The On The Road Home Podcast is up. Sorry it took so long to post. Sunday I ended up having less time to blog than I expected with a number of minor family commitments and Monday and Tuesday are my most commitment filled days of the week. So, it took until Wednesday morning to get this posted.

(As an aside, I still plan to do the reasons for optimism and despair posts throughout the rest of the week but the promised response to Avinash’s posts over at CGB are going to end up falling on the editing room floor as they say in the movies. Still 6 out of 7 isn’t bad.)

Standard Podcast [ 19:20 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

Boo to this guy.

Yay for this guy.

Boo to this guy.

As I left the stadium…

…the lady said to me, “NO RE-ENTRY! IF YOU LEAVE YOU CAN’T COME BACK?”

“Is that a promise?” I said. “Because I’ll hold you to that.”

I just received this e-mail, forwarded to me by Sandy Barbour, about the issues with the stadium at the USC game.

Dear Cal Football Fans:

During Saturday’s Cal football game against USC, we know that many of you who attended had an unfortunate and unexpected gameday experience due to the long lines and congestion throughout much of Memorial Stadium. I want to apologize and, at the same time, make sure we move quickly to understand exactly what went wrong and let you know about the steps being taken to address it.

We have almost three weeks before our next home game against Washington State on Oct. 24, and with the help of the UC Police Department and other experts, we will be working diligently to improve pedestrian flow and crowd control.

An immediate review after the game found that almost half the crowd entered the stadium through just two gates – Gates 1 and 2 – near the north side of the stadium. The resulting bottleneck caused lines to back up, especially on the concourse level. Similar problems occurred in other areas of the stadium, as well.

We take your safety seriously and many valuable lessons were learned at the game. We did have additional staff placed in the concourse to assist with crowd control, but obviously it wasn’t enough, and we need to do a better job of monitoring and directing traffic.

Entering this fall, we knew that the potential for increased congestion in and around Memorial Stadium existed, and we worked with campus and city safety and security personnel to develop an access plan to help fans navigate around the High Performance Center construction zone. Although we had few issues the first two contests, the USC game clearly showed that we need to evaluate the plan’s effectiveness. The full release can be found by clicking here (Stadium Access Plan).

With construction of the Student-Athlete High Performance Center and the planned renovation of the stadium, we are well on our way to creating a better gameday experience for all. However, I will continue to do everything possible to minimize the impact of construction on some of the best days we have together as a Cal community. We will distribute our revised plan as soon as we fully identify and make the necessary improvements in our operations.

Thank you for your passionate support of our campus and Cal Athletics.

Go Bears,

Sandy Barbour Director of Athletics

My take: everyone entering through the north end of the stadium might be an issue, but as long as the Fun Zone is over there, it’s hard to see the traffic flow working much differently. I don’t think the entry point is the root of the problem. I think the fact that you can’t access most of the center section of the west side of the stadium (due to the construction project) without going through incredibly narrow passageways is the root of the problem. And more to the point, the capacity of the venue is the root of the problem.

If this is a sincere attempt to improve crowd control, great. Fantastic. I hope that’s what it is. But I’m not enthused by the “we’ll get back to you” tone of some of the paragraphs, the blame being placed on what I believe to be a side issue (i.e., the entry point), and the suggestion that “additional staff” would be able to somehow control such a massive crowd.

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.

Thoughts after re-watching the disaster:

• I’m glad that they showed that “from Riley’s perspective” replay of the interception. Because from the stands and from the standard TV view it was completely inexplicable. But when you see it from Riley’s view, I can see how he’d think he could loft it into Jones. It just wasn’t there. Still a bad decision, but at least now I “Get it”.
• I’ve heard it said that the interception was the early turning point of the game. I disagree. I think it was the early 3rd down conversion for USC and to a lesser degree the McNight touchdown (which was a TD). That’s what sucked the air out of the crowd, which I think was key to how things went downhill. The team’s intensity quickly followed the crowd’s (something for us to remember).
• You know, rewatching the first couple series for Cal were pretty good as far as diversity of play calling. I don’t know that the 3rd down play that Riley never gave a chance by over throwing Best was going to work anyway, so it might just have been the first bad play call of the game. Nevertheless, that was a pretty good sequence of plays. I wonder if they’re scripted and when they run out of scripted plays is when they start running into trouble.
• Now, the Bears were helped by a holding call to slow the USC redzone drive that would have put them up 14-0, but you still have to give the Bear defense some credit for coming up with a stop. I know that at that moment, the Bears down 10-0 I still was pretty optimistic from what I had seen from the Cal offense so far that they could get back into it. However, I was feeling a bit uncomfortable about the defense and that gave me more hope.
• Now the Bear’s next possession was pretty pathetic. Additionally, everything already felt recycled. The Riley rollout, the crossing route to Ross (that wouldn’t have gone for a 1st down anyway), it was just too predictable. Also, they did the run in the wrong order. You run Best first and then do the Riley rollout. When you reverse it the defense can corral Best more easily because they’re OK with a 3 yard gain (unlike on 1st down).
• But that defense really continued to do its job, including coming up with those 3rd and 4th and short stops. Again, the defense although not stellar, for the most part held up their end of the bargain. They’ve definitely got some problems with linebackers in coverage and confusion in the secondary (the latter being very surprising to me), but for the most part the players are giving it their all and executing to Gregory’s game plan.
• You know, I hate to bring it up because it had nothing to do with the outcome but the Bears didn’t get any breaks from the refs. That personal foul on Tucker for his block was COMPLETELY bogus. Even what the announcers were saying is a penalty that is very rarely called and it didn’t apply. Then the punt return for a touchdown his foot was out of bounds. I’m 85% confident USC scores a touchdown on that 1st and goal from the 4 if the replay is properly called, but it was still a bad call.
• Now, back to that punt return, what frustrates me about our special teams is that it always seems to fall apart when we need them most. It was horrible coverage and it felt like the coverage team wasn’t trying very hard. It also felt like there were only 3 guys on that side of the field to be blocked. And what was with Anger’s punts? When did this guy become an average punter? Again, just when we needed him most, he kicks a low, easily returnable punt followed by a semi-shanked 27 yard punt.
• I think the problem with the Cal offense by the time the 2nd quarter rolled around is that they had already given up on the running game. I’m not talking amount the gimmicy, trick-play to throw off the defense, running game. I’m talking about the line up and smash USC in the teeth running game. Would it have been productive? Probably not very much, but you know what, it helps keep balance and just importantly, it keeps the offensive players in the right mindset of playing hard, physical, football. Instead they were already in panic mode and the defense was forced back onto the field after quick 3-and-outs again and again and again.
• And then the field goal attempt with 12 seconds left has the same effect. It just gave everyone from the players to the fans the idea that the coaching staff was playing for moral victories instead of to win the game.
• Going back to the defense, while I feel there is a lot Gregory is doing right, what. is. the. story. with. the. WR. screens!?! Are we ever going to solve this problem? EVERY team is going to run those over and over, particularly when they really need a drive extending play, if the Bears don’t bring 3 players over when the opposition has a 3 WR bunch set.
• I’ve been a big hater of the wildcat formation but I’ll tell you what, it was reasonably effective when they ran it over and over mid-3rd quarter. They need to look on film on why it worked in those instances but not when they’ve used it on single plays other times during the season (and in this game for that matter). At the same time, wasn’t that just another sign of already having given up or at a minimum, a sign of desperation? While I don’t think the game plan was as horrible in this game as against Oregon, I do feel like the signs of giving up were more obvious from the coaching staff than in the previous game.
• On the opposite side of the play calling spectrum was the sideline huddle/hide Vereen on the sideline play. A perfect call for that moment in the game and it was a sure touchdown if Riley had thrown even a halfway reasonable ball.
• That’s what is most frustrating about Riley. Riley has some brilliant throws, some brilliant escape moves with his feet and sometimes shows signs of wonderful leadership and execution. At the same time he gets in funks that are inexplicable, terrifying and disgusting at the same time. Comparing him to recent QB’s at Cal, Ayoob is really the most apt comparison, and I say that without saying it to curse at Riley like some would assume. The lone difference is that the coaching staff has molded him much more firmly to not throw the ill-advised interceptions that Ayoob was known for.
• I don’t think the offensive line was to blame for this loss, but they sure didn’t help matters on that 4th and 8 in the redzone. The collapsed like a wet plywood bridge with a tank on it. Actually, it kinda feels like they got weaker and weaker as the game wore on. In part that’s because they were taking on the strongest, best conditioned, most talented defensive line in the Pac-10 if not the country. But I think they also had given up a little bit and weren’t using the best technique.
• That long run that McNight had in the 4th quarter that was the final re-enforcing nail in the coffin was not a horrible play by the defense but it was Eddie Young who was responsible for the lost containment. He bought on Barkley’s action and was too far up-field to make the tackle on McNight. Again, not a horrible play, just that’s where the contain was lost.
• Well, that botched punt return by Syd was the perfect way to sum up the night. Another special teams failure when we need them most and poor execution across the board.

Overall, give credit to USC for taking advantage of Cal’s offensive ineptitude. And while I want to keep my hope and despair stuff for separate posts, let me just say that I think USC is going to win out and go to the BCS Championship game as long as Barkley stays healthy. They’ll beat Oregon’s gimmicy offense in Eugene with their great defense that yet again, despite all of the talent turnover and losses to the NFL, is the best defense in the conference.

You know when a game as disastrous as that game yet the first thing most people on the alumni side want to talk about is the crowds, something is drastically wrong. Jason and I didn’t plan to tag-team on this one and we don’t sit together or even near each other but we both had the same thought: Something has to be done about the crowd situation. You’ve read Jason’s letter, now here’s mine:

Dear Athletic Department,

I am writing to you about a matter that could be of grave, life threatening importance in the next couple years before the stadium renovation is complete. The crowds at Memorial Stadium at the football game on October 3rd were a major problem. Even though I got to my seats 90 minutes before the game and had no problems personally, it was very clear that there was a disaster brewing in the hallways and tunnels. People were swearing and crying and distraught when they came to their seats. Other people just needed to get out of the hallways and came flowing out of the tunnel just gasping for a minuscule amount of breathing room. So many did this that the stairwells between the sections were gridlock and tempers flared even once people were out of the hallways and tunnels.

When I took my children to the bathroom late in the 2nd quarter things had calmed down just enough that it wasn’t gridlock in the hallways, but it quickly became clear what one of the major bottlenecks was. There are 2 (or perhaps 3 or 4) concession stands that are directly in the concourse hallways. I’m not referring to the concession stands below G and GG that have a large area for lines and milling around. I’m talking about the ones underneath EE and I believe either HH or I. They are directly in the hallway and any line that forms completely for those concessions blocks the walkway.

This was a problem and an inconvenience even when the service road outside the stadium (but inside the fence) was open. It allowed people a second route to make their way around the stadium. However, with the Student Athlete High Performance Center (SAHPC) under construction, the ONLY place to get around the stadium between E and HH is the concourse hallway. These two concession stands are a HUGE problem this year and caused panic, gridlock and lots of hurt emotions. I literally saw women and children crying, their evening completely ruined, as they came out of the concourse.

For safety reasons, it is imperative that you close these two concession stands until construction of the SAHPC is complete.

I’ve also heard from friends that they believe it would be wise to reduce the capacity of the stadium until the SAHPC is complete and I support that idea as well. I think putting back up the Toyota blue and gold zone banners and not selling those tickets for the remainder of the year would be wise.

I know that the University did their best with the raised walkways to try and mitigate the construction, but unfortunately it was not enough. Please consider closing the in hallway concession stands (and if necessary reduce capacity). It is a health and safety issue of the highest order.

Ken Crawford
Season Ticket holder since 1999

Dear Cal Athletic Department,

I know you know I’m disappointed in your football team. But this isn’t about that.

This is about public safety.

Last night, 71,799 packed into Memorial Stadium to see Cal play USC.

As you’re well aware, the stadium was built nearly a century ago, when people were smaller. The rows are too tightly packed and the seat numbers on the benches are too close together.

This isn’t a problem, generally, because people spread out to fill the space. But when the game is a sellout, it becomes extremely uncomfortable.

This has been true for a while now. But by closing a large number of entrances to the stadium, as a part of the construction of the training center on the stadium’s west side, you’ve taken the situation from uncomfortable to dangerous.

Too many people are being packed into too small a space. There were people trying to get to their seats for an entire quarter. Attendees were pouring out of the tunnel behind my section, FF, and gridlocking the entire aisle all the way from tunnel to field level, in an attempt to move over to their seats in a different section. I believe at some point, certain parts of the walkway were actually closed down for safety reasons.

Going up to the bathrooms or concessions seemed like an impossibility. Getting out of the stadium in the event of an emergency also seemed completely unlikely.

What I’m saying is, the construction has changed the dynamics of the stadium, but you haven’t changed the capacity. You need to rectify this. As soon as possible, you should place a cap on the number of tickets you sell. I know it’s fun to sell 72,000 tickets, but for safety reasons you should decrease the number to something smaller. 65,000, maybe? You know, I hear scarcity can be a good thing for ticket prices. And 65,000 is still a huge number of seats.

I’m serious, now. The situation Saturday night at Memorial Stadium wasn’t just uncomfortable, it was dangerous. That stadium is not capable of handling that many people, especially with half the stadium entrances closed off by construction.

Do the right thing. Reduce the number of tickets you sell until you can fix stadium access.

There are times after a rough loss that I just want to curl up in a ball and forget that Cal football exists. There are other times when I feel like blogging will have a cathartic affect. The latter is true today. So expect a flurry of posts over the course of the day. Here’s what you can expect (not necessarily in this order):

• Reasons for dispair
• Reasons for hope
• Thoughts on Avinash’s post over at CGB
• Crackpot theories on reasons for Cal losses
• Re-watch and analysis of game
• Posting of OTRH podcast
• Plea to University regarding crowd control and safety

Stay tuned…

How bad was it?

I never leave games early. I left at halftime.

And went and had a lovely dinner with my wife instead, to bring a little bit of joy into an evening full of nothing but anger and unpleasantness.

There’s more to say, sure, about how Memorial Stadium with a bunch of tunnels closed off is really quite dangerous at its current “full” capacity, and about the classlessness of a Cal fan right behind me, and of how the coaching in this game — specifically the fact that the coaches seemed to have given up in the second quarter — disgusted me in a way I can’t recall ever being disgusted in a Cal game before.

But later. Not now.

You might be shocked to know that not only do I work with a guy who used to write material for the Stanford Band, but I actually hired the guy even after learning this information.

Anyway, Chris Holt sends along a link to this Wall Street Journal article about the futility of Cal Football.

I think he was mocking me when he sent it. But, I mean, you can’t argue with the facts. I wear it as a badge of honor. Don’t we all?

There are two games each season I find it most difficult to predict. The first is the Big Game and I think it goes without saying. There’s always some surprise, particularly historically. Minus 2007, the last 10 years have probably been one of the most predictable stretches of the Big Game with the favored team winning the vast majority of the time but even still I find it near difficult to predict what’s going to happen.

The other game is the game before us. USC.

Here’s what I can tell you about what I expect from the USC game:

1. Both teams are going to play physical.
2. It’s going to be close, closer than the pundits generally think.
3. The Bears are going to lose… AGAIN!?!

But somewhere in my heart, every other year or so, I get the notion in my head that this is the year. In 2004, it was a great shot. Same with 2006, and that frustrating Arizona loss wasn’t going to matter when we beat USC. In 2008, we’ll I wasn’t quite as confident as 2004 or 2006, but we had to pull it off eventually and that USC team seemed vulnerable.

But yet, somehow, we lost every one of those. Ironically, the one year I was most sure we were going to lose, 2003, ended up being the year we beat them. (OK, that’s a partial lie, I suspect I was less confident in 2005 by the time that game rolled around than in 2003, but they were the bottom two games anyway.)

So here I find myself, yet again, thinking that this feels like the year. But is it? Well, here are the reasons it just might be:

• This might be the worst USC team since Carrol took over. If you want a break-down of just how bad this team is, checkout The Bear Will Not Quit’s USC preview. This team has lost so much and the new guys just haven’t gelled yet. Add in the bad run with injuries and this is one vulnerable team.
• The Bears get USC at home during an ‘up’ year. So far the Bears have been getting USC at home during the down years and have had to travel to the Coliseum in up years. That’s made this match up even more frustrating. Well, I guess it still is possible we’ll look at this year like it’s a down one, but it feels more like 2007 and 2008 were down and 2009 is an up year.
• The game is early in the season. When the Bears beat USC in 2003, it was early in the season. Just about every USC loss, including this year’s loss to Washington happens early in the Pac-10 schedule. The reality is that USC has the most talent and by the end of each season their talent is dialed in enough to beat everyone. However, earlier in the season a lack of experience can hurt those talented but light on experience USC players. Yeah, other teams have inexperience problems too, but nevertheless this levels the playing field.
• The 3-4 defensive scheme. I still have a lot of faith in this scheme, yes, even after the Oregon debacle. It allows teams with less than USC talent to put tremendous pressure on the USC quarterback through creative blitzing schemes and generally make up for the talent differential with creativity and scheming. The 4-3 is basically lining up and telling USC to let us have it. Not so with the 3-4.
• Offensive balance. The other years that Cal played USC tough and had a shot at winning, Cal had balance, 2004 and 2006 being the most notable. In the other years, when Cal had balance during the game they succeeded when they couldn’t find it, they struggled. I know we’re all scratching our head about what happened to Riley in Eugene and that leaves us unsure, but generally speaking Riley has done well at home and I’m optimistic he’ll give us that balance tomorrow.

That’s a pretty good looking list, yes?

Well, hold onto your boots because for every point I’ve got in the positive, I’ve got a negative:

• Our 2003 win was a standard early USC loss. I hate to crush the popular belief that Cal beat USC “straight up” but lets face it, Cal’s win was closer to Oregon State’s two wins, as well as Stanford and Washington’s than it is to Oregon’s victory in 2007. Why does 2003 matter now? Because it means we’ve never really beat USC outright, it’s always been a “charity win”. OK, I know I’m going to hear it for this one, but tell me, why was that fairly untalented and 7-5 finishing team able to do it but the 10-1 and 9-3 teams not able to do it? Why? Because we’ve never beat them straight up.
• USC has already had their early loss. If you look at they’re history, once they have that early loss, they go on a tear and you don’t want to be the next pile of meat they get to devour. That early loss wakes the sleeping giant every year. Unfortunately for the Bears, Washington already woke them up.
• Talent, talent and more talent. In the end, USC wins year after year because they’ve got more talent. There is no denying that it’s true this year just as much as any other year.
• Their defense is still pretty darned good. This was what most struck me when writing the statistical preview for BearTerritory.net (subscription required). They’ve held teams WAY below their averages. This may not be the monster defense that stifled Cal to the tune of 3 points last year, but it may hold the Bears to 10 or 13. Do we really think we can win this game with 13 points on offense?
• The Oregon factor. I’m sick of talking about it, but any list of reasons why we’ll lose this week that doesn’t include it isn’t worth listing. I’m hoping the Bears will respond well. But don’t tell me that in your heart of hearts that you don’t visualize a Cal offense that is forced 3 and out for a handful of possessions in a row that starts emotionally breaking down as they start to see a repeat of last week. We all know that if things get just a little bit ugly, the Oregon game might make it so the Bears don’t have the fortitude to rebound.

So, where does that leave me? I’m not sure to be honest. I can’t even find that sense deep in my heart of who’s going to win. The only thing down there I can find is hope. Jason says these things so much better than I (which is why he’s the real professional journalist and I’m the pseudo-pro) but down there deep inside all I can do is hope. This has to be the year!

Doesn’t it?

(OK, just for the record, I’m picking the Bears to win 21-17)

(We continue the looking back series for the 2008 season. Unlike prior seasons where I did these games in chronological order, I’m going to do them as what will look like previews for this year’s match up. Go here for past posts.)

Pre-Game notes and thoughts:
USC was well established as a very good defensive team by the time Cal made the trip south to the Coliseum. What was less clear was how good the USC offense was. The hope for Bear fans was that Cal’s potent defense would be able to stifle the USC offense. Once that was accomplished hopefully the Cal offense could get enough going to win the game, hopefully spurred by a turnover, something Cal was one of the best teams in the nation at forcing. The Coliseum had not been kind to Cal ever since Tedford, and just as importantly Carrol, took over. Nevertheless, even with the loss in Arizona, Cal was tied with USC and Oregon State (who the Bears were headed to face in Corvallis the following week) for the conference lead and there was optimism that the Bears could end the curse.

Scoring and momentum changing plays:

• After USC fairly easily marched down the field on their first possession, the Cal defense stiffened in the redzone and forced the short field goal. Bears start in an early hole: 0-3
• Mohammed sacks Sanchez at the Cal 37 (play was from the 33) on 3rd and 3, forcing USC to punt on what was otherwise looking to be a killer drive for USC.
• Longshore throws an interception on an out-pattern (Longshore’s biggest INT weakness) but it is saved by a roughing the passer. It not only saved him from that but put Cal in the redzone.
• Longshore is saved a second time from an interception, another very bad decision, this time by a pass-interference call that although correct, would not have otherwise changed the outcome of the play were it not called.
• Tavecchio kicks a 35 yard field goal where the kick is shorter than most 35 field goals need to be. Nevertheless it ties the score: 3-3
• USC makes what looks like a great diving TD catch that replays clearly show that the catch hit the turf as the WR was trying to corral it. But the catch was never reviewed and it stands. Bears back in a hole, this time a TD: 3-10
• Cal has a great touchdown called back by a bogus ineligible receiver down-field penalty that was rooted in the ref calling a receiver who was off the line being called on the line. The TD pass to Vereen would have tied the score as well as forced USC to play Cal’s fakes better.
• Riley’s pass is tipped by a linebacker and then intercepted in the endzone on what could have been another TD pass that instead ensures the drive comes up empty. A huge blow on Cal’s first drive on the 2nd half.
• Zack Follett strips the ball from McNight on a wild crisscrossing run and Williams recovers, killing a USC drive that looked to be a killer as the Cal defense was getting tired and having trouble stopping the USC run game.
• Sanchez throws a nice quick pass on a quick WR screen that goes for a short touchdown. It was relatively well defended by Cal but great execution by USC gets it done. Cal now is completely out of it with less than 3 minutes left to play: 3-17

Observations:

• Cal’s running game was looking good on their first series, gaining 6 and 3 yards by Best. But on 3rd and 1, Cal went to the wildcat and Mack launched a high snap that Best couldn’t easily corral, ensuring the play went for a loss and forcing the Bears to punt on their 1st series.
• The USC offense was really man-handling the Bear defense the first couple series. USC started the game with a handful of play-action passes and it really slowed Cal’s aggressiveness. USC was then able to abuse that indecisiveness by winning in the trenches.
• While it hadn’t hurt USC much, about the only thing slowing the USC in the 1st quarter was their penalties. They had 3 in the 1st quarter. Add in the two defensive penalties early in the 2nd quarter that nullified 2 turnovers and USC had 5 penalties for 55 yards early in the game.
• Longshore was struggling with his accuracy down field, specifically skipping it to receivers who were open down the middle in the 2nd quarter.
• Riley comes in to start the 2nd half after only 89 yards of offense in the 1st half and Longshore’s two nullified interceptions. Probably a good decision when viewed just from the context of how ineffective the Cal offense was in the 1st half.
• The Cal defense made some good adjustments to start the 2nd half and USC looked really ineffective on offense their first few drives.
• Cal got a great start to their second drive of the 2nd half with Syd’s punt return down to the USC 36, but Riley takes a 7 yard sack on 1st down that pretty much kills the series. Then Riley throws both the next two passes too far down field and the result is a punt even though they started the drive only needing a few yards to kick the field goal.
• Penalties continue to kill USC, allowing Cal to stay on the field time and time again. Another roughing the passer, this time on 2nd and 20, gives Cal a fresh set of downs.
• In general, this was a very tightly officiated game because the Bears also got their share of penalties too.
• Nevertheless those penalties on USC were far bigger because it allowed the Cal defense lots of time to rest and that allowed them to be as aggressive as they were without giving up too much.
• Starting early in the 4th quarter you could tell that Cal was getting tired, particularly in the trenches. The offensive line was collapsing too quickly on Riley and the defense wasn’t making the tackles and plays they were earlier in the game. Riley was sacked on back-to-back plays and the Bears were only kept alive by another USC penalty.
• Riley looked sharp down the field early in the 2nd half, but by the time the 4th quarter rolled around he was consistently over-throwing his receivers down field, which was disappointing to see as Cal had gotten a handful of receivers behind the gambling USC defense.
• That inaccuracy led to back to back short drives for Cal which really affected the defense’s ability to come up with stops later in the quarter. The drive that allowed USC their final TD took a ton of time off the clock and it was clear the Cal defense was exhausted as USC had their way with them, moving the pile.

Implications for 2009:
Cal’s ability to slow the USC offense is reason for optimism for 2009. While the Cal defense has been more susceptible to the passing game in 2009 than it was in 2008, which by the way has been a big surprise to me, the USC offense is most definitely sputtering, particularly through the air. There’s real reason to believe that the Cal defense can hold USC to a point total in the 10 range. Also, with USC losing so much on defense, the hope would be that the Cal offense can get more going than it did in 2008. I think the key will be Riley and whether he can provide the balance that will force USC to play the running game straight up. Best did not get that many carries in 2008 because there just wasn’t any running room, and that was because USC didn’t have to play Cal balanced. That will be the key to Cal putting up points and putting up points should be the key factor on who wins (not to over-state the obvious).

Conclusion:
This was both a very disappointing game and one that showed a lot of promise. The reality was that the 2008 USC team was probably the best team in the nation and we really should have seen USC face Florida in the BCS championship game (and here’s betting that USC would have won). So to keep them so stifled all day was a big win for the Bears. The Bears ability to hold onto the ball was also nice to see. But there were just too many execution errors, particularly by the QBs (and both Longshore and Riley came up short, each getting a half to prove themselves) for the Bears to win. And that’s the disappointing part. There have been so few genuine opportunities to beat USC over the last few years that watching one of them slip away is pretty disappointing.