OK, this Bear Fan is finally coming out of hibernation…

Not that I haven’t been busy. We’ve got another new Crawford in the house as of July 5th. This time it’s a girl, so apparently I only have girls when the Bears have a losing season. 🙂 In any case, the last two months have gone by in a flash, so sorry for the even slower than usual off-season.

I’ll be posting pretty regularly from here on out. I hope to get in a few looking back posts before the season starts (I need to clear some space off the Tivo before I can put more games on it, after all). And of course I’ll have my game-by-game predictions and general thoughts. Plus I’m sure Jason and I will do our regular podcasts.

But until then, I’ll start with this:

I don’t think there’s been a year since 2002 where there have been as widely different expectations between fans. It’s no surprise really. Last year was a huge letdown. We lost a lot of key players. But yet somehow in the middle of that, there’s a lot of reasons for hope. With, two new QB’s in the hopper (one coming of age (Bridgeford), one transferring in (Maynard)), and with our young defense has a lot of returners back and our offensive line looking pretty experienced, it’s not outrageous to think that this year has most of the pieces needed to be something special.

And if that weren’t enough, you’ve got the external factors. The “neutral” site game against Fresno State. Home games in San Francisco. The 1st year of the Pac-12 which includes and playing new teams, not playing other teams, and compressing the schedule by one week (to make room for the conference championship game). It all makes for a lot of wildcards.

But amongst all those wildcards you can call me cautiously optimistic. I’m fairly confident this will be a bowl eligible team, particularly if the Bears get through the non-conference games unscathed (something I expect).

I also expect more consistent play. The defense isn’t going to have games like the USC or Nevada games this year. The offense won’t fall off a cliff if any one person gets injured (not like last year with Riley).

But consistent play and bowl eligible might look a lot more like 7-5 mediocrity than challenging for that Rose Bowl berth we’ve all been dying for.

(Update at Noon: misspoke in the first bullet of the “not about the road” list… correcting to match intent.)

OK, so the Bears finally win on the road, the 20-13 win over otherwise hapless WSU isn’t inspiring a lot of confidence in the Bears on the road. So, what’s the truth?

Arguments for stinking on the road:

• At home 4-0, road 1-4… it doesn’t get any more simple than that
• The OSU team that crushed us in Corvallis, lost to the UCLA team we destroyed at home
• The ASU team we crushed at home, lost a nailbiter to USC in the same stadium we got destroyed by USC
• That close loss to Arizona in Tucson looks less impressive after they got killed by Stanford

Arguments that it’s not all about the road:

• Every team we lost to is in front of us in the Pac-10 standings and every team we beat is in front of BEHIND us (something only Oregon at the top and bottom feeders WSU and ASU, and then us, can say)
• Every team we beat is behind us in the Pac-10 standings
• Nevada was not a blowout.. it was close and Nevada extended in the end. Plus, their offense is very tough to defend…
• The OSU loss can be ignored because of the Riley injury
• Based on the above two bullets, the only “true” egg-lay is USC

The point of this being, it’s not as simple and one sided as it would appear. I still think there’s something about the road that is tough for this team, but it’s not as clear cut as it seems on the surface.

I just read this article over at the Daily Furd and was struck by this quote:

In three seasons, he took one of the worst teams in the nation, churned out eight wins and booked the Cardinal a bowl game for the first time since 2001. This season, at 7-1, Stanford now ranks among the nation’s elite and is a popular pick as the best one-loss team in the country.

Simply put, in a profession devoid of job security, Harbaugh is set for life. We could churn out four consecutive five-win seasons and Jim could replace practice with Pilates, and he would still have a job.

This young man needs to take a look across the Bay before making such a stupid statement. In 3 years Cal churned out TEN wins and already had a bowl game, and a WIN under his belt. From mid-season 2007 to mid-season 2009, a stretch where Cal never missed a bowl game, is all it took for Tedford to go from “beloved coach who could ‘churn out four consecutive five-win seasons and could replace practice with Pilates, and he would still have a job.'” to “why can’t we fire this guy yet?”

Note to people like Zack Zimmerman: Football fans have surprisingly short memories. The best thing Stanford could do right now to keep Harbaugh long term is to do a face plant for the rest of the season (minus the Big Game) and then return to consistent 7-5 to 8-4 seasons. Any sustained flirting with the top-10 is bound to lead to disappointment sooner or later, particularly with the return of 5 win seasons.

It’s been nearly shocking to me how little play Riley’s injury is getting in yesterday’s loss. I mean, sure, there’s a good chance that the Bears still lose that game without the injury, but NOBODY seems to be recognizing that the Bears were only down 0-7 at that point, had just completed a big pass to get out from under the shadow of their goal line and were starting to show some progress.

Imagine that Riley leads the team down the field and scores a touchdown. Imagine the potential emotional impact that has on an otherwise uninspired defensive effort. Instead the team goes into shell shocked mode.

Am I saying they would have won? No, I’m not. But I am saying that it should be the NUMBER ONE story. Not the road or the uninspired play, the injury. The game had barely started and we were forced to play a QB with basically no playing experience for a game which there was no preparation for him to actually play. It’s a miracle they did as well as they did. Think about it, the instant he went down, we all knew the game was a lost cause, right? Why is it that nobody seems to be looking at it that way today?

So everyone please, be as critical as you want about how important it is to get your backup QB playing time or how the defensive game-plan seemed weak, but don’t forget that we have very little insight into how this game would have gone had Riley not gone down.

They’re extremely good. After watching the Bears today with Mansion and watching Oregon, even on the road versus USC, I’ve got to believe that it would take a near-miracle for the Bears to beat them in Berkeley.

I don’t care how much better we play at home.

I’ve been trying in my mind to sort out which is the worst type of loss, psychologically speaking. I see 4 candidates:

1. The game you were supposed to win and get blown out
2. The game you were supposed to win and lose in a nailbiter
3. The game you were supposed to lose and get blown out
4. The game you were supposed to lose and lose in a nailbiter

I think #3 is out of the running because you’re prepared for it. It hurts in a dull but growing in strength pain that says things are as bad as you feared.

As for the other 3, we’ve got meaningful candidates for all of them in the last handful of seasons:

• The 2007 OSU game is the most obvious example of #2. We were supposed to win, couldn’t quite get it together all day and were poised to take it back when disaster struck, stealing a #1 ranking from the Bears. It was quite painful.
• The 2009 Oregon game is the most obvious example of #1. Oregon was just barely recovering from the Boise debacle and we were poised to win the Pac-10 (sounds silly in retrospect, doesn’t it?). I’m sure I don’t need to remind anyone of this, but it was also quite painful.
• Saturday nights game is the most relevant example of #4 and jeez criminey is it painful!

In the end, I think time is the final judge of what is worst. Frankly, the 2007 OSU loss has had staying power that I doubt the 2009 Oregon game will have. It’s already been somewhat mitigated in its painfulness. But how will Arizona stack up in a few years from now?

And is it even the game on its own merits that makes it painful? Had Cal rebounded from that 2007 OSU game and gone on to win the conference and play in the Rose Bowl, would it have been as painful? What about if we’d lost to USC but otherwise been strong and gone to the Holiday Bowl?

The more I think about that, the more I think that the 2007 OSU loss would have been bad no matter what and it makes #2 the most painful type in my mind.

But those others, not so much. If we rebound from here and go on to play in the Holiday Bowl or something, the pain of this loss will be much less. If we continue to lose, this game may stick out in our minds, but is it really this game, or is it really the losing as a whole that bothers? I’d say as a whole. Same story for 2009 Oregon. It’s less terrible at this point because the Bears did rebound well and beat a number of good teams for the rest of the season. It turns out the Bears weren’t as good as we thought and Oregon was much better.

Going in yet another direction, what about that 2006 Arizona game that sticks in our minds? It fits the #4 scenario and still sticks with us. But again, I think it’s because of what happened afterward. If we had beat USC, nobody would have cared. If USC hadn’t lost to UCLA, it wouldn’t have stung so much. So yet again, it’s contingent on what happened later.

So I guess this is a long way of saying that Saturday’s debacle is highly dependent on what happens from here on out. If Cal wins out and goes to the Rose Bowl, nobody will care. If Cal goes to the Holiday Bowl and this loss didn’t keep us out of the Rose Bowl, nobody will care. But if it’s somehow formative in the outcome of the rest of the season, this one will have staying power.

If there’s a way to communicate this to the team in a whole lot fewer words, it could make a significant difference in how they recover from the blow that this loss is. Depending on how they rebound, this could either be an odd footnote or it could sting for the rest of their/our lives.

The beginning of the season depth chart was released. You can get it here.

Here are my thoughts:

• It’s amazing how much weaker the O-Line looks without MSG on the depth chart. Luckily the good news is that he’ll likely get some playing time on Saturday and will likely start vs. Colorado assuming he doesn’t get re-injured. Nevertheless, seeing Edwards back in the starting spot is worrisome, particularly at tackle. It’s no wonder that MSG is targeted for right tackle when he’s healthy.
• It’s been a slow progression, but it’s pretty official now that Sweeney has leapfrogged Mansion. If I had to guess, next year’s QB competition will be between Sweeney and Hinder unless Mansion does something substantial to improve his stock.
• Now that Michael Calvin, someone who for whatever reason I probably have more faith in than I should, has replaced Coleman Edmond (not shown on linked depth chart but reported by Okanes), I think that’s a pretty solid set of WR’s.
• Write this one down: you’re not going to see a lot of fullback play this year. Kapp, while he may have very good technique and be as good as his body allows, just doesn’t have the frame to be a good fullback. Every time I saw him in practice he looked small and over-powered. He did surprisingly well considering that, but you can’t overcome physics for too long. Stevens might end up doing a good job down the road but he’s still growing into the roll. He could be a noted strength in 2011.
• At tight end, I’ve always liked Miller and Ladner has shown lots of potential. I expect those two to continue growing as the season progresses and could be a key position in keeping defenses honest.
• I haven’t got to see the running backs practice this spring/fall, but I was pretty surprised by Sofele beating out DeBoskie-Johnson. Maybe they’re thinking that Vereen gives them the power they need, so Sofele is a better change of pace, but I’d sure like to see the power DeBoskie offers. Going further, I’ve always been very impressed with DeBoskie when I’ve seen him. While Sofele offers something sweet particularly in things like the fly-sweep, he hasn’t shown to me to be an every-down type of back. It may be when we lose Vereen that DeBoskie takes over that role, even though Sofele will have been the backup in the meantime and will still get plenty of playing time.
• I’m pretty excited about our D-Line. These 3 guys, Jordan, Payne and Owusu have the fundamentals, the size and the potential. If Jordan get’s consistent, and Payne and Owusu make the jump, this could be the Pac-10’s best defensive line.
• Linebacker is the defensive equivalent of the O-line. I look at that group and am very underwhelmed. I guess Kendricks and Holt have potential, but something in me says they won’t make the leap. Browner will be serviceable in the same way that Edwards can be, but don’t expect anything special out of him… ever.
• The much maligned secondary doesn’t look as bad to me as I feared. Hagan can still do well. I’ve always been a Josh Hill fan. In fact, those 4 safeties, Conte, Campbell, Hill and Cattouse, that’s a talented group in a position to make an impact. I think between Marc Anthony and Nnabuife there will be some mistakes that’ll cause some groans, but they’ll be serviceable, probably even more so than Edwards and Browner.

Overall, this feels like a solid group. There’s no area that’s worse that serviceable and good scheming can limit that exposure. Even when the opponent’s scheming exposes those areas, they’ll still be serviceable, so we won’t be seeing massive collapses anywhere from my view.

In the end, Riley will likely be the key. If he can make the senior leap, this could be a special season. If not, it could be another “disappointing” bowl season.

The unedited, unbalanced thoughts that rattle in my skull and make me want to travel to every game while buying tickets for the Rose Bowl right now:

• Never underestimate the senior QB: There’s a long lineage of Pac-10 QB’s who were question marks after multiple years as a starter who make a HUGE leap their senior year. Dixon at Oregon. Canfield at OSU. Boller at Cal. It’s not like Riley’s been horrible and there’s every reason to expect him to make the senior-leap. Just look at what Tedford’s been saying about him!
• Keenan Allen: The last time we signed a 5-star wide receiver his name was DeSean Jackson. He started his freshman year, even with Hawkins and Jordan around him. Allen broke into the starting lineup too. Why shouldn’t we expect great things? Add in Marvin Jones on the other side, who’s been getting better with every game plus Jeremy Ross backing them up and we could have a pretty good WR core.
• Shane Vereen is much better suited to Tedford’s offense: Best was awesome, but he wasn’t the grind it out RB that Cal’s offense depends on. When a defense was committed to stopping Best, they could. Sure Best might still break out a 95 yard run for a TD, but otherwise he’d be pretty bottled up. Vereen gets the hard yards. Everyone who saw him at the Big Game knows what he’s capable of and it’s going to open up a lot of possibilities in the passing game as Vereen continues to get 6 yards a carry even with a loaded box.
• Anthony Miller is healthy: Anthony Miller was pretty good before he got injured and never really got back to 100% in the last few games after coming back. Now he’s 100% and there’s every reason to believe he’ll be a key component in the 2010 offense.
• Defensive line ready for a breakout year: Cameron Jordan was awesome at times, inconsistent at others. Owuso and Payne have shown great potential. Those 3 are ready to come of age and be a dominating force on the defensive line.
• No substitute for experience on the O-line: Sure they’ve had some struggles and losing MSG for a while hurts, but there’s no substitute for experience and years of working together and this unit has that. All these guys have seen a lot of playing time, even Galas as a sophomore. They’re ready to take it to that next level, particularly now that it’s their 2nd year with their coach, Steve Marshall.
• Pendergast will give us the same edge the 3-4 did: Remember how that 3-4 had all the offenses in the Pac-10 off balance in 2008? Well, get ready for version 2 of that as Pendergast is going to unleash a new defense, an NFL grade defense, on an unsuspecting Pac-10 this year. That alone will make up for any deficiencies in personnel.
• Better recruits are going to make an impact: Sure we lost a guy or two, but we also kept the vast majority of the recruits of the last two years. People forget how thin our recruits were a few years back: 2007 and 2008 had only 5 4-stars. 2009 got the number to 6, but more importantly 2010 took the number to 8, and one of those is a 5-star. These players are going to make a difference, even this year. But just as importantly, it’ll make a bigger difference in years to come. Cal already has 4, 4-stars lined up for 2011.

See, things aren’t so bad in Berkeley. Why is it we’re ranked so low? Oh yeah, the final reason for hope: no high expectations to mess with the team’s psyche.

Next up: review of the depth chart

This is the first in a two part series. Reasons for hope comes next.

The unedited, unbalanced thoughts in my head that cause me to despair:

• Recruits leaving or having problems: Before this season, the last 5 star Cal got was DeSean Jackson, so Cal fans were pretty stoked when we got 2 in the off-season in Keenan Allen and Chris Martin. Then Chris Martin drops the bomb that he’s transferring to Florida. What the heck!?! Not a week later we hear that 4-star Cecil Whiteside will grayshirt for academic eligibility reasons. What the DOUBLE heck!?! Why can’t we keep our best recruits? WHY!?!
• Riley hasn’t progressed: There was so much promise for Riley after 2007, but it hasn’t really materialized into a great QB. In 2008 we shook it off because the competition between Longshore and Riley didn’t help Riley’s confidence or consistency, frequently getting swapped out for Longshore. He was also still “young”. But 2009 it was all his show and he didn’t take the next step. We’ve now waited two seasons for the next step and have seen consistent mediocrity. Only a fool would think he’s going to make the next step in 2010.
• Key players have the injury bug: The last two years Best couldn’t stay healthy, but sadly the injury bug didn’t leave with him. Matt Summers-Gavin is awesome when he’s not on the bench and he’s hurt yet again. In fact, he’s not even on the depth chart right now. Derrick Hill has had his problems and now has GOUT!?! Vereen’s been injured in camp too. Now Cattouse is injured. There’s just not the depth on this team needed to overcome these problems.
• O-Line doesn’t have what it takes: While Tepper doesn’t seem like that big of a loss, with MSG out, the line is rebuilding. Sure Edwards is a senior, but when he’s playing at one of the tackle positions, that’s a bad sign. He’s never shown the ability to be better than mediocre. Add in 2 sophomores who have talent (Galas and Schwenke) but are relatively green and this unit is going to under perform again this year.
• Secondary has problems: With Syd gone, an already dicey secondary got far worse. Hagan has shown signs of brilliance but is far too inconsistent. Nnabuife’s inexperience was clear last year, despite being a junior. He’s got upstaged by Anthony who’s got very little experience. And Conte, everyone’s favorite kicking-boy is starting at safety. If that’s not a reason for despair, what is?
• Linebackers just not there: We’ve been used to great LB’s and while this group won’t be horrible, don’t expect a return of 2008 anytime soon. Mohamed is the real deal, but outside of him, everyone else has been inconsistent or has surprisingly little experience for their age. Kendricks was hit and miss last year. D.J. Holt has seen surprisingly little playing time and is now a starter and Browner is a senior who’s just now breaking into the starting lineup. This isn’t a recipe for success.

There you have it, all the worst thoughts from the worst corners of my brain. Don’t slit your throats yet, the reasons for hope are coming soon.

I was perusing Jeff Sagarin’s computer ratings this morning. His composite ranking places Cal 17th in the country overall, though his Predictor rating (which is more accurate, though less politically correct because it takes into account margin of victory) places them 28th.

I was more amused by the ratings of the teams Cal has played this year. Talk about three stinkers: Maryland is rated 115th overall (below a few I-AA schools), Washington State is rated 119th, and I-AA Eastern Washington is rated just one slot below the Cougars at 120th.

Cal’s other wins were over Sagarin #42 UCLA and Sagarin #59 Minnesota.

In contrast, Cal’s losses? To Sagarin #3 Oregon and Sagarin #5 USC. That’s the good news. The bad news? Cal has yet to play Sagarin #14 Arizona, Sagarin #23 Stanford, and Sagarin #24 Oregon State. In terms of the pure Predictor rating, Sagarin would predict that Cal will finish the season 9-3, with wins over Arizona, ASU, and Washington and a loss to Stanford (!). I can’t really call that an unreasonable prediction. It might even be optimistic.

But as always, computers don’t play the games. So we’ll see.

For what it’s worth, Cal’s current ratings in the computer systems that make up a portion of the BCS standings: 26, 17, 27, 20, 15, and 21, for an average computer rating of 20th in the country. (Hat tip: Jerry Palm’s CollegeBCS site.)

OK, I don’t claim to believe any of these nor do I think they’re all bogus, but I thought I’d throw them out there both for discussion purposes and to show how ridiculous some of our thoughts are:

• Shouldn’t have used the gold jerseys: I know that there aren’t many who take the gold-tops seriously but this is the first time they’ve lost with them. It couldn’t have anything to do with the fact they always use them at home and they’ve until now only lost twice at home since their introduction, including one USC loss where they wouldn’t have used the gold jerseys if they had not used the throwbacks (the other loss was to Oregon State in 2007 where we wore blue). It was a huge mistake to bust them out and kill their mojo, right?
• Tedford doesn’t show enough emotion: We wouldn’t want him to throw his play-card and headset on the ground, because he could lose the team with a showing of emotion like that, but more emotion please!
• Tedford has been destroying his quarterbacks: OK, Rodgers was brought from nothing to an NFL grade QB by Tedford at Cal, but that kid just had natural talent and he would have been great without Tedford. Yeah, and maybe Longshore had a good year in 2006, but look at him in 2007 and 2008. Look at Ayoob in 2005. And look at Riley now!?! Is that the same guy who played in the Oregon Sta… er the Armed Forces Bowl?
• Ludwig is no good: Look at what Oregon fans think about him! Look at what Utah fans think of him despite his record at Utah and their undefeated season! Look at the play-calling in the last two games!
• The Bears can’t play in the wind: The Bears are only 4-4 when the wind is over 12 mph including losses to Arizona and Stanford. Tedford’s offense isn’t built to win in tough conditions like windy days and thats what sunk us on Saturday.
• The memorial turf is getting old: The Bears haven’t replaced the turf since it was installed in 2002. This turf is only supposed to be used for a handful of years before its replaced but all the money is going to to SAHPC and the stadium renovation.
• Pete Alamar is a horrible coach: Cal’s last punt return for a touchdown allowed? The 2005 game against UCLA. Alamar just doesn’t bring his A-game for the big ones and no none of the games in between count and the fact that it’s been that long doesn’t matter either.
• The Bears don’t play well on the road: And let’s be honest, that was a virtual away game with the 10k seat sold to USC including their huge section in the south endzone and the fans spattered all over the rest of the field. Add in that stupid band of theirs and that stupid song that they play over and over and over and the Bears didn’t stand a chance on the road.
• Cal’s lack of facilities is killing them: They can’t get recruits and none of the 4-stars they got are any good. Plus, look at how we were man-handled by USC and Oregon. Their guys were much bigger than ours. And Tepper is just too big for his own good.
• The game plan is too conservative: And when it’s not too conservative, it’s full of all these trick plays that never work.

OK, perhaps I’m being too cynical towards both sides, but I guess what I’m saying is that it’s a bit more complicated than any of the explanations. Yes, I’ve said all these things too, but it’s just never as simple as we want to make it.

I was completely shocked to find last night that the top search criteria that had people coming to my blog was some variant of “Fire Coach Tedford”. That was taking them to my old post titled “Fire Tedford, are you NUTS!?!”. Rather than repeat the sentiment there, which I fully stand behind, allow me to give some thoughts on the state of the Cal program and specifically it’s leader Jeff Tedford.

I believe there are 5 things that make up good head coaches: Recruiting, talent development, game planning, good assistent coaching hires and finally empire building. Let’s take them one by one:

Recruiting:
I believe Tedford has a very good sense of which recruits are truly worth their “stars” and which are all hype. It’s a similarly difficult task as NFL coaches have to determining if great college players can make the transition to the NFL, but instead it is the transition from high school to college. Additionally, I think he’s done an exceptional job of convincing a lot of very good players to come play for Cal despite our lack-luster facilities. Additionally he’s recognized the schools issues that have prevented them from recruiting the top talent and has worked diligently to address those. I’ll come back to that in “Empire Building”, but suffice it to say that ever since Cal broke ground on the SAHPC, the recruits have been pouring in like never before.

Talent Development:
While I’ll admit the inability to get another QB to perform at the level of Boller or Rodgers in a number of years is a bit baffling to me, in the big picture I think Cal has done an exceptional job of making the most of its talent. In fact, for the most part when I’ve seen Cal lose in the back of my head I’ve always known that part of the problem was the talent differential between Cal and its opponent, although due to recruiting this differential is lessening every year. I think this is part of the reason Cal fans are so upset about yesterday’s loss. They know we finally have talent that is well developed.

Game planning:
OK, I’ll admit I’ll have a tough time selling this one to those who watched yesterday’s game, but I think the history of Cal football under Tedford shows him to be a great game planner, particularly in his ability to grow and learn. Particularly if you include game preparation as part of game planning, which I do, his willingness to do things like travel to Minnesota on Thursday after how poorly traveling to Maryland on Friday worked out or changing the emphasis from the opponent to internally on the team when facing a big opponent after he did the opposite versus Tennessee in 2006, show not only that he’s a good game planner but that he’s one who’s on a mission to constantly improve. I can guarantee you that Tedford will be spending a lot of time thinking about this Oregon loss and figuring out how to address it.

Good assistant coach hiring:
I think if you look at Tedford’s overall record here, he’s done pretty well, but I must admit that this is the weakest of the 5 categories for him. Sticking by Alamar may be his worst on-going mistake, but sticking by Gregory while he completely re-tooled the defense was one of his best. Bringing in Dunbar may not have been the best decision for the short term but it helped the Bears add new aspects to their offense that have remained to this day. Cignetti is hard to judge but was not a bad hire. Just as importantly the next tier of coaches have been awesome hires including Gould, Lupoi and Marshall (or Michalczik before him), If Ludwig proves to be a good OC, and no yesterday’s game does not prove that he won’t be, I’d say Tedford has done pretty well in this category.

Empire Building:
And here’s where it all comes together. Between Tedford and Sandy Barbour Cal football has come a REMARKABLY long way in the last 7 years. Has everyone noticed the big hole in front of the stadium or the 200 million dollars in the bank for future improvements? Or what about the fact that there’s a ton of interest in Cal football like there has never been before. 8 years ago when I told some random person I was a Cal fan, they’d say “you’re a, what did you say, cow fan?” Or if I said I was going to the Bears game in Berkeley people would ask why Chicago was playing an AFC team and didn’t I mean Oakland? Now although there is the occasion oblivious person but the vast majority of people in northern California are well aware of the empire being built in the Berkeley hills. It’s the first empire to topple the formerly unbreakable grip that the radical socialist activists had on Berkeley. And here’s the most incredible part, most people in Berkeley CHEERED when it happened! There’s no doubt that Tedford has built something special in Berkeley. Even if he were to get run over by a bus tomorrow his impact on the program would endure and his influence would never be forgotten. Andy Smith, Pappy Waldorf and Jeff Tedford, those are the great names of Cal football.

Does Tedford make mistakes? Of course. He’s not God, or even a god, despite reports to the contrary. In fact, perhaps that’s the problem. Sometimes we put him up on a pedestal that nobody could possibly live up to. Nevertheless what I like about Tedford is that he’s committed to continuing to improve and to learning from his mistakes. People forget this is his first head coaching job and he’s learning as he goes. He’s got great instincts and pretty good analysis skills. Between the two he’ll continue to improve and I’m absolutely that Cal will reach the promised land and I will be able to take my children to a Rose Bowl not just before I die but before any of them are off to college themselves. Heck, I still haven’t given up hope on this year.

I believe Tedford is our guy and he’s going to get us there. We just have to be a little bit patient and keep showing up. I’ll be there next Saturday, will you?

One of the many “joys” of the off-season is finding statistics that will help predict the success of teams in the fall. There’s all kinds of them: Returning points, returning touchdowns, returning yards, returning catches, returning starters, returning tackles, returning sacks, returning pass breakups, returning interceptions, etc.

The thing all of these stats have in common, besides being about “returning” is that they’re easy to calculate. All you have to do is take the players who have stayed with the team and total their numbers for the stats you’re interested in. Any bozo can spend 10 minutes on YahooSports or ESPN or Rivals to produce these number.

What often gets overlooked is that there are a whole bunch of statistics that one would like to have but are more difficult to compile. How about: returning fullback blocks, returning O-Line pancakes… OR how about returning starts?

Particularly for the offensive line where there aren’t any NCAA tracked stats, it’s difficult to determine statistically how much strength is coming back. Leave it to someone like the Wall Street Journal to take the time to compile returning offensive line starts. Here’s the numbers for the Pac-10:

1. USC 91
2. WSU 82
3. UW 67
4. UA 66
5. ASU 56
6. UCLA 56
7. Cal 53
8. Stan 53
9. OSU 37
10. UO 20

(As an interesting aside, the way this came to me was via Oregon Duck fans who were disconcerted to see that Oregon was so low. When the first article came out they only showed a handful of examples of the better teams and who was statistically strong and who was weak. It wasn’t until yesterday that the WJS released all the data and showed that Oregon was the 3rd worst in D-I football, plus the absolute worst in a BCS conference, ahead of only Ball St. (16) and Memphis (18) overall.)

What these numbers say to me is a few things:

The first is that my concerns about this Cal O-Line are well founded. Starts are not the only metric to judge a line by, but watching them get owned by the D-Line all spring made me a little bit suspicious. True, our D-Line looks great, but it’s bad to see Cal at the bottom of the middle pack in starting experience.

The next is that this might be the year to bet against the Oregon teams. Oregon State lost a LOT last year minus a few skill players on offense. They’re key to success last year was an opportunistic offense with the Rodgers brothers and a very stout defense. Losing 8 defensive starters made me confident they were going to take a step back. Seeing their O-Line is in trouble (who was the Most Valuable Unit in the USC upset) makes me pretty confident that they’ll be a middle of the Pac team. As for Oregon, only 20 combined starts… OUCH! Luckily for them, they’ve got a great system and a lot of reloading talent so I think they’ll still be tough, but this hurt my respect for them a bit.

Of course then there is USC who always seems to have 1 key area of strength to keep them in the mix. Weak offensive year? They put up the nations most stingy defense BY FAR. Weak defensive year and breaking in a QB (this year)? They bring back an O-Line that means they won’t need to throw the ball a lot and when they do, he’ll be well protected. ARG!?! These guys are still way ahead of everyone else as a program.

The final thing is just how much line strength the supposed weaker teams are returning. WSU with 82… WOW! Then with UW and UA both in the mid-60’s one’s got to think that these three teams may be less of a pushover this year than many might be expecting.

In any case, lets hope the talent on Cal’s O-Line will be enough to make up for it’s mediocre level of experience.

Cal released its post-spring depth chart and I can’t help but wonder if it was done while all the eyes were on the NFL draft on purpose… but that could just be my conspiracy theory side talking.

In any case, you can view it here.

Some thoughts:

• I think far too much is being made of the lack of any depth for the QB. Some think that putting “OR” next to each guy is a big deal, but I don’t think so. They’re still in the same order they’ve been in all along and I just view the “OR” as a sign that Tedford is reserving the right to change the order in fall. And why shouldn’t he? None of the three is really separating themselves right now. Perhaps if Riley had finished the spring the way he started it, but he didn’t and he needs to know that he needs to get back what he had at the beginning of spring if he expects to be safe at the starting position.
• The fact that Darian Hagan still got the starting spot over Conte despite the fact that he didn’t play all spring is significant to me. The coaches must have a lot of confidence in Hagan. Conte did a pretty good job during the spring and seems to have improved a bit. Don’t be surprised to see more of him on the field, perhaps in nickle packages, perhaps substituting for a safety because of his progress.
• For the opposite case, Verran Tucker lost his starting spot while being out this spring to Marvin Jones. Jones has come a long way, so it may have been the case that was the real reason for the swap. But I also think it is clear Tucker doesn’t have the confidence of the staff that Hagan does.
• Also note that there are 7 WR’s on this “two-deep” depth chart. Between putting in a slot receiver as a third WR position, Michael Calvin got listed as 3rd on the depth chart for one of the three positions. Besides Tucker, the other player seeing his stock fall is Ross, who didn’t get the slot position which instead went to Lagemann, who was perhaps the spring’s best WR.
• Look at how big this offensive line is. With the exception of Guarnero at center at 275, everone is over 300 for an average of 312.4 (or 321.8 without the center). That’s one big line.
• The biggest surprise to me on the O-Line is that Cheadle drops to 3rd string at right-guard. Everyone else is about what I expected. The one with the biggest upside this spring was Summers-Gavin who is beginning to live up to his promise when he was recruited (and as a redshirt freshman is doing it pretty quick).
• If there’s a weak spot on the roster it is fullback. Brian Holley looked pretty sharp early in spring ball but has looked less impressive as practice wore on. Both Tyndall who seems green despite being a redshirt sophomore and Will Kapp who is small and light to be a fullback at 5-10, 210 don’t quite seem poised to challenge Holley for the spot. Hopefully one of them can step up.

Overall, I think this is one solid and deep depth chart. Generally speaking when I look at each position I look at who is 2nd string and think “tough break for that guy” instead of looking at the first team guy thinking “this is the best they can do?” Between guys like Cattouse who I’m not sure what they have to do to prove their capable to be 1st string to Ross, Payne and Conte who seem to all be in the same boat, this is a pretty deep depth chart.

Other thoughts?

The word on why Darian Hagan and Verran Tucker have not been at Spring Practice has been stated as, by me and others as “focusing on academics”. It’s what the coaching staff has been saying for why they’ve not been there.

To me, I internalized that as meaning it was a cooperative decision between the player and the coaches, perhaps even initiated by the player. I imagined a conversation that went something like this:

Coach: How are things going academically?
Player: I’ve been struggling with my (insert difficult class) class
Coach: How can I help
Player: I’m not sure, I’m just not finding time to do all of my work
Coach: Is your weight-lifting and practice taking too much time
Player: Well… I love going, but yeah, it takes a lot of time
Coach: Tell you what, you’re a strong player who’s going to start. Why don’t you take spring practice off to focus on academics
Player: Thanks coach

But Tedford when asked about it after Saturday’s scrimage (I think some were anticipating that Tucker and Hagan would at least participate in the weekend practices or perhaps even just the scrimages) Tedford’s wording of their status was a bit less chartable than the above theoretical conversation:

Yeah, they do academics when we’re at practice and then they come out at the end of practice and get their conditioning in.

Now, I don’t know about you, but that doesn’t sound like a mutually agreed upon decision to help the player. That sounds a lot more like a disciplinary action to punish them for not being successful enough for the coaching staff to approve of. I’m most definitely reading between the lines here, but it just doesn’t feel like it’s a helping thing to me. It sounds more like they’re in trouble.

Hopefully it is not so much trouble that they might be academically ineligible at any point.

(Note that I’ve reworded a few things to be more “blog friendly” from the version that was on BearTerritory.net just over a week ago)

With Spring Practice underway, the coaching staff is furiously working to make sure that they’re ready by September. While there will be plenty of emphasis on the fundamentals of coaching during Spring Ball, the coaching staff will also have a number of specific issues to address during practice. What follows is a list of the top-10 issues that must be improved upon during Spring and Fall Practice for the team to succeed in 2009.

#10 – Develop a new Long Snapper

Nick Sundberg was everything the pundits hoped he would be when he was recruited in 2005. His 4 consecutive years of near perfect snaps more than speak for themselves. With his departure, Matt Rios, the redshirt Freshman will have his chance to prove himself to be a capable replacement. However, without the game experience, Rios has a lot to learn to be ready by September to step seamlessly into Sundberg’s shoes.

#9 – Integrate Andy Ludwig’s style into Tedford’s offense

Nothing is more difficult to a team than lots of late changes to the coaching staff. Different coaches teach different ways and emphasize different aspects of the game. The departing offensive coordinator Frank Cignetti was as close to a clone of Jeff Tedford’s style and mindset as one could find. Ludwig, particularly after taking over the spread in Utah, comes in with similar challenges as past offensive coordinator Mike Dunbar who struggled with different philosophies than Tedford. The team must feel that both Tedford and Ludwig are on the same page right from the starting whistle of practice in everything from coaching style, areas of emphasis and play calling.

#8 – Find a replacement for Cameron Morrah

No loss during the off season surprised the coaching staff more than Morrah’s decision to declare for the NFL draft. They had not intended on having to find a replacement for their starting Tight End in 2009 and thus could take a more leisurely attitude to the development of their young Tight Ends, particularly Anthony Miller and Spence Ladner. With this surprise, not only will the more experienced Tad Smith have to step up his game right away, but the younger players will have to develop quickly.

#7 – Develop the power running game

For all the wonderful attributes of the 2008 Cal running game, one thing it lacked was the bruising Running Back who could be counted on to get one or two yards when absolutely necessary. Between redshirt Freshman Covaughn DeBoskie and incoming true Freshman Desarte Yarnway it seems there are candidates to take that roll. Developing them during practice will be key to keeping the chains moving in September.

#6 – Improve pass protection

With the loss of both Alex Mack and Norris Melele, there is much to be worked on for the offensive line. To make matters more challenging, even with Mack and Melele, the offensive line still struggled to give Riley and Longshore the kind of protection they needed to pick apart opposing secondaries. If the offensive line is to succeed in 2009 it will require not only replacing the run blocking skills of the 2008 squad but also completely re-tooling on pass protection.

#5 – Improve Quarterback consistency

Nothing hurt the Bears more on offense than inconsistency at the quarterback position. While head coach Jeff Tedford insists that the younger QB’s will get a shot at the starting position, nobody doubts that it is Riley’s job to loose. He is also the only Quarterback with enough game experience to even have the hope of consistent play, as all young Quarterbacks struggle with it in their first year under center. Nevertheless Riley will have to improve his consistently substantially during practice for the Bears to be able to deliver on the promise of the 2009 squad.

#4 – Solve kickoff issues

It’s no secret that the coaching staff was besides themselves with the average field position that Cal gave their opponent after kickoffs in 2008. Between a number of kicks out of bounds, short kickoffs and mediocre downfield coverage, the Bears relied on their strong defense to cover their mistakes. Between now healthy David Seawright, a year of experience under Giorgio Tavecchio’s belt and the new challenger Vince D’Amato who arrives in the fall, there is reason for hope.

#3 – Get new team leaders to emerge

The two intangible areas where the Cal Bears have fallen short during the Tedford era have been collapses after disappointing losses and handling high expectations. Many hope that 2008 was the year where the collapse issue was resolved. It was due in great part to the exceptional leadership on the team. 2009 will likely see raised expectations, expectations similar to the beginning of the 2006 season where the team struggled out of the gate in Tennessee. Team leadership will be key to the team managing expectations, particularly if the Bears win their first few games and end up in the Top-10.

#2 – Improve Linebacker rushing skills

One of the big benefits of Cal’s 3-4 defense is that it unleashes the Linebackers on the opposing Quarterback frequently enough to keep him on his toes. The key to the success of this strategy is having Linebackers who are competent pass rushers. Cal lost three very good such linebackers in the off-season. Both Mike Mohommad and Eddie Young bring enough experience at the position to keep the status quo. Finding the additional two Linebackers who can fill the shoes of Zack Follet and Worrell Williams will be key to keeping the defensive momentum developed in 2008.

#1 – Find a replacement for fullback Will To’ofu’ou

Whenever Jahvid Best and Shane Vereen busted off a big run last year one could be sure that the game film would show To’ufu’ou laying a massive hit on some unsuspecting Lineman or Linebacker, opening the hole for the ball carrier to run through. If the run game is going to be as prolific in 2009 as it was in 2008, developing a replacement for To’ufo’ou will have to be on the top of the list. Sophomore John Tyndall and Brian Holley are the leading candidates, but are still quite raw. Zack Smith, the Duke transfer, probably has the most experience but may lack some of the physical tools to fill To’ufo’ou’s shoes. Rounding out the list, Peter Geurts showed a lot of talent in practice in 2008 and Tedford mentioned having been impressed with the potential of Eric Stevens.

I’ve been meaning to write a post about Cignetti leaving and the hire of Ludwig for a while now, but finding the time has been a challenge.

First, Cignetti’s leaving:

Personally, I thought Cignetti was an awesome offensive coordinator and worked perfectly with Tedford. Those two were twins separated at birth. As such, Tedford could focus on being the head coach and could leave much more of the offensive play-calling where it theoretically belongs: in the booth. Also, Cignetti had a great balance of adding in trick plays, run vs. pass, inside vs. outside, about the only area where Cal seemed to have an tendency was throwing out of the shotgun. Well, I hate it when we run out of the shotgun so as long as Cal only starts out of the shotgun when it’s an obvious passing play, which seemed to be the becoming the norm as the season progressed, it’s not a tendency that bothers me.

So I was really high on Cignetti and his leaving was a tough one for me to take.

But the question remains, is his leaving a systematic problem of the program or just part of college football. On the one hand, we’ve lost a lot of offensive coordinators, particularly in the last 4 years. Here are the OC’s of the Tedford era:

2002: Cortez
2003: Cortez
2004: Cortez
2005: Cortez (hired away)
2006: Dunbar (pushed out)
2007: Michalczik (Demoted)
2008: Cignetti (hired away)

Really, Cal did a great job of holding onto the OC through the first few years. It’s been the last 4 where things have gotten “ugly”. Breaking it down even further, Cortez getting hired away after 2005 is completely understandable, so it need not be discussed. Michalczik was really a figure head for Tedford when he didn’t have someone he wanted to hire externally in 2007. So really, we’re talking about two coaches: Dunbar and Cignetti.

Dunbar to me was the failed experiment. Tedford wanted to bring in someone who would challenge him to introduce new ideas, specifically the spread. But Tedford didn’t realize just how much it is a matter of philosophy and when you get a pro-set guy and a spread guy trying to join their philosophies together, it’s just not going to mesh. Each is going to suggest that the solution to the current set of problems is to go further down the road of their philosophy and away from the compromise.

So that explains why Dunbar left after one year.

Which leaves Cignetti. On the surface, what we’re told is that Cignetti left Cal for his “dream job”. I think as fans we’ve got two choices: We either assume that they’re lying and something else was going on under the covers or accept that they’re telling us the truth and this really just was a unique situation. Personally, I’m inclined to believe that this was a unique situation. There was nothing in the interaction of Cignetti and Tedford both on and off the field that suggested Cignetti was anything but happy in Berkeley. It also doesn’t seem like the money he was getting in Pitt was anything to entice them away on its own right.

And because of that I’m inclined to believe there is no OC problem in Berkeley. Just one failed experiment and one unique situation.

On to Ludwig:

At first glance Ludwig has both a bunch of upsides and at the same some big downsides. First the upsides:

The first big upside is that he knows Tedford’s system. Having both taken over for Tedford at Frenso State and at Oregon when Tedford left, he’s very familiar with Tedford’s playbook, his terminology and also how it has progressed over the years. There’s no doubt that when Ludwig was handed the Cal playbook what he saw was very familiar.

There’s a subtle upside to this as well. Because Tedford hired him with the “knowing Tedford’s system” as being a big reason, there’s no debate who’s offense is going to be on the field in 2009. This is unlike Dunbar where it was a “lets join forces” operation. Ludwig knows who’s offense he’s being brought in to run.

The second big upside is the success he had at Utah. I’ve followed Utah with interest ever since Cal lost to them in 2003. They looked darned good. After Utah won their BCS bowl game in 2004, my suspicions were confirmed. But then Urban Meyer was hired away by Florida (as an aside, boy did Notre Dame miss the boat on that one…) and I figured Utah was a flash in the pan. But somehow they rebuilt into the BCS Bowl team they were this year and instrumental to that was their offensive coordinator, Ludwig. How can one argue with 37.4 points and 405.3 yards per game with a pretty good balance of pass and run (over 2000 yards each)? Plus they went undefeated and beat Alabama in the Sugar Bowl.

But underneath that big upside lies the downside: spread offense.

Ludwig, for all of his experience with Tedford offenses, has become a spread guy and he’s had a lot of success with it. So despite the fact that he knows he’s coming to Cal to run Tedford’s offense, one may wonder just how much his heart will be in it. Could it be that somewhere deep down inside he’s hoping to convince Tedford to open the playbook to morph it more towards the spread again?

That’s my biggest fear. We can’t afford another Dunbar.

To compound that fear… talk to any Oregon fan about how Ludwig did running the Tedford offense in Eugene. They were VERY glad to be rid of him. I temper my thoughts on the subject because Oregon fans tend to have overly high expectations and are over critical. But nevertheless, one only need look at Oregon’s performance in 2002-2004 (7-6, 8-5, 5-6) to see that the Ducks were not in top form with Ludwig in the booth. In fact, since 1998, the only season the Ducks performed as badly as the best of Ludwig’s 3 seasons was 2006 when they went 7-6. Other than that, Ludwig’s 3 seasons as OC were the 3 worst years of the recent past.

So, what does this all mean?

It’s hard to tell really. I’m taking a wait and see attitude. Particularly considering how late of a hire Ludwig was, it’s important not to under-estimate the value of bringing in a guy who is comfortable with Tedford’s offense. At the same time, there’s reasons to be concerned with his history of running pro-set offenses. However, his recent past suggests he’s developed into a very good OC… but with the Spread. It’s all very, very, very hard to tell.

So I say, let’s give this guy a chance. Only time will tell what will happen.

(Note that I’ve reworded a few things to be more “blog friendly” from the version that was on BearTerritory.net just over a week ago)

As I said in my Signing Day Wrap-Up post, Cal secured another solid recruiting class. It wasn’t incredible, but solid. Tedford has been quoted as saying he’s really happy because it meets the teams needs.

So the question is, what are the team needs?

There’s really two parts of that. The most obvious is to look at where the team fell short in 2008. For a pro-team, that would suffice. In college however there is the complication that the team loses about a fifth of the team each year. In this post I’ll look at those losses so that in future posts I have that background for what the team needs to improve next year.

The Bears are losing 18 players this off-season in 17 seniors and Cameron Morrah who opted to head to the NFL early. 9 of these players were starters on the post-season depth chart, 4 on offense, 4 on defense and Nick Sundberg as the long-snapper on special teams.

What follows is an ordered list of each player and how difficult it will be to replace them:

#18 Alex Stroud – Wide Receiver
A 2-star recruit who transferred from Illinois to come back home, Stroud never saw much of the field. His first catch was in his 2nd to last game versus Washington this year.

#17 Drew Glover – Wide Receiver
A walk-on in 2004, Glover finally saw significant playing time in 2008 on special teams. Nevertheless, as a receiver he only played in 2 games and had just one catch.

#16 Jordan Kay – Kicker
If it were not for Tavecchio’s rise to prominence in 2008, Kay may have been Cal’s starting field-goal kicker in 2008. However, with both Tavecchio and Seawright ahead of him on the depth chart, Kay’s impact was limited to 1 field goal and two extra points.

#15 Sean Young – Wide Receiver
There were big hopes for 6th year senior Sean Young this year. In many ways he delivered in his first couple games, providing the experienced hand as the younger receivers came up to speed. However, as time went on Young saw less and less playing time, catching only a handful of balls after the mid-season Arizona game.

#14 Zack Smith – Fullback
Zack’s spot on this list is secured not so much because of his own contributions in 2008 but because he backed up #3 on this list, Will Ta’ufo’ou. The experience of Ta’ufo’ou will be sorely missed in 2009 and the fact that his most experienced backup will be missing as well will make the Fullback position a challenging one for 2009.

#13 Bernard Hicks – Safety
Hicks was another player who saw less playing time toward the end of his Cal career as the younger Marcus Ezeff and Brett Johnson came into their own. However, unlike Young and Kay, there are aspects of Hicks skills that Ezeff and Johnson have been yet to duplicate, making him a situational player who will be missed.

#12 Mika Kane – Nose Tackle
Kane struggled with the injury bug throughout his days at Cal but was generally the starter over Derrick Hill when he was at 100%. Hill’s progress over the year would likely have had him as the starter in 2009 even if Kane had another year of eligibility, however when Hill needs a rest, Kane’s presence will be missed

#11 Nick Sundberg – Long Snapper
It’s difficult to quantify the value of a long snapper and his highly specialized skill. However, one need only try to think of the last time a bad snap was the cause of Cal’s occasional woes on special team to know just how important Sundberg’s consistent play was to the Bears.

#10 LaReylle Cunningham – Wide Receiver
Cunningham was the Wide Receiver with the most on the field experience when 2008 started and yet he found himself in a similar role to Young, seeing less time as the season wore on. However, he still had more time as a backup than Young and his leadership off the field seemed to be more instrumental than Young’s.

#9 Nate Longshore – Quarterback
Probably the most difficult player to place on this list and a controversial one as always, there is no doubt that Longshore will be missed. This much is for sure: whatever criticisms there were of Longshore, he kept at it all season long and was a competent backup and starter when his number was called. Said another way, had Mansion been pressed into action when Riley was injured, Cal would have likely lost the Oregon game and likely not has been as competitive against USC.

#8 Noris Melele – Offensive Guard
In the long tradition of strong offensive line play, Melele is yet another who will be remembered fondly by Bear fans. With a mostly injury free season he was 2nd in command on the offensive line and one of two needed voices of experience on a line that was otherwise a patchwork of relatively inexperienced young players. The young guys will have to step up in 2009 if they hope to replace Melele.

#7 Anthony Felder – Linebacker
The most under-appreciated of the “big-3” linebackers, most forget that he was involved in more tackles than any other player on the team. He also played in all 13 games. Nevertheless, while his presence will be sorely missed, his more quiet role on the defense will make him less missed than the other two.

#6 Cameron Morrah – Tight End
Most did not expect that Morrah would have to be replaced when the season ended. However, being the leading TD receiver on the Bears and tied for 2nd in receptions, it too was hard for him to pass up the opportunity to declare for the NFL draft. With Tad Smith the likely replacement for Morrah there is hope that the Tight End position may not be a weak spot in 2009, however, Smith will have big shoes to fill in the passing game.

#5 Worrell Williams – Linebacker
Third on the team in solo tackles, Williams was a terrifying force for offensive lines to contend with. Plugging running lanes and sniffing out middle screens was his strength. It will be difficult to find someone to replace his physical over-sized presence in the middle of the field.

#4 Rulon Davis – Defensive Line
For a player who missed 4 games, Rulon takes the cake as player who made the most of his playing time. While his overall statistics were not stellar, there was something different about the Cal defense when he was on the field. It was more powerful, more disruptive, more tenacious. While his play will be missed, just as much his no nonsense, take no prisoners attitude will be just as missed.

#3 Will Ta’ufo’ou – Fullback
Probably the most underappreciated player in recent Cal memory, he was a big part of the success of the Cal running game in 2007 and even more so in 2008. Even back in the 2006 Holiday Bowl he made his mark, starting for the first time and paving the way for a dominating rushing performance by the Bears. Even more troubling is that the candidates to replace him, Brian Holley and Peter Geurts, are sorely lacking for experience and will need to come up to speed quickly for the Bear running game to keep on track.

#2 Alex Mack – Center
Alex Mack may just go down as the Bear’s best center if not in its history at least in the Tedford era. Just as important was his leadership that helped hold together a rag-tag offensive line that sorely needed his guidance. Probably the only two things keeping Mack from the top of the list was his leadership was mostly confined to the offensive line and there look to be one or two candidates to replace him who, while clearly will fall short of Mack’s dominance, look to be capable replacements.

#1 Zack Follett – Linebacker
The pain-train himself tops the list of losses for the Bears going into 2009. For Follett, it was not just his speed off the edge nor his ability to force the big defensive play at the most important time, as witnessed by the forced fumble that won the Bears the Emerald Bowl. Follett was just as important as a leader. Coming on to the field during the Oregon game to pump up the offense and encouraging them to seal the deal on an important redzone possession may just be his defining leadership moment. However, it was just one of many moments where the pain-train ensured that every Cal player on the field was bringing the pain.

Overall, it is clear that Cal will be losing a surprisingly large group of impact players for 2009. The top 11 players all made a significant impact in most games. On defense, while the defensive secondary and defensive line remain mostly intact, it is clear that the Bears will be missing the spark of a number of key leaders from 2008 that will be critical to replace in 2009. On offense, it is mostly the blockers who will be most difficult to replace, with 3 of the top 8 losses being Cal’s key blockers in 2008.

The question that remains is who is going to step in to replace them. Look for that in an upcoming post.