Note to God: Hold off on the end of the world
(Written by kencraw)
I’ll have more detailed thoughts later as well as a full review of the game but I just wanted to get some quick thoughts out on the following topics:
- This loss has very little impact on the Bears in the Pac-10 title hunt
- The Beavers are better than we give them credit for
- The Beavers did everything I said they needed to do for the upset
- While it was a tough loss, I’m full of optimism
- Finally, the difference in the blog versus message board content is why I’m a fan of blogs
First of all, ignoring for a moment any concerns that Cal won’t be good enough to win their big games coming up, Cal still controls their own destiny in the Pac-10 and they’ve got their main opponent coming to Berkeley. Yeah, the National Title hopes seem pretty dashed at this point, but did anyone really think that was a shoe-in? I always saw it as a pipe-dream and I’m not too concerned that it seems to over (although with all the losing this year it might not be as over as everyone things… but I digress). The short term goals for Cal have always been a Rose Bowl and upgraded facilities. Both of those hopes are still very much alive, at least by the numbers.
But I think what really bothers soms is not that mathematically things are fine, their fear is that the Bears aren’t a good enough team to win the games they need to win to get to the Rose Bowl. I think that’s just foolish.
As I said in my previews both here and in Rivals, the Beavers are a pretty good team, just a mistake prone one. If you look at how they competed with everyone so far, and they’ve played some very good teams, it was their turnovers and mistakes that killed them, not their lack of talent. They’re not a Stanford or a Washington State or even an Arizona or Washington talent wise. Sure, they don’t have the talent of Cal, but they are well coached and have enough talent that a couple lucky bounces of the ball puts them in the hunt with just about anyone.
And all of those bounces went the Beavers way yesterday. In my previews I said the Beavers needed to do two things to win: 1. slow the Cal rushing game. 2. not make mistakes. Guess what? That’s exactly what they did. They had only 1 turnover, and it came at one of the best spots of the field for a turnover, if there is such a place. It wasn’t deep in their own territory, giving Cal some free points and it wasn’t deep enough in Cal territory to be missing out on some guaranteed points. As for the rushing game, having a new QB for Cal played right into their defensive hands, particulary their load the box philosophy, and Cal wasn’t able to stretch the field like Longshore would have done and as a result they weren’t able to control the flow of the game.
So when one puts together that the Beavers are a pretty good team and that everything went their way, I think we shouldn’t fear that the Bears aren’t any good. In fact, call me full of optimism for the future. Riley showed me a lot of positive stuff yesterday and the young guys who continue to get playing time due to injury continue to impress. Even if this season doesn’t turn out as we hope, the future is bright if you ask me. 2008 and 2009 look even better (lone unproven area: receivers).
But back to 2007, Cal took a dangerous Pac-10 team who got all the bounces and breaks right to the limit… and they did it with a backup QB. Longshore will be back for UCLA, an infinitely beatable team. Cal has proven they can go on the road and win against good teams in the most hostile environment and I give them an 90% chance of returning to Berkeley unscathed after taking down an exposed UCLA and an untested ASU. After a quick romp over WSU at home, the game that will determine the Bears fate will be before us. I’m looking forward to it and thing the Bears have an excellent chance of winning that game. If they do, with the rest of the Pac-10 likely beating up on each other, Cal need only likely win one of the Washington or Big Game to be Rose Bowl bound.
So cheer up campers!
All of that said, I’m frankly proud of all of us bloggers and blog commentors this morning. While there was the ocassional doom and gloom sentiment, for the most part people had perspective enough to not do what the message board freaks are doing. There’s been no stream of deleted comments about literally feeding Riley to the lions, firing Tedford (or one’s favorite scapegoat assistant coach) or denying all belief in the God who has spurned up. Call me proud to be Cal blogger this morning:
Full of optimism despite a very tough and heart breaking loss and proud to call all of you fine gentlemen (and ladies) my compatriots.
October 14th, 2007 at 8:48 am
I don’t want to say that bloggers are better than the message board denizens. But I have learned to appreciate the avant garde music of Phillip Glass. And I have opposable thumbs. So, that should all count for something.
October 14th, 2007 at 9:00 am
Ken- wish I shared your optimism, but thanks nonetheless.
October 14th, 2007 at 9:10 am
After the game, Joe Starkey interviewed Lavelle Hawkins, who said something along the lines of “This only motivates us more” in is raspy, high pitched voice (great game, Lavelle). Kevin Riley also obliged to be interviewed, a very mature and professional move in my opinion. He acknowledged his own mistakes and misfires. I say he played a great game, considering he found out about starting about 10 minutes before kickoff. With Longshore at the helm, things probably would have turned out better, but we can’t look back, but look forward to steamrolling UCLA in the Rose Bowl. Go Bears.
October 14th, 2007 at 9:39 am
I too think Riley showed quite a bit of promise (dare I say, Elway-esque; I know, bad word), but I don’t feel I need to witness any of that promise unless it’s at the tail end of a 35 pt. thrashing. I’ll be interested to hear how the decision to pull Nate came about. It has the smell of conceit.
Listen, we have an opportunity to do something no Cal team has done in 50 years. But, we’ve also been in this position several times before, and, well, it hasn’t exactly worked out in our favor. It’s understandable that most Cal fans have an “u-oh, seen this before” attitude today. Add to that the fact that his Cal team is not exactly demolishing opponents, and yesterday’s game not simply an anomaly. This team really has to work to win, regardless of their opponent.
October 14th, 2007 at 10:27 am
Ken – I do share your optimism although I may need more than good will to make up for screaming “WTF Kevin” at my cousin’s wedding yesterday night as I listened to game at the back of the chapel. My voice echoed pitch perfect and Kevin the groom didn’t seem too happy.
He must be a huge Bear fan.
Anyway, it’s good to hear Longshore will be back. I wonder how Jackson is doing.
October 14th, 2007 at 12:21 pm
The polls have shown parity. Cal only fell seven places (eight in the AP) in the Coaches Poll, and we’re either ahead of, or tied with $C. SoCal fell after barely overcoming Arizona. (And did anyone really think, had we won, the Ohio State wouldn’t have jumped us? They beat the mediocre Kent State 592-3. Win yesterday, Cal would still be #2, but with a few parenthetical numbers to its right.)
My point here is that NOTHING MUCH HAS CHANGED. Cal is sitll in control of its Rose Bowl destiny. Obviously, we have to win out the rest of the season, and I truly believe we can. Longshore needed to be 100%, and, while I hated yesterday and the loss, Riley needed the serious experience. He threw for over 300 yards, right?
I missed the pregame warm-up, but the guys behind me said Nate had been out there and looked good. He was listed on BearVision as a starter. It wasn’t until they offense first walked out for the opening snap that they announced Riley. I had hoped they were going to let him get some time but bring Nate in if things got dicey. I kept waiting to see Nate put on his helmut. Alas…
(If anything, I feel kinda mislead. Ever since Longshore’s injury two weeks ago, all we’d heard was that he was going to be just fine. The bye was perfectly timed to a lot of banged-up Bears. Even Nate himself, on his EPSN chat, said it wasn’t anything to worry about. I knew Tedford was putting Riley in first-team practice to allow not only Nate more time to heal, but to obviously get ready to play, but even then Tedford told us Nate ‘will be fine, just letting the ankle time to rest.’ Then, Friday morning, the tone is much more bleak. All of a sudden, Longshore was a “gametime decision.” Right up to the last-second announcement that is was Reilly…I don’t know, I guess I’m more down becasue of the loss itself, but I was a little angry at Tedford for not being more honest these last two weeks…No worries, I’ve not lost my faith, respect or trust in Tedford…)
Another weird thing about yesterday…did anyone else notice that they never gave any score updates during the game? They flashed a couple of scores on the screen once or twice, but NEVER, when LSU lost, was there an announcement!!
At that point, Cal, the #2 team, was playing hard, game still in hand and then the MAJOR NEWS that the #1 team lost…and NO ANNOUNCEMENT?! It just seems so odd that there weren’t ANY scores announced (not during breaks, halftime…never), let alone the very major news that, at that point, Cal was/could be #1.
I’ve lost focus here…sorry.
I had always hoped to go undefeated, but knew a loss was probably in the cards. I’m glad it happened still-early enough; obvioulsy, we didn’t do too much damage in the polls (I haven’t seen the Harris yet). Frankly, I thought that losing–at home–to unranked, lousy OSU would be much more costly; and I never thought we’d be as lucky as $C was, poll-wise.
But, that’s is Bears. We have no room for error from here on out. We have to beat UCLA, ASU, WSU, $C, Washington, and Stanford. The best part? We can beat all of ’em. All of them are beatable, all have shown serious flaws (or, in the case of ASU, who almost lost to WSU, haven’t played any real competition yet, the polls reflect that sentiment…rest up Sun Devils: some pissed-off Golden Bears are coming to welcome you into the 2007 college football season in two weeks!!)
This loss isn’t fun, but it isn’t that bad. I don’t feel anywhere near as badly as I felt after Arizona last year. We are still the great team we’ve always been. Our defense continues to grow and our offense will only get better with Longshore’s return and Riley’s experience. You can bet he’ll know to throw the ball away next time!
To recap: We lost. It sucks. We are still in the top 10. We still have every shot at our main goal: Pac-10 championship and the Rose Bowl. We have to beat the next six opponents, and we can. Our quarterback will be healthy and better than ever, while our green back-up finally got that first game under his belt. It’s not over, Cal. You control your destiny from here on out!
October 14th, 2007 at 12:54 pm
Is it just me or was the play calling a little over-ambitious in the first half? Seemed to me that we called an inordinate amount of pass plays early on, especially considering we were running an untested QB out there. Very un-Tedford. I know that Or St.’s run defense is superb, but so is our running game. That Forsett immediately broke off a long gainer, makes it all the more puzzling that we didn’t impose the running game with more single-mindedness. It seemed at time that Tedford gave Riley more leeway than he does Longshore.
It would have been interesting to see how Nate would have performed against that pass rush. He makes quicker reads than Riley does at this stage, but they most certainly would have sacked him a couple of more times and perhaps produced another fumble out of him.
Also, do we have defensive ends on our team? Those guys have been absolutely i-n-v-i-s-i-b-l-e this year. Our defensive backs have definitely had to work because of it. Those guys have come a long way and deserve a lot of credit for at least limiting that deficiency some.
October 14th, 2007 at 12:59 pm
Guys I hate to say it but the time has come for Gregory’s immediate canning. He has been a liability for years. Despite having an innumerable amount of talent he continually produces mediocre at best results. The old adage that his D bends but not breaks is a bunch of crap. For the life of me I cannot fathom how a team that could only manage a measly three points against an overrated Cincinnati team could STOMP all over us. I know we are all upset and looking to place blame on Tedford and Riley but the real fault rests with Gregory, and Gregory alone. Sure big T made mistakes with some of his calls last night but the real reason we lost was our defense, and that falls on Gregory’s lap. He mustn’t be allowed to hide behind Tedfordss brilliant offenses anymore! Tell me, does anyone else think he should be fired? Does anyone else have a complete lack of confidence in him? If you don’t, you certainly should, IMHO.
October 14th, 2007 at 1:06 pm
A mid-season canning? Really? Not so sure about that. But, yes, eventually the law of averages catches up with a “bend but don’t break” defense.
October 14th, 2007 at 3:00 pm
Seth, Seth, Seth… how did I know you’d come out of hybernation after a Cal loss?
The defense did not lose this game. Turnovers, the inability to score from 1st and goal from the 2 and and an inexperienced quarterback were higher on the list of issues than the defense.
There was only one drive, the drive that opened the 2nd half, where I was disappointed with the defense. Otherwise they did an admirable job with a lot of short fields (scoring drives were on drives of 13, 16, 23, 23, 55 and 76 yards). Other than the longest two, can you really pin those points on the defense? Looking at the stats, Cal held OSU well below their season average in almost all important categories.
Nope, the defense doesn’t deserve the blame here and Gregory continues to do an excellent job.
October 14th, 2007 at 3:32 pm
Ken, Ken, Ken… How did I know you would disagree with me? (-: Even in these most trying of times I am comforted, somewhat, by your sureness. Still, the fact remains, this defense is in shambles. You see Ken, you are looking at this all wrong. You are viewing this through the lens of a jaded old blue whom remembers all of our previously mediocre defenses, and from that you conclude our current D is acceptable. On this issue I could not disagree with you more. Finding ourselves on the cusp of being the #1 ranked team in the ENTIRE nation, our defense had a duty to step up and help out the rook QB. This they did not do, what they did was utterly fail us. Why did they fail us you ask? Simple, Bob Gregory failed THEM! Had they been coached like the #2 team in the nation Oregon St. would probably not have scored.
In any event this inevitably begs the age old question, were we highly overrated, or simply failed by our defense and by extension BOB GREGORY? I believe it is the latter. OSU had no business scoring as much as they did, and you know it Ken. Statistical analysis aside, (which is often useless when determining the outcomes of close games like this) you know in your heart they just shouldn’t have scored that much against the supposed #2 team in the nation.
Despite all of this I remain confidently optimistic that we are still headed for Pasadena come New Years, but not if Bob Gregory doesn’t at least get a good hard kick in the tail from Tedford. God help us all if he doesn’t shape up, and fast!
October 14th, 2007 at 4:23 pm
The big point you’re missing Seth is the turnovers and short fields. The defense DIDN’T give up 31 points… they gave up about 17. I’m pretty content with holding OSU to 17. Would I like it to be even better? Sure. But 17 points is pretty darned good and nothing that should raise the ire of those looking for a firing. This is the same defense that held Oregon to 24. It’s worth noting that it’s less than HALF of their normal score and just put 58 up on WSU’s reasonably stout defense.
October 14th, 2007 at 7:35 pm
How’s this for a glass-half-full kind of statement: Riley didn’t remind me of Elway yesterday, but he did remind me of Bret Favre–both the good and the bad. In not just his first start, but his first significant college game experience period, he was breaking would-be sacks and slingin’ it around the yard like #4 himself. Unfortunately, just like #4, he got lost in the moment at the end and let his confidence and lack of situational awareness get the best of him. That’s why I think Tedford’s gamble to take a shot at the end zone was a bad choice: with steady Nate Longshore, who you know will make a good decision, you can take that gamble. But with an amped-up Bret Favre, Jr., forcing him to sit, gather his breath, and prepare for OT would have been wiser. And not just because hindsight tells us so.
Stupidest blog comment I’ve read to date: that Riley looked “scared” in the 4th quarter. Quite frankly, he wasn’t scared enough.
Great effort by the Bears to almost pull this one out. Remember that it wasn’t the loss to OSU that knocked the Trojans out of the BCS title game last year, it was the loss to the Bruins. If the Bears had to lose a game, this was the one to lose. The pollsters will be very forgiving come late November if the Bears can rebound and reel off another five in a row.
October 15th, 2007 at 1:15 am
I also agree the defensive need to improve and specifically through better recruiting. In the past Tedford was able to recruit offensive stars solely based on his reputation. Offensive players would come to Cal just to play for Tedford. I believe our recuriting classes are never top 5 and rarely top 15. The one year we came in the top 10 was when Desean commited to Cal. Hopefully now that we are on the national map, we will convince more defecsive stars to come. Given our non top 25 talent level on defense, I think Gregory has fine.
Tedford even mentioned that in the past we were competing with for 3 star and 4 star recruits and now we’re competing for 4 star and 5 star recruits.
Beat UCLA!
Given our recruiting histotry
October 15th, 2007 at 9:20 am
Cal doesn’t need a new defensive coach, they need better recruiting. They are getting 2-star defensive linemen or they have to go to the JC ranks. Also two of the front four were out and they had to use back-ups.
I do have a question about the Rose Bowl selection. How is the PAC 10 team picked? Is it by the highest randed BCS Pac 10 team or some other way. Oregon is ahead of CAL in the BCS poll. If Oregon wins all of the rest of their games and so does CAL they would probably have a higher BCS ranking than CAL. CAL however beat them, so who goes Oregon or CAL in that situation.
October 15th, 2007 at 9:50 am
@California Pete: I agree. After the first half I was really worried about Riley. But despite his final boneheaded play, that last quarter made me understand why he’s the QB of the future at Cal. We may be in for a wild ride, but don’t most football fans prefer a wild gunslinger with a rocket arm over an efficient, robotic passer?
October 15th, 2007 at 12:18 pm
Hey Guys
We will be featuring this post on tomorrows (10/16) episode of BleacherBloggers.
If you don’t know who we are, we scour the web for the best of the sports blogs and present them and comment on them in our twice weekly video podcasts.
You can check tomorrows show out at around 1pm eastern.
Check it out and keep up the great work!
The Bleacher Bloggers
October 16th, 2007 at 2:51 pm
Cal Fans
I agree with a couple earlier posts. Recruiting, recruiting, recruiting…… Tedford will probably never have trouble on the offensive side of the ball. However, the defensive recruiting needs to be stepped up. Something isn’t right with the defense.
Speaking of recruiting, would like to see them find bigger back to go with Best next year.
I would also like to see game plan involve more throwing to the tight end. I don’t see how it would be stopped. Opens up the field, easy throw for the QB, etc.
Does anyone think that Longshore may miss the UCLA game? Could he be hurt more than is being let on?
Go Bears