a good shot at a win.

Instead they go for the high risk Forrest throw, it’s incomplete (as any idiot would expect) and then it’s too high risk to go for it on 4th and 5 and punting is sadly the right call with 2 minutes left.

The coaching staff still found fresh ways to lose their minds before regulation was up.  What was with the timeout with TCU at their own 10 with 2 minutes left on 1st down?  There’s only 2 timeouts.  Cal couldn’t have stopped the clock on all 3 plays.  They should have waited for 3rd and 4th down.  By waiting, at least they would know if it was 3rd and short or long before calling time out. At least by waiting you know if you’re likely to get the ball back and so it’s good to conserve clock, or whether they have 3rd and short and Cal should want to shorten the game.  But no, they take a timeout on 1st down and all of a sudden TCU is rumbling down the field and thankful Cal saved them some clock.  But thankfully, they miss the long field-goal and Cal is saved from their stupidity.

On to overtime…

The Cal running game picks up a reasonable 3 yards on 1st down (and frankly, it felt like it could have been 4 or 5.  Do they keep running the ball?  Do they say, “you know, I bet we can win a game of trading field goals… did you see how weak their kicker was?”  No, on 2nd down they have Forrest throw incomplete, surprising no one with his passing incompetence.  On 3rd down do they wise up?  No, they have Forrest throw again and it’s a ridiculously bad INT that was almost run all the way back.

Then the Bears lose when TCU kicks a field goal on their overtime possession.

Pathetic and disgusting.

It reminded me of everything that was wrong with the McIlwain experiment.  They have confidence in the wrong guys at the wrong time.  Instead of working with the obvious choice (Garbers) and working with his short-comings to hone in on an offense that is at least mildly functional without shooting the entire team in the foot, they go for a wildly high-risk plan with a QB who has shown time and time again to be even worse at the one thing we can’t afford (lot’s of INTs).

I just don’t get it.

Colorado re-watch thoughts

Decided to re-watch, or more accurately watch the TV converage for the 1st time, the Colorado game.  Here are my thoughts as I watched.

  • What was Montez thinking on that 1st INT?  There were two guys who could have made that interception.  That had to be a case of having a pre-determined throw because he didn’t seem to have any thought behind that throw.
  • Now, that 2nd INT, I was a bit more sympathetic to Colorado’s plight when I saw it live, but on re-watch, that one was just as egregious.  Montez should have seen the safety.
  • You have to feel sorry for CU on the 3rd possession.  Could they possibly throw the ball again?  No.  So everyone knew it was going to be run heavy.  So it’s no surprise they had no success.
  • There was a targetting no-call on Cal’s 1st offensive play, but there was no notice of it on the TV coverage.
  • Penalties didn’t help the Cal offense much this game.
  • Jeez, I had forgotten that it was the very 1st Cal punt where CU fumbled it. They just couldn’t get out of their own way, could they?
  • Colorado was very committed to stopping the run through the whole game.
  • Garbers did a great job of getting off the pass to McMorris on that 4th and 1.  That was pretty impressive.
  • Why did CU take the holding penalty to replay 3rd and goal when Cal only got to the 5?  It’s not like a field goal from the 18 is particularly tough.  Instead, Cal gets 16 on a scramble on the re-try and then Cal converts on 4th and 2.
  • Nixon, the WR for CU, was *really* fast.  A few times he got behind Cal’s DBs and it was only because Montez didn’t have the right touch that they didn’t convert.
  • I was really impressed with Wharton’s after catch effort.  There’s a couple other receivers who could learn from him.  He doesn’t dance.  He doesn’t back-track.  He just runs hard and then when all that is left it to try and bowl over the DB, that’s exactly what he tries to do.
  • Cal had 2 defensive offsides early in the 2nd quarter on back to back plays.  I don’t have trouble admitting that I was livid in the stands.  And sure enough, 3rd and 12 ended up being a 1st down and from there CU drove the rest of the field to get their lone 1st half touchdown.  Small things like that can make a huge difference.
  • Boy have our TE’s been a disappointment this year.  Lot’s of dropped passes and not very good routes run.
  • That 2nd muffed punt return was a hugh momentum saver.
  • That Garbers slide wasn’t even close to a 1st down was it?  I take back what I said in the podcast.  There was no reason for Garbers to push it.  He wasn’t going to get it no matter what.
  • I’m disappointed there was no TV coverage of the hold the killed the 3rd interception return that cost the Bears 40 or so yards.  I sure as heck didn’t see it.
  • Ha!  I didn’t realize Cal’s only 3rd down conversion was a Garbers scramble.  It shows just how ineffective Cal’s offense was.
  • Can someone explain to me why Wilcox was calling timeouts on CU’s last 1st half possession?  Cal wasn’t going to get the ball back with much time left.  It’s not like the Bears had been very aggressive on offense.  Why?
  • On one of Montez’s 3rd down scrambles, Weaver looked like he had the positioning to get to him, but he held up like he had some zone assignment that he didn’t want to risk giving up a pass over the middle.  The next play CU scored their 2nd TD.
  • Cal’s 2nd field goal is yet again the result of an unforced error by CU, in this case a stupid personal foul after the play was over.
  • If I were Stanford, I’d spend a lot of time watching CU’s last touchdown drive.  They seemed to find the key to beating the Cal defense.  Perhaps it wasn’t Cal’s best effort, but CU marched right down the field on that one.
  • Why wasn’t CU given a penalty for “inadvertantly” snapping the ball?  That seems like illegal procedure to me.
  • Hicks made a big mistake on CU’s last touchdown.  He needed to protect the inside, not the sideline, but instead got caught outside of the WR making Montez’s life easy to complete the throw.
  • Wharton was the offensive MVP of the game for sure.  After that 4td down conversion, he got two big pickups by being really physical after the catch.
  • I was so ticked when Cal kept going backwards after 1st and goal.  3rd from the 18?  OUCH!
  • But bailed out by a REALLY stupid personal foul that gave Cal a re-do… a 2nd shot at first and goal from the 7.
  • And then both Garbers and Ways play the fade perfectly for the touchdown.
  • The two point conversion was a pretty good play if it hadn’t been tipped at the line.
  • Jeez, how many false starts were there on 3rd and short?  At least 2.
  • Oh that offensive pass interference was garbage.  Yet another 3rd down conversion lost to penalty.  (In this case not fair)
  • I can’t believe Mo Ways didn’t catch the ball on that 3rd down that would have just about ended the game.  That was a pretty risky call, a deep fade on 3rd and short.
  • Another bogus penalty on Cal on 4th and 17 with a PI call.  There was no way that WR was coming back to the ball and Bynum even got his head around and his hand up.
  • That lateral on the Montez scramble was somthing else, wasn’t it?
  • And Davis as a single high safety… gotta love how he plays.

Final thoughts:  The offensive performance wasn’t quite as bad as I thought.  Just some random stupid mistakes that need to be cleaned up.  I’ll admit the lack of O-Line push was troublesome, but other than that, what was wrong was very fixable.

Re-viewing of USC game thoughts

I re-watched the game (or said another way, watched the TV coverage for the 1st time since I was at the game).  Here are some thoughts from that:

  • What a game Beck had!  Tackled the kicker on the fake field-goal attempt.  Had a 3rd down pass breakup.  Had a very nice tackle for loss.  And of course the key interception that setup the go-ahead touchdown.
  • I hadn’t noticed that Wharton was missing in the 1st quarter from the stands.  That’s one of the harder things of being at the game.  Minus the QB and the running back, it is generally tough to see who’s missing.
  • The holding call on the long run play of Garbers was pretty marginal.  Yeah, it was probably technically holding, but only in the ‘if you were to call every hold, there would never be a play without a penalty’ sorta way.  The lineman disengaged pretty quickly and didn’t seem to meaningfully slow the progress of the defender once he had turned away from the legitimate block, particularly from the perspective of the likelihood he gets to Garbers before he gets downfield.
  • While on the topic of long Garbers runs that were for naught, the fumble call was complete BS.  The replay clearly shows his knee was down and his arm is still around the ball.  Was the ball “starting” to come out?  Perhaps.  But his arm is still around the ball.  It makes me want to look up just when the precise moment a fumble has happened.
  • Not that anyone was doubting this besides the TV commentators, but going for 2-points when up 15-14 late in the 3rd was the right call.  If this was Dykes Cal vs. WSU, then I get the “not until the 4th quarter” rule.  But this was a defensive struggle.  It was late enough in the game not a lot of other points were likely to be scored.  (Which turned out to be true)
  • The game had more dropped passes on the Cal side than I remembered.
  • To give one concession to USC, the personal foul that extended Cal’s final drive was pretty harsh.  I know I wouldn’t have been happy if it was the other way around.  No pushing or shoving, just something he said from a few feet away.  Yes, the USC guy should have been smarter and stayed away from the Cal sideline.  But at the same time, unless he said something incredibly egregious, that’s a pretty harsh call on USC.
  • In the podcast (yet to be published) I talked about how the 1st USC touchdown was a really good play call, putting Bynum in a really tough spot to cover the WR.  What was noticeable on the re-watch was that Cal changed from having the DB follow the receiver to doing a “shift” of receiver assignments when USC brought one across the formation (most of the time).  A wise decision.
  • Something I forgot to mention on the podcast… boy was that stadium quiet starting at about 7 minutes left in the game.  The USC fans were stunned!
  • Another forgot to mention in the podcast… another game where the opponent wasting timeouts in the 2nd half came back to bite them.  And both were really stupid.  Why would they go for it on 4th and 2 from that point on the field?  You can’t get in a play call in 40 seconds?
  • USC really did leave a lot of points on the board.  The fake field goal.  The fumble in the redzone.  The score should have been at least 20-0 if not 24-0 at halftime.
  • For some reason it was more obvious to me watching the game on TV how much the field-position game was not in the Bears favor in the 1st half.  They really shot themselves in the foot a couple of times, particularly that horrible kickoff.

More thoughts to come…

McIlwain sinks the Bears again

When will Wilcox and staff realize that McIlwain can *NOT* be trusted with the ball for more than a play or two?  I think the Bears would have won that game had Garbers been in on that drive that resulted in an INT in the endzone.  Instead, everything went sideways from that point.

GAH!

(If you’re looking for a silver lining… the Bears continue to show they can compete with anyone in the conference.)

Looks like I was right to be afraid

UCLA just kicked Cal’s butt up and down the field.  While on the one hand, UCLA is better than people think, I’m starting to lose confidence in the Cal coaching staff.  There’s more talent on this team than what they’re showing.  The defense is starting to look disinterested in giving a full effort if the offense isn’t going to carry its share of the load.

That was a horrible performance.

If they don’t turn a HUGE corner this week, they’re going to lose in Corvallis and the wheels are going to come off the bus.  Then we’ll be dreaming of last year’s success as the Bears end up going 0-9 in conference or at best 1-8 with that odd upset that can’t be explained (like last year’s WSU performance).

Post Arizona Rant

I couldn’t be more livid right now.  Wilcox… KICK THE STINKING FIELD GOAL!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!?!

Everything that went wrong with the end of that game started with the failed 4th down conversion when they *SHOULD* have kicked the easy field goal to tie the game.  The Bears were dominating on both sides of the ball.  The Arizona offense didn’t score a point after the 1st quarter.  The Cal offense was moving the ball.  Why would you take the high-risk path like that?

This is two Arizona games in a row where Wilcox took the “win it now” philosophy (last year it was going for 2 in the 2nd overtime) and both times it has cost the Bears the game.

All of this is particularly true with McIlwain under center.  You think he throws those two interceptions, forcing the ball where it shouldn’t have been thrown, if the game was tied?  No, he plays smarter if the game is tied.  Instead he plays desperate and makes two stupid decisions because he knows it is drive and score or lose.

And then to add insult to injury, none of the breaks went Cal’s way.  That 1st INT for a TD with the fumble was blind luck from start to finish.  And then the Bears got a horrible call on the sack turned fumble where McIlwain’s hand was clearly moving forward and clearly in a throwing motion.  The key is to look how his hand releases the ball.  It releases it in a spiral motion as if he was throwing.  For a moment I was upset Wilcox didn’t challenge that, but with only one TO left and the marginal nature of that booth review, I can make my peace with that one.

But I absolutely *CAN NOT* make my peace with Wilcox’s ridiculous decisions to take the “win it now” attitude in games when the Bears have the upper hand.  Last year, it was ignoring how much overtime games tend to go in favor of the home team, particularly the longer they go.  This year it’s not recognizing the Bears are dominating on both sides of the ball.

It is completely inexcusable to lose a game that you’re leading by 4, dominate statistically in the 2nd half, but somehow manage to lose by 7.  There’s no excuse for it and it completely came down to poor game management by the coaches, putting the team in a bad situation.

Final gripe: I hate, hate, hate, hate, hate, hate, hate, hate these 7 PM or later games.  I’m supposed to go to sleep now!?!  And I’ve got to be up early for 7:30 AM Mass. ARG!?!

And to add insult to injury on that front, next Saturday I’ve got an all-day commitment where I could have barely got to Berkeley for a 7 PM game.  So it was the one game I was hoping for a late start.  Do I get it? Of course not.  No, it’s just all the other games.  The one time I want it to be late, it’s at 4 PM. GAH!

(mid-morning addendum: Sure enough, I didn’t get to sleep until around 1 AM and then when my alarm went off, I slept through it for over an hour (admittedly I set a quiet alarm), and then woke up with *barely* enough time to shower and make it to mass.  Phew!)

Sunday morning thoughts post BYU

Some various random thoughts the day after…

  • Still feeling pretty good about the potential of this team after last night.  The offensive play calling, when it was good, which was that one 1st half drive and most of the 2nd half, was very promising.  And of course the defense, lights out.
  • On the “let’s not get ahead of ourselves” front.  BYU’s win over Arizona looks pretty unimpressive after Arizona got throttled by Houston of all teams.  That might mean that BYU’s narrow victory over them wasn’t nearly all that good and thus mean Cal’s win was not that impressive either.  The same goes for UNC which got destroyed by East Carolina.  If we only beat them by 7 and ENC beat them by 22 (41-19), isn’t that a bit worrisome?
  • And while we’re worrying, I’ve got to believe that if the Bears keep letting the opposition claw their way back close enough where an onside kick could doom the Bears, one has to think that eventually the Bears are going to lose one they shouldn’t.
  • But of course, wins are wins and these teams have P5 size and competency.  Even if they’re mighty flawed, we’re still looking at a Cal team that can beat at least mediocre to weak P5 teams.
  • Oregon, who is very untested themselves, will be Cal’s first test.
  • I think we’ve seen the last of Bowers, sans injury.  Heck, even then, McIlwain might be our full time QB should Garbers get injured.
  • Heck, I won’t count out McIlwain being our primary starter.  His throwing ability was much better than I thought.  He didn’t show us that much because he was only asked to throw a little bit, but what we saw had promise.
  • Winning all 3 non-conference games will be a great start to this season.  With the parity and weakness in the conference, only having to go 3-6 in conference to get to a bowl should be very doable.  Arizona, UCLA and Oregon State should all be games the Bears should win if they play to their potential.  Add in WSU and Colorado as games the Bears should be competitive, and one should expect at least 3 conference wins.  And I’m not even going to count out an upset against Oregon, USC, UW or Stanford (who, sad to say, is looking pretty good right now).

BYU live blog

Since i didn’t pre-announce this, I don’t know if anyone will follow along, but I’ll do it anyway.  (click on the blog title or here to see the full commentary from last night.)

UNC game re-watch

I watched the game on TV today after having gone to the game on Saturday.  So “re-watch” is not entirely accurate.  It was my first time watching the TV broadcast… but the 2nd time watching the game.  In any case, here is my as-it-happened commentary:

  • Coming out in the first defensive possession, the Bears looked pretty good. Bynum’s defense on the 3rd down throw was textbook.
  • Boy, it speaks to how many QBs graduated in the Pac-12 that Bowers has the most passing yards per game of any returning QB.
  • Both of the 1st two plays were outside runs to the right. It felt a little predictable.  Now, admittedly, what caused the drive to stall was a weak throw and unimpressive grab by Hudson on what should have been an easy 3rd and 3 conversion.
  • Goode was a strong X-factor all day. What looked like a pretty good wide receiver screen got blown up by him on UNC’s 2nd possession, putting an end to the drive.
  • Boy did the offensive line not look good on that first sack. Live I thought that Bowers should have known he didn’t have time to pass that ball, but on watching it again, if the line had done their job, he would have had a lot more time than he did.
  • All 3 of Bowers throws thus far haven’t been very good. The WR made the adjustment on the 3rd one, but it still wasn’t quite in the right place.
  • Another 1st down, another run.
  • Another pass to Hudson, another drop. Both have been contested passes (bad reads by Bowers?) but TEs need to be able to make those sorts of catches.
  • Another deep pass attempt in Bynum’s direction and yet again he’s on his WR like glue and forces the breakup.  He had a great day.
  • But hiding amongst the good plays is a lot of incompetence by UNC’s offense. Receivers falling down.  Screens where the intended target doesn’t turn around.  Lot’s of mistakes.  Don’t think UNC’s offense is any good.
  • Another Cal 1st down, another run up the middle.
  • It feels like the old Holmoe, run-run-3rd and long. Just not good play calling.  Too much predictable stuff.
  • Best Cal play thus far: interception of UNC and the Bears get the ball inside the UNC 25.
  • Another Cal first down, another Laird run up the middle.
  • Garbers is now in at QB. As much as Bowers didn’t do anything positive, he also didn’t do anything worthy of being pulled.  Clearly the plan was to have Garbers come in.
  • Garber’s 1st pass is overthrown. As is his 2nd pass, but he gets bailed out by a (deserved) PI call.
  • Now that’s a good 1st down play call. Play action when McMorris as a fullback ends up as a pass to McMorris in the flat.
  • And that sets up the touchdown run as the UNC defense is more hesitant on 2nd down to not bite too hard on the run in case it’s another play action. Gotta give the OC props on that sequence for doing a good job.
  • I’m loving our new kickoff guy!  It’s been a while since I’ve been so satisfied with kickoff depth and positioning.
  • Great play by Goode again. Getting up to bat down the pass when it was clear he wasn’t going to get there on the blitz.
  • Wharton was trying too hard to break the big punt return. Sometimes you just have to take the yards the defense gives you.
  • UNC was not fooled by any of Cal’s screen plays.
  • Bad throw on another Garbers throw. This time not finding the right spot on a quick WR comeback.
  • Interesting to see the number of designed run plays (or option plays) with Garbers here on this drive.
  • Garbers also looked to be having a little bit of a difficult time progressing through his reads. He looked a little confused by UNC’s coverage.
  • Goode continues his dominance with his interception and runback for a touchdown.
  • So the score is 14-0, but 10 of those 14 points come from the INT’s. All the offense did was make sure they got those few yards on the short field to turn the FG into a TD.
  • Bowers is back in and throws a reasonably good ball on 1st (and notice, the defense was not well prepared for throwing on 1st down.)
  • Another Bowers completion. This one a bit low, particularly for short over the middle pass that needs to be the type that makes it easy for the WR to run after the catch.
  • And then, because Bowers had thrown 2 in a row, it’s no surprise that Laird has his biggest run of the day. UNC was clearly playing run first and it was very disappointing that Cal didn’t pass more early to loosen up the defense.
  • OK, it was the right call that Laird stepped out at the 14 yard line, yet it was frustrating to me because late in the game UNC did the same thing pretty much at the exact same spot on the field but it didn’t get reviewed.
  • Bowers had a shot at picking up a key 3rd down conversion, but puts it too far outside for Hudson to get a toe down in bounds. Hudson, for all his early poor catches, did a great job on that one and almost pulled it off.
  • OK, I forgot something I used to do… and I’ll pick it up from here. At what point we’re at in the game for each comment.  Sorry about that.
  • (5:41 2nd) UNC gives Cal another gift of an interception. All they had to do was play center field on a pass that never should have been thrown, but made all the easier by overthrowing the WR so he can’t even make a play on it or break it up.
  • (5:02 2nd) Good throw by Bowers on 2nd and 9. A nicely timed out and right on the WR’s numbers.
  • (4:20 2nd) Although another completion by Bowers, it was a bit behind Noa and slowed his progress. The play after that, a good out pattern by Bowers.  3 completions in a row, 2 of which were right where they should be.
  • (2:33 2nd) A wise TO by UNC. Waited until it was clear what Cal was going to run (a dive by McMorris) and then called the TO.  Although Cal picked up the 4th down conversion after the timeout, they were forced to change the play call because of the TO.
  • Bowers makes a bad throw (perhaps even the wrong read) and Noa can’t get to the ball.
  • Another bad throw by Bowers. After a good sequence, he’s now off his mark.
  • (1:05 2nd) I’ve been very impressed by the secondary’s ability to get off their blocks and get to the runner.
  • (1:00 2nd) Why was Cal trying to get one more possession at the end of the 1st half? Why not just go to the locker room and talk it over?
  • (0:41 2nd) Bowers next throw was low, but I’m inclined to thing that was intentional to put it in the only place that it was safe from an INT. But it was probably a bad read.  His next pass was also a bad read and a much more dangerous one with 3 defenders in the area.
  • (end of the half) So a dominating, in every sense of the word, performance by the Bears.  Only gave up one 1st down and 38 total yards. But the offense was pretty inconsistent.  Just one meaningful drive that netted 3 points.  Otherwise it was mostly the defense that got Cal the points.  Bowers didn’t do much in the last couple of possessions to make his case to play in the 2nd half.  Bad reads, bad throws.
  • (13:54 3rd) Garbers throw on 3rd down was overthrown and lacked the touch needed for an over the top throw.  My guess is it was also the wrong read, but on 3rd and long, sometimes  you don’t have a lot of options.  That one would have at least been long enough for a 1st down, even though it was low percentage.
  • (12:59 3rd) UNC definitely hurt themselves with penalties. Finally they’re ahead of the sticks and they get a false start.
  • (11:22 3rd) Good play call by UNC, a reverse. The Cal defense did slightly over pursue to help make that play work.  (But that’s how the play is supposed to work from an offensive perspective.)
  • (10:10 3rd) Jeez, a whole sequence of penalties here.  Again, nobody should be thinking the dominant Cal defensive performance is all about the Bears.  It helped that UNC was pretty weak offensively.
  • (9:55 3rd) Now is when the Bears go back to being too conservative on offense. Another run-run-3rd and long.  This time Garbers makes a nice throw on 3rd and 7 on a slant to get a 1st down, but it’s not the type of play calling I want to see.
  • (9:43 3rd) Nice sideline fade by Garbers to his tallest receiver.
  • (5:47 3rd) UNC completes their 1st long pass of the game. It was a good pass, but contested by 2 defenders.  Every once and while that is going to work, but not often the way the defense was playing.
  • (4;39 3rd) UNC converts the FG based solely on the long pass. Cal 17, UNC 3.
  • (3:38 3rd) Garbers significantly under throws his receiver on a fade down the outside. Luckily the DB clobbered the WR and Cal got the PI call.  But it should have been a big pass reception if Garbers had hurled it far enough.
  • (2:12 3rd) Cal hurt themselves with a couple too many false start penalties throughout the game.  When the offense is mediocre, there just can’t be any stupid penalties.
  • (1:43 3rd) Garbers definitely has better wheels than Bowers. He’s had a few nice scrambles and a couple reasonably good designed run plays.
  • (0:22 3rd) Garbers throws a nice out to Laird on a pass out of the backfield and then a nice cut up field to score a TD. This was the only legitimate drive of the field by the Bears, and I guess it is notable that Garbers led it, not Bowers.  Cal 24, UNC 3
  • Now, who would have thought at this point the game was going to end up being close?
  • (0:03 3rd) UNC has their first inside run of any merit. A 9-yard QB keeper where it didn’t look like it would go for much, but ended up being a significant pickup.  A sign of things to come…
  • (14:55 4th) Another Cal INT on another poor throw by UNC. One of the upsides of Cal playing so much zone is that they’re looking back towards the ball more often to make these sorts of plays.  In man coverage, that’s less likely.
  • (13:27 4th) Overthrow by Garbers on fade down the sideline. Cover-2 defense and a bit late to squeeze it in the window.
  • (13:18 4th) Garbers sacked on one you’d think he would have seen the blitz coming as his head was turned that way. Would have been nice to see him recognize the blitz and throw it away.
  • (11:43 4th) Another sizeable run for UNC. I think the Bear defense was starting to show its tiredness at this point.  Also notable was that UNC was running at a much faster tempo than earlier in the game.
  • (10:35 4th) UNC converts a 4th down on a traditional option play. I shouldn’t be too judgmental as Cal doesn’t see a lot of it.  But I still have the feeling that earlier in the game Cal would have stopped that.  It sure feels like Cal was getting tired.
  • This was also the play that Goode went out with his foot injury. So point being, the run game was already softening up before he went out.  Of course, losing him doesn’t help.
  • (8:43 4th) Definitely the tempo of UNC was neutralizing the defense. They couldn’t attack as much.  They were much more vanilla on defense.  Perhaps it was because they didn’t gameplan for fast tempo, but they’ll need to fix that.
  • (7:19 4th) OK, one of the most overlooked plays of the game.  4th down just outside the Cal redzone.  The UNC QB scrambles with the ball.  He definitely steps out at the 17 yard line when I freeze on the right frame, although admittedly close.  He needed to get to the 15.  His next step is at the 15 and a half, just short of a first down and he’s *CLEARLY* out.  His foot is in the middle of the white line.  With none of it on the green.  It’s horribly bad out of bounds from a marking it perspective.  Yet the ball is placed at the 12 yard line.  Now, admittedly, they get to the line quick to prevent the review, but it was a horribly bad call.  And remember, it was 4th down, so the Bears should have gotten the ball.
  • Plus, and this is less clear on video, but the Bears were quite surprised at the spot and the lack of a replay, so they were not very prepared for that next play, which was an easy 5 yard run for 2nd and 5 from the 7. That’s a great place to be when it should have been a turnover on downs.
  • And are the announcers even remotely aware of all of this? Nope!  Even after they go to a commercial break, no mention of the missed call.
  • And imagine how different this game is with 7 minutes left, UNC down 24-3 and the Bears have the ball.
  • (6:31 4th) UNC punches it in for a touchdown and the Bear defense all of a sudden is getting beaten on the line and the inside runs are working. Cal 24, UNC 10.
  • (6:26 4th) The first onside kick, although a Cal recovery, was not played particularly well by the Bears.  A sign of things to come.
  • (4:45 4th) Disappointed by the play calling on 2nd and 3rd and short for the Bears. If you can’t get a 1st down from 2nd and 3, you’ve got a problem.  And it’s not right to do a sweep run on 3rd and 1.  There’s just too many people close to the line on a play like that.  Better to play it straight up in the middle and trust your offensive line to get the push they need to.
  • (3:50 4th) UNC back with the ball.  On their first play (although the play was called back due to penalty) there were a lot of missed tackles. This defense was tired.
  • (2:50 4th) It may be a bit unfair to criticize the run defense excessively at this point. They were playing 2 deep safeties, which means there’s just not enough guys close to the line in a 3-4 defense, particularly when one of your LB’s is out wide on a WR.  It’s a prevent defense forcing UNC to use up a lot of clock to score.  Not a horrible idea when Cal is up by 2 TDs.  But perhaps I’m being too harsh on how they couldn’t stop the run.  To some degree that was by design.
  • But they still look tired to me.
  • (1:20 4th) I really loath announcers when it comes to PI. They have no idea what they’re talking about (a few exceptions aside).  Bynum did indeed commit a PI, but it wasn’t the contact, it was the holding of the shoulder and preventing the WR from turning to the ball.
  • (1:13 4th) A great pass and WR battle by UNC to get a TD.  They deserved that one.  Bynum did his best to make a play on a perfect throw, but it wasn’t enough.  Cal 24, UNC 17
  • (1:10 4th) The 2nd onside kick… I have to admit that I was not aware of the illegal block rules for an onside kick. While probably technically a foul, the Bears got lucky on that one.  It seems to me that the offense should be engaging the kicking team well before 10 yards to force them to evade their players or risk a foul.
  • And it just seems like Cal didn’t have enough players on that side. Why 2 guys in the middle?  Put one there to protect the middle kick, but put 5 on each side… or even when you know which way they want to go, go 6 and 4 to the “strong” side.
  • Final score: Cal 24, UNC 17

Overall my impression is about the same as it was in my OTRH podcast.  The Bears are pretty annemic on offense and not as well conditioned on defense as I’d like.  I’m worried.  Bowers played worse than I had realized but Garbers played about as bad as I thought.  In other words, we’re pretty mediocre at QB.  I’m pretty worried this is going to be a long season, that UNC is a pretty bad team and the fact that the Bears had such a hard time putting them away is really troublesome.

BYU will be a much stiffer test.

UCLA mid-game thoughts

End of 1st Quarter:

Jeez, what a bunch of wasted opportunities.  The Bears are getting worse and worse and worse as the season progresses at finishing drives.  It’s unacceptable to have the ball inside the 30 twice and only get 3 points.  It should be at *LEAST* 10 points so far against this *VERY* uninspired UCLA team.  (The Bears aren’t looking particularly inspired either (on offense anyway))

Update early in 2nd quarter:  Yet another trip to the redzone, and only 3 more points to show for it.  *COMPLETELY* unacceptable.

Half time:

I’m so ticked off with Cal’s effort right now.  It’s unbelievable that Cal has been inside the 30 4 times but only has 9 points.  I’m starting to lose confidence in Bowers.  He’s had plenty of time back there.  Don’t tell me there’s no one open.

The defense is doing better, but still seem to have inconsistent effort,  On some downs their dominating, but then they’re giving up too many long pass plays even after getting UCLA substantially behind the sticks.  One of the touchdowns came when the Bears had the punt, but then had a running into the kicker (for no good reason) give UCLA a 2nd chance on the field.  The score should be 20-10 Bears.

(Side note, I’m also sick of these UCLA biased announcers who don’t know an obvious targeting foul (against Cal) when one happens, among other idiotic commentary.)

Beginning of 4th quarter:

Wanted to wait to see how the end of quarter drive ended up.  Cal has now had SIX trips inside the 30 and only scored 17 and it required going for it on 4th down to get the touchdown.  Unbelievably bad short field offensive performance.  Bowers looks confused and overwhelmed.

Mid 4th quarter:

We’re up to SEVEN!?! short possessions and only 20 points.  The play calling from first and goal from the 5 was ridiculous.  UCLA was loading the box, and obviously so.  You don’t just stuff it into the middle twice and then have one shot at the pass.  If you’re going to run, you have to do some sort of mis-direction.  I’m getting more and more and more disappointed with the way this is going.  The Bears should be KILLING and I mean DESTROYING UCLA right now, particularly with Rosen out in the 2nd half.  Instead their down seven and are just now starting to show some urgency.

Urgency that should have been there from the opening snap.

End of game:

I’m so stinking ticked off.  There’s no excuse for losing this game.  UCLA played uninspired crummy football and Cal handed the game to them with horrible play of their own, starting with the coaching staff’s hyper conservative play calling and complete lack of urgency until mid-way through the 4th quarter.  It’s like they didn’t realize they were behind.  And guess what, tying it with 2 minutes left is a great way to lose the game (as what happened).

And don’t get me started on the over-aggressive play calling by the defense that left them open to big plays on the final drive.  There’s no reason to continue the strong blitzing game when the result can be 10 and 15 yard gains.  No, you let your 4 rusher try to get pressure and you keep the plays short and in front of you.

GAH!?!   What a ridiculous end to a season, that in many ways mimics it.  There was promise, but between bad execution at poorly timed moments and poor leadership from the coaching staff at critical moments, the team just couldn’t win enough of the close ones.  There’s no reason this team couldn’t have been 8-4 with just a little bit better play, game planning and coaching.

And someone, for the love of Pete, please tell Wilcox that ON THE ROAD YOU MUST, and I repeat *MUST* START THE GAME WITH A SENSE OF URGENCY!?!  STOP PLAYING SO TENTATIVE ON THE STINKING ROAD!?!

(and yet somehow, amidst my teeth grinding frustration, I’m optimistic about the future.)

Oregon State Sunday evening watch

Here’s my thoughts on watching the game Sunday evening:

  • OSU sideline looks pretty pumped up to start the game.  They know this is one of their few shots at a win this season.
  • Bears sure looked fooled on OSU’s first play.  I haven’t done a detailed look, but it sure feels like for at least the last few games, Cal has not been well defensively prepared for the 1st few plays/possession.
  • It sure seems like the linebackers have been playing further back the last few games.  They’re playing a good 7-8 yards behind the line on this 1st possession.  Generally that’s good for underneath pass coverage but not so good for run defense nor for their “come from anywhere” blitzing scheme.
  • Wow, the Bears were sure fooled by the 2-pass touchdown play.  Not a very good defensive possession.  The Bears are going to need to start stronger defensively in their last two games if they want to win.  Bears down early: 0-7 with 11 minutes left in 1st quarter.
  • Bears offense in good rhythm early.  I liked Bowers reading of the pass coverage on 3rd and 7.  That looked like his 3rd read and the right decision to Wharton.
  • The Bears have been using the inside WR screen a lot in the redzone, generally with good results.  (Although in this case it was negated by a personal foul.)
  • Lots of penalties on this 1st Cal offensive drive.
  • Boy, Oregon State is sure leading with their helmet a lot on their tackles.  Have they not learned about the targeting rules?
  • Nice run by Laird for a TD with pretty good zone blocking by the O-Line.  Score tied 7-7 with 8 minutes left in the 1st quarter.
  • The Bears have sure been “lucky” with kick off returns against them being called back by penalties.
  • Overall good pressure by Cal D-Line on OSU pass plays.  If Cal can slow the running game and force OSU to pass, they’ll be in good shape.
  • Cal O-Line is opening nice holes and getting a good push against OSU.  So far very different than last year when OSU dominated the trenches on both sides.
  • Laird has good patience, which does him well most of the time, but he needs to learn in the redzone that holes close quicker and negative plays are more troublesome.  Down there, you need to pound it and do it quicker.
  • We haven’t seen as much of Enwere lately.  Even on some ‘pound it’ downs.  (although here he comes in now on 2nd and goal)
  • Holy smokes did 2nd and goal go bad!  12 yard loss.  But then Bowers throws a brilliant fade (his touch is getting better) to Wharton on 3rd and goal from the 14.  Great recovery after a disaster of a play.  Bears up 14-7 near the end of the 1st quarter.
  • Lots of drops by OSU receivers today.  They’re kinda shooting themselves in the foot the last couple drives.  This game could easily be a shootout if OSU could execute.
  • Another couple big Laird runs.  The way this is going, there is no reason to ever throw the ball.
  • Matt Anderson has been back to his old form after a tough few games to start the season.  Bears up 17-7 with 12 minutes left in 2nd quarter.
  • Bad decision by OSU to go for it on 4th down, even though they got lucky and got a good spot.  But they’re only down 10 in the early 2nd quarter and it’s on their side of the field.  I wonder why Wilcox didn’t challenge?  It seemed the evidence was pretty good to overturn it.  Probably just didn’t think it was important enough.  If the game got tighter later, you’d hate not to have that in your pocket anymore.
  • OSU doing a good job with their option running game on this next drive.  Cal’s doing a good job of assignment football, making sure all the options are covered, but it means there’s not as many guys to cover the main run threat.  Bears lead down to 17-10 with 5 minutes left in the 2nd quarter.
  • Wharton has been getting a lot more attention from Bowers now that Noa is being double covered a lot by defenses.  That’s maturity by a QB to hit other WRs when his favorite isn’t open.  Bowers is still young, but is maturing nicely this year.  I’m hopeful that he could be really good in the future.
  • Cal is mostly dominating this game, but OSU is within 4 with 1 minute left in the half.  As a general statement, I feel like Cal hasn’t been very efficient the last few games.  Also, yet another game where the defense gives up end of 1st half points.  Bears only up 17-13 wit one minute left in the half.
  • Wow, great catch by Wharton.  That was an interesting scenario.  Did Bowers mis-throw it, or did he throw it to the hole in the zone coverage and force Wharton to come back to that hole?
  • And Cal steals back 3 points with another good Anderson kick.  Bears lead 20-13 at the half.
  • Bears again going back to the run game with success to start the 2nd half.  But again, the Bears are only up 7 despite statistically and visually dominating the 1st half.  Ever since the Arizona game I feel Cal has been “inefficient” on both sides of the ball.  Somehow the points just aren’t coming for the offense and somehow the defense is giving up more points than they feel like they are (the big play was a big part of that for Arizona and Colorado).
  • OSU really was putting their helmet down on defense.  It’s like they didn’t know about the targeting rules.  2 players out of the game, but there could have been a couple more.
  • Bears fumble in the redzone and give up the ball.  More signs of that inefficiency.
  • Bears force a 3 and out on the next possession, with a good job of corralling the underneath stuff to not go for many yards (although gets lucky with a missed catch on 3rd down).
  • Bowers has been doing a good job hitting the quick slants when the defense has been giving them with a soft safety coverage.
  • The offensive line is doing a good job picking up blitzes today.
  • But then Bowers makes the absolute wrong decision on a read-option for a “sack” (statistically).
  • And again, Cal not being efficient.  They get the ball well on the OSU side of the 50 yet just get a handful of yards and kick the field goal.  For how much the ball has been on the OSU side of the field, the score should at least be 30, if not more.  Instead the Cal lead is only 23-13 with 6 minutes left in the 3rd quarter.
  • The OSU QB did a pretty good job finding the deep hole in the Cal zone and dropping a pass in exactly the right spot on their next possession.  That’s the first big play the Bears have given up all game, which is a nice change from the last couple weeks.
  • OSU uses the run game to get in the endzone.  I suspect Cal’s defensive redzone numbers aren’t that good either.  Cal lead down to THREE!  Considering the nature of the game, there’s no excuse for the score to be this close: 23-20 with a few minutes left in the 3rd.
  • The Bears have been running the ball surprisingly little in the 2nd half.  It sure doesn’t seem like OSU is loading the box and forcing Cal to throw.  Seems like the Bears have abandoned it a bit considering how well it has been working.
  • Bowers hits another deep fade to the endzone and Cal is back up by 10: 30-20 at the end of the 3rd.
  • I know it’s hard to be an announcer, a lot harder than it seems, but some times… how can the color guy be saying “that’s tough” for an obvious PI call.
  • The Cal offense is showing good balance right now.  They’re leading with the run and Laird, and then going to the pass when OSU starts to bite on it.
  • Cal finishes off a drive built on the run (with just enough passing to keep the OSU defense honest) with Enwere pounding it into the endzone.  Bears up 37-20 with 10 minutes left in the game.
  • It feels like the Bears have been able to extend so quickly because they’ve won the conditioning battle.  OSU can no longer give 120%, particularly on defense, and Cal is having their way with them.
  • Ahhhhh… it sure feels good to hear Nall only had 35 yards at this point in the game (and that’s all he got).  If you needed a reason to still feel good about getting rid of Dykes… (last year he had 221 against Cal)
  • OSU has been quietly building up a number of big plays, particularly as the game wears on.  A few of them have been because the Cal defense is playing soft to contain OSU, but still, it’s worrisome to see the big-play trend continuing into a 3rd game.
  • OSU kicks a field goal to close it to 37-23 with 6 minutes left in the game.
  • I’d have Laird out of the game at this point.  He’s carried the ball 30 times.  Give him some rest and save him from injury.  It’s not like we don’t have a senior in his final home game nor a couple of young guys who could use some more experience.
  • Cal never punted in the entire game.  One failed 4th down conversion at the Cal 40 and one fumble in the redzone were the only two drives that didn’t end in points.  Yet at the same time, 3 field goals and a missed redzone opportunity.  Games with no punts generally shouldn’t only have 37 points.
  • Overall, it feels like the score should have been 45 to 13 based on how the teams played and the stats.  Cal is going to have to be more efficient in their last two games to get that crucial 6th win.

Disgusted

That was BY FAR the worst half of football under Wilcox thus far.  How do you give up a 3rd and 17 in the redzone!?!  How do you give up *ANOTHER* 3rd and 17 when you have them pinned on their goalline!?!  How do you give up two over the top plays for long yardage when on both 3rd and 17’s the reason you gave them up is you were playing too soft!?!

And the offense, how do you *NOT* know that it is VERY hard to throw over the top at altitude!?!

It’s a miracle the Bears are only down 13.