(Written by kencraw)

I hope everyone’s ticker is still working after that nailbiter. I know I was pacing the room like a caged… um… bison perhaps?

In any case, after I thoroughly woke up the 2 month old baby with my victory antics and helped calm her back down, I recorded my thoughts:

Standard Podcast [ 16:57 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

(Written by jsnell)

It was like a Dickens novel. Except with fewer coincidences. Want to relive the pain? Our liveblog transcript is after the jump… and don’t forget to join us here for every road game!

Read the rest of this entry »

(Written by kencraw)

In my pre-season predictions, I predicted Cal would lose the Colorado game 24-27. I mostly referenced that the Bears have a hard time on the road, particularly in non-conference games. While I didn’t spend a lot of time on it, I also felt that Colorado would be significantly improved over the team that lost in Berkeley. Heck, last year that was their worst game, so even last year’s Colorado team was better than the one that lost in Berkeley. They did beat Georgia last year after all.

However, another telling game is Hawaii. Last year Colorado handled Hawaii fairly easily, 31-13, at home. This year in their trip to Oahu, Colorado lost pretty big 17-34. Now, one possible explanation is the whole ‘Colorado sucks on the road’ factor. But to me, that just doesn’t seem like enough to justify that backwards step, particularly to the degree it happened.

Add to that, the particular problems they saw. The offensive line troubles which manifested itself in only 17 yards of rushing and 7 sacks on Tyler Hansen was quite troubling for Buff fans. Their inability to stop the running game of Hawaii, particularly their QB who ran for 91 yards was similarly troubling.

So, I just don’t see it yet for Colorado. I think the team is getting better, but not that much better. Their project is closer to WSU’s, i.e. a multi-year program overhaul, than UW’s, something that results in real meaningful changes the first year.

On the other side, as we all saw last Saturday, the Bears are ready to play even better than they did last year. Maynard is a definite improvement at quarterback (and by the way, that was quite clear after re-watching last years Nevada and Colorado games, back when Riley was healthy and supposedly at his best). Since he adds the scrambling QB factor that hurt Colorado last week, it’s even more promising. The defense looks to be every bit as good as last year and will be giving Colorado’s offensive line fits all day.

So the only question in my mind is the external factors: the altitude, the home-field for Colorado, the non-conference road game for Cal, Colorado’s desire for revenge. And the more I think about it, and perhaps it’s just the pre-game glow, I just don’t think that the differences in talent and coaching can be over-powered by these factors.

People seem to forget that our three examples of losing on the road were to fairly good teams. 2006 Tennessee was a 9 win team. They were much better than the team Oregon saw a year or two ago. 2008 Maryland was one of their better teams as well, beating #20 Clemson, #21 Wake Forest and #17 North Carolina. We were ranked 23 when we lost to them. Last year’s Nevada team was a 12 win team, beating Boise St to end their national title hopes on the same field they beat Cal.

Are we really going to compare Colorado to those teams? Maybe one could make an argument for Maryland being of the same quality, but I think even that’s a stretch. And even is one is willing to make that stretch, it’s not even close with the other two, and one game does not a trend make.

So that’s what we’re left with. The intangibles just don’t seem to be enough to overcome teams in very different places.

Bears win: 31-17

(Written by kencraw)

I’ll admit it, I wouldn’t have remembered if it weren’t for CGB. But that doesn’t mean it isn’t worth remembering that today is the 3 year anniversary of the final tree-sitters being extracted from the last standing tree and it being cut down, clearing the way for the now nearly complete High Performance Center.

So where were you on oak-grove liberation (OGL) day?

As for me, I was in New York City looking at the World Trade Center site the day the final trees came down, having flown directly from the WSU game in Pullman to Springfield, MA to pickup my brother for a road-trip/tour of the East Coast on our way to the Maryland game the following weekend. Tuesday 9/9/2008 we took the commuter train in to NYC from Newark, NJ (cheap hotels 🙂 ) and toured the city.

While the final tree was coming down, I was looking at the cross that refused to fall on September 11th (click on the picture for a larger image):

OK, that’s a bit over the top 🙂 (but true)

Share your ‘where were you on 9/9/2008’ story in the comments.

(Written by kencraw)

(We continue the looking back series. We’re going to continue the trend of doing these in “matching order” instead of chronological order, with doing games from 2008, 2009 and 2010 as needed to complete the series. Today we look at the 2010 Colorado game. Go here for past looking back posts.)

Pre-Game notes and thoughts:
The Bears had just come off of an expectedly easy win over UC Davis, a game in which they were barely tested in the 1st game of the season. Kevin Riley looked very proficient in that win. Would he have the senior magic this year after struggling with inconsistency in 2009? As for Colorado, it had already been announced that they would be joining the Pac-10 and they were clearly anxious to show that they could belong. Head coach Dan Hawkins’ job was on the line in 2010 after a few years of under-performing. Nevertheless there was reason for Colorado to be optimistic that they’d be turning the corner to get bowl eligible. The Bears themselves were coming off a less-than-stellar 2009 campaign and there were plenty of question marks. At least at first, this had the feel of a game where whoever wanted it more, would come out on top.

Scoring and momentum changing plays:

• The Bears receive the opening kickoff, but Isi Sofele fumbled the kick. Luckily he was able to fall forward on it to the 23 yard-line. Still made a nail-biting start to the game.
• After the defense kept Colorado pinned deep on their first possession, Jeremy Ross returned the quick punt to the Colorado 19 yard-line.
• Kevin Riley throws a nice back-shoulder pass to Shane Vereen in the endzone, who does a great job getting one foot down for the first score of the game. Bears score on their 2nd drive of the game: 7-0
• Cal goes for it on 4th and 1 from the Colorado 40 yard-line, and has Riley pass the ball. He over throws Marvin Jones on a crossing route, giving Colorado good field position.
• After giving up one 1st down, Cal sacks the Buff’s QB twice, the second time forcing the fumble that the Bears (Kendricks) recover.
• Riley throws a strike to Marvin Jones as he’s streaking across the endzone, for the Bears second touchdown. Bears up early nearing the end of the 1st quarter: 14-0
• After getting yet another sack on Colorado, they hit QB Hansen as he’s throwing the ball, sending an easily interceptable ball up into the air, which Nnabufee intercepts and returns to the Colorado 21.
• Cal doesn’t convert on 3rd and short and they kick the field-goal. Bears up 3 scores early in the 2nd quarter: 17-0
• Cal is dominant on their next drive, mostly on the ground (although Riley had one nice throw for a long-ish gain) and Vereen tops it off with a 3 yard touchdown dive. Bears blow it open with 10 minutes left in the half: 24-0
• After Colorado got to the Cal 3 yard line, on 3rd and goal they got a personal-foul chop block, a false start and then a sack, to setup a long field goal attempt (42 yards), which was missed.
• Colorado was trying to get a 2-minute drill in to get some points on the board before halftime when Hansen threw behind his outlet receiver and into the hands of Mohammed, who sprints into the endzone. Things go from bad to horrible for Colorado and the Bears hold a BIG halftime lead: 31-0
• Cameron Jordan sacks Hansen on 3rd and 9, to force Colorado to punt on which was otherwise their best drive of the game (now in the 3rd quarter).
• After another long, drawn out drive, Colorado finally gets a TD on a busted play on 4th and goal from the 3, when Hansen runs it in on the QB keeper. Bears lead shrinks a bit: 31-7
• Anger kicks a 67 punt that is called back on an offensive formation penalty and then repeats it with a 65 yard punt, pinning Colorado deep in their own territory.
• After Cal gets the ball back, Riley finds a wide open Marvin Jones for a 61 yard play down to the Colorado 2 yard line.
• After a false start penalty, Riley finds Keenan Allen on a rollout play for a touchdown. Bears back up by 31: 38-7
• Steve Williams out jumps the receiver on an under thrown go-route to intercept the ball.
• Sofele caps another nice drive, with had a nice catch by Ross, with a 1 yard touchdown catch. Bears extend: 45-7
• In one of the oddest looking plays, after the Colorado WR catches the ball it’s punched out from behind, right into the hands of Darian Hagan who streaks down the sideline for an easy touchdown. That’s the final score: 52-7

Observations:

• Eric Kiesau was the offensive coordinator at Colorado, a former Cal Bear coach who of course is back on the Cal Bear staff in 2011 as the passing game coordinator and receiver coach.
• The Cal defense was extremely dominant on the first Colorado drive of the game, actually pushing them back from where they started on the 6 yard-line.
• Colorado had lots of penalties early. On their first drive a illegal block penalty on what would have been their only positive play. On their 2nd drive, they both got a holding penalty on the return and a false start before they had even run a play.
• Tavecchio was booming the kickoffs early in the game, sending all of his kicks inside the 5 and one at least 4 yards into the endzone.
• Colorado actually had negative yards until they finally put a drive together in the mid-2nd quarter. Hansen threw a few good balls and the running game came to life, at least for one drive. Unfortunately for the Buffs, they went from nearly guaranteed points at the Cal 3 to a missed long field-goal which was a definite momentum and confidence killer for them.
• Colorado actually had some of the same success as with their earlier drive in their first few drives of the 2nd half. While it took them a lot of plays and a lot of 3rd down conversions, they moved the ball effectively. Colorado could have easily had 3 touchdown drives in the late 2nd quarter and 3rd quarter, but mistakes and turnovers killed all but one of those opportunities.
• The Bears were in a funk in the 3rd quarter offensively, having 2 3-and-outs in the quarter (with Colorado’s two long-ish drives taking the rest of the time)
• One really has to wonder why we never saw Mansion or Sweeney in this game, even in the 3rd quarter. We did see a number of other backups, Sofele getting a number of snaps late in the game and substitutions throughout the rest of the offense and defense. But no QB backup… why not?

Implications for 2011:
The Bears controlled this game from start to finish. They controlled the game in the trenches, particularly on defense. If the Bears can have similar control in 2011, they’ll be victorious again. However, so many breaks went the Bears way, I think if you played that game 10 times, at lease a couple times Colorado would have been within 14 points at the end. Colorado did show some potential and did put together a few sustained drives. Don’t think that the Colorado offense was as inept as the final score indicated. They also seemed to keep the Cal running game mostly in check, although they did it at the expense of the pass defense and the way Maynard is playing, he’d abuse them worse than Riley did. However, what truly killed Colorado was the mistakes, particularly the penalties and turnovers. If their new head coach can keep that in check, the game will be a lot closer.

Conclusion:
This was Cal at their best last season, probably their best game of the season. However, Riley wasn’t playing all that well and you could see the seeds that would flower into trouble later in the season, heck, even the next week. As mentioned above, despite being up so big, we never saw backups Mansion or Sweeney get any snaps. That would turn out to really hurt the Bears later in the season. Of course hindsight is 20/20 (well, that’s why we do this series of posts, isn’t it?), but it’s pretty clear that when re-watching this game what would eventually plague the team.

(Written by kencraw)

(Today we pick back up the looking back series. We’re going to continue the trend we started a couple years ago of doing these in “matching order” instead of chronological order, with doing games from 2008, 2009 and 2010 as needed to bring the series up to date. Today we look at the 2010 Nevada game, which in theory matches with Fresno State from last week, but is also a good match for Colorado both because the game will be at a similar altitude and it’s the challenging road non-conference game of the previous year. Go here for past looking back posts.)

Pre-Game notes and thoughts:
The Bears had just come off of two dominating wins over Colorado and UC Davis. While everyone knew that UC Davis was nothing to brag about, Colorado was a bit of an unknown quantity and there was reason for great optimism in Berkeley. That said, everyone knew there was reason to fear the trip to Reno. Nevada was peaking and thought to be a serious challenge to Boise State in the WAC. With a senior quarterback who was a legitimate dual-threat QB and an innovative scheme that was growing in popularity (the pistol), there was reason to be nervous, particularly considering the struggles the Bears have on the road during the non-conference (see 2008 Maryland, 2006 Tennesee). Nevertheless, this was definitely a winnable game for the Bears.

Scoring and momentum changing plays:

• Nevada got the ball to start the game and made relatively quick work of the Bears. Kaepernick delivers a strike on a come-back route off the play-action, to a wide open receiver who powers through the tackle of Darian Hagan to the endzone. Cal in a hole early: 0-7
• Riley throws a nice pass to an open Keenan Allen, although a tad behind him, but it goes right through his hands and is tipped into the safety’s hands for an interception to end Cal’s first drive that was otherwise promising.
• After the defense forces the punt, Vereen explodes through a large hole on the first play of the drive and runs for a 59-yard touchdown run. The Bears tie it up: 7-7
• Kaepernick caps another read-option heavy drive (although just enough diversity to keep Cal on its toes) with a 2-yard touchdown run. Bears back in a one touchdown hole: 7-14
• Riley is sacked on back to back plays as the offensive line folds all to quickly. The Bears are forced to punt on a 3-and-out.
• The defense is every bit as inept on the ensuing Nevada drive, completely letting Kaepernick free on the outside. This time it’s capped by an 8 yard touchdown run by the nimble QB. Bears down by two scores: 7-21
• After stringing together a couple 1st downs, Riley overthrows an easy target on 3rd and 3, forcing the Bears to punt from around midfield.
• Cal recovers a fumble from a botched handoff, getting the ball at the Nevada 21.
• Vereen punches in a 2 yard touchdown run on the end of the short-field drive. Cal back within a touchdown: 14-21
• Kaepernick throws a nice deep ball on loose coverage by Conte, for 30 yards, giving Nevada a shorter field for their end of half drive.
• Nevada runs out of time (not very good clock management, actually) and has to kick a 30 yard field-goal. Bears down by 10 at halftime: 14-24
• Vereen busts his 2nd big run, this one is a 49 yard touchdown run, on the opening drive of the 2nd half. Bears back within 3… yes, all you “Cal got blown out by Nevada” people, Cal was down by only 3 in the 3rd quarter: 21-24
• Cal forces a 3-and-out on Nevada’s first possession of the 2nd half.
• After marching the ball down to the Nevada 35, Riley makes a crucial judgment error and is intercepted. A pick-6 at that! Bears back down by 10: 21-31
• Vereen nearly breaks his longest run of the day. As it was, it was a 35 yard run. But it was a couple of steps from being an 80 yard touchdown run.
• On the following play, Anthony Miller takes it most of the rest of the way to the endzone, setting up 1st and goal from the 7.
• However, 2 run plays only get the ball to the 5 and the jump ball to Jones in the corner of the endzone falls incomplete. The Bears have to settle for 3 to get it back to a touchdown deficit: 24-31
• Kaepernick throws another great ball on a seam route down to the 5 yard line. The ball is knocked out by Marc Anthony, but the receiver is able to recover the fumble just over the goal line for a touchdown. Bears down by two touchdowns again: 24-38
• Cal marches down the field and has unable to convert on 3rd and 4th down from the Nevada 8 yard line (could get a 1st down at the 2 yard line). Instead of taking 3, they went for 7 and ended up getting nothing.
• The tired Cal defense was so concerned about Kaepernick on the read-option that they eventually gave up a big run up the middle, a 54 yard touchdown run. Now with less than 8 minutes left in the game, the score was officially embarrassing: 24-45
• Riley throws a nice rainbow to Jones down to the 4 yard line, giving Cal one last shot to close up the score.
• Riley throws a rare fullback rollout for a touchdown. The Bears are back within 14: 31-45
• After a failed onside kick attempt, Nevada makes easy work of the short field and Kaepernick scores on another read-option. Back to down by 3 TD’s: 31-52
• With Riley throwing up desperation balls to trying and get another touchdown or two (or perhaps the miracle comeback), he throws up an interception, sealing the final drive for the Bears and the victory formation for Nevada.

Observations:

• On Nevada’s first drive, it was feast or famine for Nevada. In a lot of ways, there was promise in the Cal defensive effort, with a number of plays for no gain or even a few short losses. But then on other plays, things would break down quickly and it would go for a lot of yards.
• On Nevada’s third drive, Cal’s outside pursuit was diving on the running back EVERY TIME they ran the read-option. Kaepernick was able to explode for big yards on the outside. It was a disappointing thing to see and seemed to reflect that Cal wasn’t well prepared for the pistol (it’s OK to dive on the runner, but you’d better have someone on outside contain if the QB runs with it.)
• After Vereen picked up 14 on 2nd and 20 in the 3rd quarter, he had to come out of the game to catch his breath. You could definitely tell the altitude was getting to him in a big way, the way he was gasping for air. He was back in 2 plays later to score the touchdown, so it’s not long term, but it just shows how players need to be spelled at altitude.
• Cal’s defensive adjustments looked really good to start the 2nd half. Kaepernick was contained when he kept the ball and the inside run game wasn’t going any better. Things definitely looked up for the Bears.
• It can’t be overstated how much of a turning point Riley’s interception was. Cal had clawed within 3 and was driving. They were only a few yards from being in field goal range to tie the game, but it felt more like the Bears were headed to the endzone. The defense was also containing the Nevada offense for the first time all game. Instead, the Bears find themselves back in a 10 point hole with just over 20 minutes to play.
• Kevin Riley’s accuracy in the 4th quarter was a real problem. While he wasn’t perfect earlier in the game, most of his passes were enough on target to be complete. Not so in the 4th quarter. Their drive down into the redzone was on the back of Vereen and Sofele and also on pass interference penalties (on not very well thrown balls).
• The failed conversion on 4th down was the turning point where the game officially fell apart. You could tell the defense lost their heart after that failed conversion deep in Nevada territory and Nevada’s runs returned to a level of success they mostly hadn’t seen in the 2nd half, including the 54 yard touchdown run.

Implications for 2011:
There’s no doubt that Cal has struggled with their bigger non-conference road games. Just about every year but 2009: 2006 Tennessee, there was no tough road game in 2007, 2008 Maryland, the exception that proves the rule 2009 Minnesota and then this game, 2010 Nevada. Will Colorado have the same result in 2011? It does have a similar aspect to it with the altitude. But in many ways, that’s where the comparisons end. Really, of all the teams Cal lost to, with the exception of perhaps 2008 Maryland, each of those teams would clearly be better than Colorado this year. Also, Nevada ran a very unconventional offense, one the Bears had never seen before and there’s no doubt that had an impact on the defensive performance. So it’s a little hard to judge things based on this game. But the altitude is an interesting component. There’s no doubt players will have to be spelled. But the good news is that Cal has lots of depth to do that, particularly on defense. So the comparisons here may be pretty weak.

Conclusion:
Overall, this was obviously a very difficult game for the Bears, but re-watching it confirmed what I thought after watching it the first time. The Bears could have legitimately won this game if a few of the breaks had gone their way, starting with Mike Mohammed not being available for the game. It also confirmed for me just how good of a team the 2010 Nevada team was. They most definitely peaked in 2010, and their victory over Boise State later in the season was more evidence of that. Is it just me, or does it feel like we often get non-conference foes while they’re peaking?

(Written by kencraw)

Many of you who play the Pick’Em probably noticed that the scoring was all out of whack. There was a very insidious bug that was very hard to track down. It’s fixed now.

For those of you who haven’t signed up, you can still signup and be competitive. Because the EMFMV league is based on averages not totals, you’ll be scored on the averages of the games that start after you signup.

(Written by kencraw)

I spent a fair amount of time commenting on this in yesterday’s podcast, but I thought this was a topic worth expounding on further.

As long as I’ve gone to Cal games, 1999 was my first season, there has always been no alcohol sold at Cal games. Frankly, being someone who doesn’t drink a whole lot, I never thought much about it. This is not to say that I’m anti-alcohol, I’m Catholic not Fundamentalist after all. While it’s not exactly something to brag about amongst drinkers, it’s a tradition in my house to buy a new type of beer to drink on New Years day while I watch the Rose Bowl. So I’m not even against mixing alcohol and football in the privacy of one’s home.

But Saturday there was beer for sale at the game at Candlestick and it got me to thinking: I’m very glad it’s not for sale at Cal home games. There was a different vibe to the crowd. There were more “boisterous” people, people who were there seemingly with the purpose of engaging and annoying others. They swore like sailors, despite the fact that there were 2 kids ages 6 and 8 within 10 feet of them. While it was most definitely tolerable, I would still have brought the kids even having known those bozos were going to be there, it was not as pleasant as the average Cal gameday experience.

It had always been my understanding that the no-alcohol rule was a Pac-10 rule, but research this morning has proven otherwise. USC had alcohol for sale to the general public through 2004, banning it for the 2005 season as fan behavior deteriorated. Notable in the article was that the pressure banning it did NOT come from either the Pac-10 or the NCAA.

However, since 2005, no Pac-10 and now no Pac-12 team has allowed alcohol for sale to the general public. We’re not alone. As more and more schools have had to deal with alcohol related problems, they’ve taken to banning alcohol at the games as a way to control this. Alcohol is banned at all football games on CSU campuses, by executive order from the CSU chancellor starting with the 2006 season. A voluntary 2003 survey of 77 campuses showed only 26% of schools sold alcohol during games. For the most part, it seems that these tactics are working.

But what I found troubling during research this morning was that there seems to be a movement to start reintroducing alcohol for sale to the general public at games in the Pac-12. As if this should be a surprise, one of the main motives is money. They’ve seen how much money they make selling it to donors in either the suites or in adjacent to the stadium facilities (ASU, both Oregon schools, both Washington schools and starting this year Cal, all either sell or give-away alcohol to the high-end donors). They’d like to expand that revenue opportunity.

I think this is a big mistake.

I’m no fool. I know that lots of people sneak in alcohol. I know lots of people get loaded up before the game, hoping the buzz will last through the game. My wife and I had the unfortunate experience in either 1999 or 2001 of sitting in front of a recent Cal grad at the Big Game in the old Stanford stadium who was VERY liquored up when he sat behind us and thought it was the funniest thing to yell out (assumably to the Stanford team on the field) “your mom eats kitty litter!” Around the mid-2nd quarter the alcohol induced stupor set-in and during half time he puked all over the place, with the splatter getting all over my wife.

So I understand that the alcohol ban does not stop people from drinking or being drunk. But forcing it “underground” has numerous positive effects. People don’t feel as comfortable “acting drunk”. Sneaking it in is hard enough that for those who just have to drink, it’s too risky to to rely on it as one’s means for drinking. Alternatively it takes a lot of planning to be drunk enough before the game so that it’ll last through the game but not so drunk that you don’t make it to the game. This is particularly true in Berkeley where the travel time to the stadium and lack of tailgating make it hard to consume copious amounts of alcohol close to game time. As a result, I’ve found that the few people I’ve identified as drunk are usually mellowing out by the 2nd quarter or are being very careful about sneaking and concealing it.

But even those instances are rare. I think the no-alcohol environment leads to a self-selecting, weeding out process where people who list getting drunk as a key attribute to going to a football game, eventually choose to go elsewhere for their football. It’s just not fun to have to plan and work so hard to get drunk. Why do that when you can go to pro-football games and get drunk with ease? As such, in 12 seasons of Cal football I only have that one ‘kitty-litter’ story to tell until the game at Candlestick. The only fan issues I’ve ever dealt with, and they are very few and far between, relate to the cramped spaces at Memorial (people stepping on each other trying to get in and out of rows, people elbowing or accidentally punching people when jumping up to cheer, the 2009 USC game concourse debacle, etc.).

And frankly, I like it that way (well, more space would be nice too).

Let’s keep Cal football the amazingly family friendly environment it has always been. I don’t mind the beer for sale at the fun zone. I don’t mind the beer and wine for sale for the big time donors. That amount of beer isn’t going to result in the sorts of bozos I had to tolerate on Saturday. But sadly, despite being a very small percentage of the overall crowd base, these bozos have the potential to cause discomfort and irritation to people in a 30-seat radius of their belligerent antics.

I’d much rather continue to enjoy football games in Berkeley without them, even if that means the rest of us have to go without an otherwise enjoyable beer or two during the game.

(Written by jsnell)

Another week, another Excuse Me For My Voice podcast with Jason and Ken. We recap the Fresno State victory, talk Candlestick Park, preview Colorado, and review the Pac-12 results for the week. Also: Topics that upset people, like beer and religion. And a new, impossible-to-spell secret word!

You can also subscribe to the podcast on iTunes.

2: Minus Two (EMFMV 2011) [ 52:25 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

(Written by kencraw)

Saturday night when I got home I surveyed the various news outlets to see if there was any press about the Bears. There was nothing at all. No mention of the game on ESPN, even on the college football centric shows. Even Ted Miller had nothing to say, with the game basically playing at the same time as the Oregon/LSU game he was at.

But once all the various press outlets caught their collective breaths, they re-looked at all the ‘minor’ games they hadn’t been watching and the good news has started rolling in:

• Cal gets 1 vote in the coaches poll
• Miller calls Cal ‘team of the week’
• Miller raises Cal to 5th in the his power rankings (up from 10th out of 12)

(and I’m sure there are some other’s I read and can’t remember right now.)

OK, so it’s not exactly high-praise, but it’s a big step up from where we have been. Cal has been this anonymous team that nobody talks about. In 2006, the game versus Fresno would have been one of the higher billed games of the weekend. Instead we were an also-ran.

If the Bears can beat Colorado in convincing fashion (and then of course get the easy win over the Blue Hose), all of a sudden the game up in Seattle may come with a fairly high billing that week.

(Written by kencraw)

Obviously every win is a good game on some level, but what I saw this weekend gives me a lot of hope, with a number of caveats.

Overall Commentary

• Changes in tempo: One of the things I really liked about the offense was the changes in tempo that kept the defense off balance. While there was nothing of the speed of Oregon, there were definitely some times that Cal did a pretty quick turn around. Then they’d vary the pace after getting set and snapping the ball. Sometimes it would be rocket fast, to the degree it would catch me off guard, and other times it would be slower. I think that sort of diversity in pace throughout the game can do nothing but good. Not only does it keep the team ready to play just about any pace when they need to, but the defense has trouble getting into a rhythm and sometimes is caught quite off guard.
• Play call changes: Another new wrinkle in the pre-snap activities was the sometime used post-lineup play-call change. I don’t know what the system is for when they use it, but I like that it’s not an every-down thing. It’ll be interesting to see the frequency this is used and in what scenarios it is used. In this game, it wasn’t used a whole lot, but it’s an intriguing addition.
• Field position: The Bears really didn’t get very good field position in this game. Most of that was due to the special teams. The kickoffs for the Bears were short and the Bulldogs punting was pretty good. But it was very nice to see the Bears for the most part not let it affect their success, driving the long field for touchdowns.
• Rugby Punts: Having read the post-game quotes, it’s clear that Tedford and his staff see rugby punts as a way to avoid the punts being blocked. Well, sorry, I think they stink. It’s COMPLETELY wasting the talent of Anger. Let. Him. Kick. The. Ball. Maybe the story is that Cal doesn’t have a lot of confidence in it’s punting team and their ability to block the rushers. But again, it’s a waste of a great punting talent.
• Early rust: While watching the game live, it sure felt like there was early rust but the Bears settled down. However, now having re-watched on video, the Bears got into a funk after those first 3 touchdown drives. And there were plenty of different mistakes. Everything from Maynard missing some passes, a couple of dropped balls to penalties. Obviously the 1st game jitters don’t go away just because they’ve scored a few touchdowns, but I don’t think it was as much early rust as it seemed at first. We may be in for some inconsistency for at least a few weeks. (As long as it’s resolved by the UW game, we should be OK.)
• Penalties: When I re-watched the game, one thing I was looking for was any consistency in the penalties. Same type of penalty, same players, etc. Other than the false starts, there was no consistency as to what the penalty was. And the penalties were spread around the whole team (in particular the whole offensive line).

Individual player commentary

• Tavecchio: Georgio is a great kid, so I hate to be critical, but talk about a guy who plateaued when it looked like he had so much upside potential. His kickoffs are worse this year than last and the hiccups on the extra points was pretty troublesome. Perhaps Tavecchio just had first game jitters, but something tells me that this game was a sign that the inconsistency that has plagued him to date will not be going away.
• Sofele: Sofele on the other hand, very much impressed. He’s running really hard and he’s hitting the hole with authority. A power guy he’ll never be, so if the offensive line breaks down don’t expect him to go all beast-mode, but he’s more than just a scat-back now. He’s going to do just fine this year. If I have one concern, it’s ball security. He had a number of plays where the ball came loose, although many of them were not counted a fumbles for a number of reasons. Nevertheless, it’s still concerning. One fumble cost the Bears 5 points, bulldog touchdown instead of a safety. I have a feeling Ron Gould will be running a bunch of extra ball security drills this week with his punching bag on a stick.
• Galas: I won’t be breaking down the offensive line play, so I don’t have a good sense of how Galas blocked overall, but his snaps leave a lot to be desired. The above mentioned fumble by Sofele that should have been a safety, was going to be a safety because of his horrible snap. There were plenty of other bad snaps that Maynard bailed Galas out of.
• Maynard: I definitely feel after a re-watch that his inconsistency was more prevalent throughout the game than I thought after being their live. It wasn’t just the first few plays. He was really streaky. He’d have a few good drives, then he’d get in a bit of a funk for a few drives. What can’t be denied is that his talent means he’s a TON more likely than Mansion in particular at converting on tough downs. There’s no doubt there’s talent there. But people forget that’s what we said about Riley at first. And while I’m not as negative on Riley as some, we ought to be a bit more cautious. I think part of it was that Mansion set the bar SOOO low, we’re ready to take inconsistent play, particularly when it’s wrapped in a warm blanket of LOTS of potential.
• Marvin Jones: Marvin has arrived. He’s playing great ball. He did have a couple of odd drops, but he also had some great catches. His ability to make people miss. His speed. There’s lots to feel good about with him. I’m expecting big things from him as long as we continue to have reasonable quarterback play.
• Keenan Allen: Allen has improved a great deal from last year. Now he’s got some experience to go along with his raw talent. And boy did he show it on a number of catches on Saturday. Between Jones and Allen, we’ve got a GREAT pair of receivers.

Individual play/drive commentary

• Interception to start the game: Just based on the play, it’s hard to know who’s fault the interception was. It looked like Maynard was throwing the ball like it was a slant and Jones ran a stop or a quick come-backer. Did one of them get confused or forget? Did Maynard call the wrong play in the huddle? Was it a read play that one of them read wrong? Lot’s of possibilities. However, when hearing the commentary from both Maynard and Tedford after the game, it appears it was Maynard’s fault. Whether it was an off-target throw or a mis-read on what the play was is less clear.
• 3rd and 3 on 2nd drive: Tedford showed a lot of confidence in Maynard to let him throw the ball on 3rd and 3, particularly after that early pick. But Maynard sure delivered on that 23 yard pass. While it had more air under it than necessary, it was still a good pass that only Allen was going to be able to catch.
• First blocked extra point: Watching the video, the penetration up the middle wasn’t that good and the leap from the defense wasn’t that high. That looked more like Tavecchio didn’t get the loft he should have.
• Sofele’s 39 yard touchdown run: What a great play all the way around. The blocking was good and Sofele hit the hole with authority and exploded through it. Good downfield blocking by the wide receivers (Allen in particular).
• Second blocked extra point: This one seemed to be a combo of the two. The penetration was much more troublesome, but there’s no doubt that Tavecchio kicked it pretty low.
• Maynard to Allen in “double coverage”: While it was a crucially important 3rd down conversion, the lob over the top to Allen in double coverage that Allen did a great job of bringing in, was kinda over-blown from a double-coverage standpoint. Allen had gotten behind the coverage and if Maynard had laid it out where he was supposed to, it could have been a TD catch. So Maynard wasn’t throwing into double coverage. It became double coverage when Maynard slightly under-threw it and Allen had to slow down and then go up and get it. Great athleticism from Allen, and a good decision if a slightly off throw by Maynard.
• Maynard slings it to Jones: Two plays later Maynard showed his arm-strength in slinging the ball way down field to Jones. What I find interesting about those sorts of throws is that Maynard has an instinctive ability to know where it’s safe to throw. It wasn’t the most accurate throw ever (although it can be forgiven for how he was scrambling), but he threw it where he knew Jones could go get it and then Jones shed the tackle for the touchdown.
• DJ Campbell realing in the receiver: I’ll overlook for a moment how badly the coverage was blown on the play, but DJ Campbell showed off his speed in an impressive way, realing in the reciever. An important note: After penalties and a sack, Fresno State missed the long field-goal, so Campbell’s effort didn’t just save 4, it saved 7.
• Maynard hits Schwarts in the helmet on an attempted screen: This was another example of some inconsistency by Maynard. To some degree it’s because Maynard has a bit of a low release, but still, I’m sure he’s completely capable of getting a ball over the head of the tackle.
• Clock not running at end of half: According to my watch, the play where the clock didn’t run was a 14-15 second play (the commentators said 13 seconds). I guess either way it would have been one play for Fresno, but seriously, is that the correct referee procedure for when the clock doesn’t run? We have a replay booth that is supposed to be looking at every play. Couldn’t they figure it out for us?
• Maynard read-option for 48 yards: While I’ve always thought the frequency with which Oregon runs the read-option is a weakness (it’s not like it’s some magic play that can’t be defended), it is a nice wrinkle to add to the arsenal, particularly when you’ve got a QB who can run like Maynard. What I find particularly impressive about the read-option as run by Maynard is that the handoff deception is VERY good. That’s something that previous Oregon QB’s had that Thomas does not. Maynard’s got that little magic in his release that’s very deceptive.
• Jones’ spin move gets him into the endzone: What a great route run by Jones and then a good, timely delivery by Maynard. What I find impressive about the Jones spin move is how quickly he can get back up to full speed after it. Some players take a while to get their feet back underneath them after a spin move. Not so with Jones. He’s off to the races before the guy who whiffed hits the ground.
• Maynard throws it away after scrambling backwards 20 yards: This play confirmed what Tedford has been saying all along. Maynard gets it. He knows there are times to just throw it away and life to play another day. He did it even though it was 3rd down and the Bears had to punt. It was a wise move.
• Cecil Whiteside strips the ball and Guyton runs it in for a TD: For the most part I was a bit under impressed with the pressure the Bears were getting on Carr on passing plays (although it got better as the game wore on), but this play was top notch across the board. Not only did Whiteside get there quickly to knock the ball out as Carr pulled back to throw it (from where I was in the stands, I though for sure the arm was coming forward, but the video clearly shows otherwise), but there was pressure from all over. Add the awareness to find the ball after the fumble quickly and then to scoop and score, was quite impressive.
• Allen’s botched punt return: Although he got away with it when the ball bounced sharply away from him as he dived to catch it, that near-miss is not going to help Allen’s campaign to be the punt returner.
• Maynard misses a wide open Deboskie: Another example of the inconsistency was the missed easy TD from Maynard to Deboskie, where he slightly overthrew him. I suspect Maynard was expecting more speed out there, but still, you’ve got to make that throw and get the easy TD. There wasn’t anyone with in 20 yards of Deboskie.

(Written by kencraw)

OK, I was a bit miffed that parking was $30 (was I some ignorant fool who didn’t know about some reasonably close and cheaper parking?), but other than that, I don’t get why people are so down on Candlestick. The concourses were a bit narrow and everything was showing signs of wear (things that could be easily fixed if the plan wasn’t to bolt), but the escalators to the upper decks were very nice, the sight lines weren’t bad (better that the Oakland Coliseum for football) and frankly, after all the nightmares I’ve heard about parking, I was appalled just how easily I got both in and out of the stadium. And the weather… Maybe we just got a nice weather day, because it wasn’t any worse than Memorial is normally.

Perhaps it’s kinda like that movie that everyone tells you is horrible and then when you see it your expectations are low enough that you find it entertaining, but I sure didn’t get why this place is such the abomination that everyone says it is.

(Written by kencraw)

After reviewing the feedback, frankly I was surprised just how many people wanted to continue to hear me speak. Thanks for that 🙂 . That said, there seemed to be enough support for going to an unedited format that I want to give it a try. So listen here to my first un-edited edition. Please give me your feedback. Were the extra pauses and stutters detrimental, or easy to ignore?

Overall, who can’t be happy after Saturday, so hopefully this will keep the enjoyment going.

Standard Podcast [ 19:29 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

(Written by kencraw)

I had to take advantage of the cool weather this morning to get some work done in the shop. I’ll have the OTRH podcast and a couple of follow up posts later this evening and tomorrow.

In the mean time, vote in the poll.

(Written by kencraw)

The college football season starts today, so today is your last chance to signup for the Pick’Em League without any penalty (of missing the 1st two games).

Signup NOW:
http://excusemeformyvoice.com/pickem/

(Written by jsnell)

We’re back! For another weekly(ish) podcast about Cal football. This week Ken and Jason talk about the off-season, how the team is shaping up, what’s up with Jeff Tedford’s evolution (or de-evolution?) as a head coach, where we’re sitting at AT&T Park, and more. Plus: A walkthrough of Cal’s 2011 schedule, complete with Ken’s detailed predictions for every game. Except Presbyterian.

You can also subscribe to the podcast on iTunes.

There is no secret word this week. We forgot that we used to do that. We’ll bring it back next week.

Warm with high clouds (EMFMV 2011 #1) [ 55:19 ] Play Now | Play in Popup | Download

(Written by kencraw)

Jason and I will be recording our first regular mid-week podcast shortly, but I’m debating this year whether to continue my On The Road Home podcasts. For those of you who listen, you know I record them on the way home from the game. It started back when I was traveling to all the road games for Rivals, so I had lots of time in the car. It also gave me an opportunity to make available audio from the post-game interviews with the players and coaches.

Now that I’m no longer doing that, I’m wondering if they still have value. I’ve still got plenty of time in the car, coming from the Sacramento area, so that’s not the issue. But they take a lot of work once I get home as well. Because I’m driving while I record them, the post-processing of editing out the pauses (and the “what in God’s name is your problem!?! stay in your lane butt-wad” comments) and the such take over an hour. With a beautiful wife, 4 kids, a more than full time job, and lots of commitments at Church, my time is limited. That’s time that could be spent doing additional blogging instead, above and beyond what I already do. So please answer the poll on the sidebar with your thoughts of how you’d like me to spend my time for EMFMV:

1. Keep them the same: Pick this if you like the Podcasts and wouldn’t want them to change.
2. Go shorter: Pick this if you’d like me to continue, but with a shorter format (which would also reduce my editing time), probably in the 5-10 minute range.
3. Go unedited: Because I know I’m going to edit them later, I speak differently than I would otherwise. The reason that you hear no “ums and ahs” is because when I’ve got nothing to say, I’ll just shut-up for a minute or two until I gather my thoughts. I could instead just do a true stream of consciousness with no editing. The quality of the comments would be a bit lower and I’m sure there will be more stuttering/ums, but I think I could do OK.
4. Shorter and unedited: Pick this if you kinda like the podcasts but think they’re too long and want me to spend as little time on them as possible while still having reasonable content.
5. No OTRH podcast: Pick this if you’d prefer I focus my time/energy on blogging and perhaps doing a video review of the game (something I’ve thought of doing instead of a podcast).

Thank you for your feedback to help us make EMFMV a better site. I’ll decide whether to record one for the Fresno State game on Saturday around 10 AM before I head down, so get in your vote before then.

(Written by kencraw)

Sorry I got a slow start on this, but the Pick’Em league is ready for everyone to sign-up. Do it quick because the first game (UC Davis @ ASU) is on Thursday, just two days away!

Either click on the link on the header bar or go to:
http://excusemeformyvoice.com/pickem/

Yet again we’ll have the Betting Line and Ted Miller to compete against. Mr. Miller has been exposed as being nothing special when it comes to predictions… the Betting Line on the other hand, he’s pretty unstoppable.

(Written by kencraw)

It’s time for my annual act in futility of doing game-by-game predictions. Here are last year’s predictions. Other than missing the Nevada game (I seem to have a soft spot in my crystal ball in regards to non-conference road games), I was perfect, at least as far as the winner was concerned, until the Oregon game, when the wheels fell off the prediction bus and cracked my crystal ball. Frankly I underestimated how good Oregon would be last year (remember, they were short Masoli and nobody knew how good Thomas was going to be). The same goes for Stanford who I thought would stink without Gerhardt. And we just won’t mention The Game That Should Not Be Named to end the season.

Here goes my shot at this year:

Fresno State @ Cal => 13-24: I was pretty nervous about this game when the schedule first came out, and while I still feel there’s a lot of risk here, my confidence level is growing. Fresno State is not the team they were a decade ago. Although I think the neutral site will work to FSU’s advantage, I think Cal’s defense will be too much for the Bulldogs and Cal’s offense will get just enough done to win without there being too much doubt.

Cal @ Colorado => 24-27: As indicated above, my crystal ball stinks when it comes to non-conference road games. Therefore, as much as I’d like to believe we’re going to win this game, I mean, we CRUSHED them last year, I think their new head coach, playing at altitude and buffaloes desire to prove that they belong in the new Pac-12 will have Cal fans boiling over when we lose this one in as frustrating fashion as @Maryland and @Nevada.

Presbyterian @ Cal => 3-52: OK, there’s not much to doubt here and I can’t even think of a good/tasteful joke as a Catholic to relate how this historically protestant school will lose… so I’ll just leave it as “Cal wins”.

Cal @ Washington => 27-17: You can call me a Washington naysayer because I just don’t see anything in them that scares me. They *barely* beat us last year and we were a crippled shell of a team on offense. Yeah, yeah, I know they beat a supposedly good Nebraska team in the bowl game, but that was a letdown game if I’ve ever seen one. Yes, I also remember they’ve beat us both times that we’ve played them since Sark took over, but the 2009 game was a case of a letdown game for Cal in UW’s AND Locker’s best game of the season. This year the game is early, they’re short Locker and I think Cal comes out strong and wins this one.

Cal @ Oregon => 17-42: There’s a part of me that would like to believe that Cal can put together another defensive performance like last year. There’s a part of me that thinks Oregon is over-rated this year. There’s a part of me that thinks Cal’s revamped offense will get it done. But after that part of me is done talking to the Easter Bunny, I come back to reality. This one is going to be ugly and I only hope it doesn’t kill our chances for the following week.

USC @ Cal => 24-17: How is a Thursday night game at AT&T against a not-bowl eligible USC going to go? Your guess is as good as mine. USC will have had a bye week, so they won’t be coming into this on 4-days practice (sadly for us). Cal will have had an odd full week, playing the 2nd of back-to-back Thursday night games. Additionally, the sheep-skins should be undefeated at that point, with the teams on the schedule to that point being either over-rated or weak. I’m going to go with the pessimist in me and say the Bears lose this one in what will have a defensive struggle feel to it.

Utah @ Cal => 20-31: If Ted Miller has us winning this game in his best and worst case scenarios for both Utah and Cal, that’s good enough for me. Seriously though, I think Cal will be hungry after two tough losses to get back on track and they’ll be in no mood to let the new kid on the block push them around. The two extra days of practice won’t hurt either. Utah should be showing the signs of how a Pac-12 conference will wear on you and will have just come back from an oddly schedule cross-country non-conference game at Pittsburgh. Finally, I’m sure the bowl loss in 2009 will keep the older Bears on the intense side, not wanting a repeat of that debacle.

Cal @ UCLA => 42-21: Can you believe that Herb Herbstreet picked UCLA to win the Pac-12 South (minus USC)? Neither can I. Cal has owned this series ever since 2008 and Neuheisel hasn’t done anything to get UCLA back on track and I don’t see anything that would make me think this is his year for anything other than collecting an unemployment check. Bears win this one easily, particularly if UCLA can’t win some of their push games leading up to the Cal game (I could see them being as good as 3-4 and as bad as 1-6).

WSU @ Cal => 17-27: If you’ve been counting, the Bears will be 5-3 coming into this game. They’ll be very hungry for that 6th win this year. At the same time, WSU will be just as hungry and still be hoping to reach bowl eligibility having started out 3-0 but having lost the last 5. Needing to win 3 of their last 4 against Cal, ASU, Utah and UW (something they’ll believe they can do), they’ll come to play. Nevertheless hunger can only make up for so much of a talent differential and while this one will start close, Cal will win this one going away.

Oregon State @ Cal => 13-31: Oregon State’s stock has been plummeting faster this summer than my stock options in HP and I think for good reason (sadly, on both counts). Riley has made miracles happen in Corvalis, but last year he ran out of magic. Things look even more dire this year with injuries galore over the off-season. The Bears are sick of losing to this team (yes, it has been since 2006) and I think with bowl eligibility out of the way, the Bears play loose and fast in this one. Buy your tickets now: this will be the most cathartic win of the season.

Cal @ Stanford => 24-34: It pains me to say anything other than the Bears will bring back the Ax in 2011, but despite the Bears feeling much better about themselves at 7-3 at this point, I think the former-Harbaughs will still win this one. Sorry Bears.

Cal @ ASU => 28-31: This might be the hardest game of the season to predict. It’s after the rivalry game for both teams. Being a ASU naysayer, ASU will be long out of Pac-12 south contention by this point. The Bears generally have had ASU’s number, but that’s been a lot more iffy when the game is in the desert. ASU should already be bowl eligible, but Erickson might be playing for his job. Seeing as how I think I might have been a bit too optimistic, having the Bears win at UW, and beating both Utah and Oregon State, I’ll even things out by having a loss here.

That puts our final record at 7-5, which feels about right to me. But at the same time, I only see 3 games where the Bears are pretty likely to lose: Oregon, Stanford and USC. If this team was 9-3, it wouldn’t shock me. On the negative side, the risk is if UW and Oregon State don’t go our way. The ASU game could be pretty important to save us from two consecutive years of lacking bowl eligibility.

Go Bears!

(Written by kencraw)

I did both my analysis posts based on reports from the press and not an actual depth chart released by the team, so I knew up front they wouldn’t be perfect (I even said as much in the first post). Now, the official depth chart for the Fresno State game has been published. You can find it here.

I got the entire set of starters correct, but there were a few changes for the backups. I’ll list them with the most egregious mistakes first:

1. Backups for inside linebacker: Somehow JP Hurrell completely escaped my radar, despite being someone who’s seen the field in the past. I had the younger Fauna as the 2nd backup and even thought Forbes would be ahead of Hurrell. Instead it is Hurrell who will join Mullins as the backup.
2. Backups for cornerback: I had Avery Walls penciled in as a backup along with Michael Coley. There had been so many good things said about Walls in camp, I had to assume he had passed Moncrease. But in fact, he had not and Moncrease gets the #2 spot behind Cattouse.
3. Backups for offensive line: I didn’t even make a stab at listing them, although I did mention Rigsbee, Tyndall and Brazinski in the text. Those three are official backups now (at tackle, tackle and center, respectively), with the addition of Chris Adcock, a redshirt freshman who has had some good things said about him and Justin Gates, a senior who has seen some backup playing time in the past, having done better than terrible.
4. Backups for nose guard: Tipoti had been injured enough I thought true freshman standout Moala would get the nod, but indicating it was probably Tipoti’s job when he was healthy. Not sure how healthy Tipoti is, but he’s apparently healthy enough to get the #2 slot.
5. Backups for defensive end: Getting into the nit-picking category, Mustafa Jalil has played strong enough as a true freshman to get the “or” listing next to Gabe King for the #2 spot behind Trevor Guyton. Seeing as I mentioned him as coming on strong behind King, I don’t feel to bad about this miss.
6. Backups for wide receiver: I listed Edmond and Clay as the backups to the top 3 wide receivers, but with only two receivers listed on the depth chart, Michael Calvin who I had listed as the #3 guy, is ‘demoted’ to a backup and only Edmond gets the mention as a #2 guy. Clay is mostly recovered from his minor knee surgery, which is what is likely keeping him off the depth chart, but will likely see his name on there in the weeks to come.
7. Backups for outside linebacker: Finally, I listed Ryan Davis and Cecil Whiteside as the “or” backups for the surprise Camporeale. Only Ryan Davis is listed.

All in all, while there were more minor errors than I would have liked, only two were cases where my judgment was truly incorrect. Considering both were backups, that’s not bad if I don’t say so myself. The rest were merely cases where the situation wasn’t clear and I said as much in my preview, so I have a hard time holding that against my previous analysis.

As for what any of this does for my overall analysis of the depth… I can only answer: not much. There’s no revelations that change much of anything.