The longest continually active Cal Bear blog

Say goodbye to the Rose Bowl

(Written by kencraw)

Well, the Pac-10 decision is in and depending on how you view things it’s the best or worst case scenario. It’s the best because we get to play all the schools we care about every year. USC, UCLA, Oregon, Washington… we play them every year. It’s the worst because we have to play the best teams in the conference, USC, Oregon, etc., every year.

I was hoping we’d go with the division game record for deciding who goes to the championship game, so we could play USC and UCLA, but wouldn’t have to worry about beating them to get to the conference championship game. Now the Bears are going to be the class of the conference just to get to the conference championship game and then they’re going to have to re-beat USC most years. OK, some years it’ll be Arizona or UCLA, but it’s going to be the norm that USC is in there.

So, what do you care about? Do you care about having an easy schedule like Arizona was just gifted? Or do you care about having great matchups every year? Depending on what you think, this was either really good news or the worst possible scenario.

As for the conference as a whole, I’m still shocked, absolutely shocked that the northwest schools agreed to the limited LA exposure they’re going to get from now on. They really lose a lot by allowing the California schools to keep their rivalry. Yeah, they got the revenue sharing as a bone-throw, but it seems to me that’s not enough to compensate for the loss of exposure both on TV and in LA itself. But I guess I’m not the president of any of those schools, so that’s why it’s my job to be surprised.

On to ASU… GO BEARS!

Liveblogging the Pac-12 announcements

(Written by kencraw)

OK, here we go, the moment of truth for the conference:

  • All decisions were unanimous, says first speaker (Michael Crow, an ASU guy).
  • Larry Scott on now.
  • Going through all of his thank yous, blaw, blaw, blaw.
  • Talking about revenue sharing: We will have equal revenue sharing going forward, including TV revenue (sorry USC and UCLA). They will get a $2 Million bonus when it’s less than $170 total for the conference.
  • Cal and Stanford in the North as expected. Will be called North and South.
  • Talking about how balanced the two divisions will be and the importance of rivalry games.
  • Going with the 5-2-2. Cal will play USC and UCLA every year. WOW!
  • conference record, not division record, will determine who goes to the championship game.
  • No other sport will have divisions.
  • Basketball will have 18 game conference schedule.
  • Conference record will determine who gets to host the conference championship game as well. So no neutral site.
  • USC would not be eligible for conference championship games while their under sanctions from post-season.
  • Not going to rule out neutral site in the future, but Scott really likes the easy and guaranteed full stadiums of hosted games.
  • Scott’s trying to soft-sell the 5-2-2 as good for the Northwest schools, saying that they’ll play the SoCal schools every other year. I suspect what he means is that they’ll play one school from SoCal each year and thus each school they’ll only see every other year.
  • I can’t believe the NW schools bought into this. Obviously the compromise was to give them equal revenue sharing, but still, shocking to me.
  • Crow is saying that you can’t get the AD’s to be unanimous on anything but the CEO’s, well he doesn’t quite say while they’re different, but reading between the lines, they want to look united so they all vote on what they know will pass.
  • Scott reiterates that he fully expects USC and UCLA’s $2 Million bonus to be short term while they’re increasing TV revenue.
  • Utah will still have their revenue phased in as per their agreement when joining the conference.
  • Scott reiterating the value of the hosted conference championship game and the home fans well outweigh things like weather.
  • Note that revenue sharing doesn’t start until 2012-2013 year, i.e. the year of the new TV contracts.

OK, into stupid questions now. I’ll give commentary later…

Comments re-enabled

(Written by kencraw)

I’m not sure how this keeps happening, but the comments got disabled at some point again. I know I haven’t been doing it, and I doubt Jason has. I haven’t even done a blog upgrade recently (although I did do some plug-in upgrades, perhaps one of those?).

The worst part is, I can’t tell that they’re turned off. Since I’m a logged in user, I can comment. But of course only a couple of us have accounts, so most of you can’t comment. In the future, if you see that commenting is disabled, please e-mail me at:

blog AT excusemeformyvoice DOT com and let me know.

In any case, they’re re-enabled now… comment away!

What a trojan horse disaster

(Written by kencraw)

(I caught most of the game from a Chili’s (in the bar area) in between a wedding rehearsal and the rehearsal dinner, so that’s why I wasn’t online but have thoughts now…)

The Bears played their worst half of football all season at the most critical moment yesterday. Receivers couldn’t catch, blockers couldn’t block, Vereen didn’t stand a chance, and Riley threw interceptions whenever the rest of the offense finally did something right. The defense also didn’t stand a chance the way the offense kept giving the ball back but also turned in a weak performance with lots of over-committing and generally desperate looking play.

And that’s what I noticed about the team as a whole, they looked desperate. They looked like the 2005 Bears with Ayoob under center playing the best team in the country, like they knew the only way they’d win was by getting lucky for 90% of the plays for all 60 minutes. They lacked the confidence that they were a real contender and USC was nothing to be scared of.

And I’m not sure why other than some generic claim to “leadership problems”.

Leadership problems show up at two times:

  1. In tight games
  2. On the road

The good news is that Cal has a softer back-end schedule, particularly when considering the home games. They only play two teams on the road: WSU and Oregon State. Unless something significant changes, I’m writing off the OSU game as a loss at this point. However, I think the Bears can go to the frozen potato patch and beat WSU. So it all comes down to how they can do at home. ASU is very beatable, as is Washington. We beat those three, ASU, UW and WSU, and we’re bowl eligible. A Big Game win, something I still think the Bears have a better than 50% shot at with the game at home, and the Bears are 7-5. Pull off the miracle at home, where the Bears CLEARLY are a different team than the one that went to the LA Coliseum, and beat Oregon, and we’re 8-4.

Personally, I’m thinking 7-5.

Cal-USC Liveblog! Cancelled due to Cal being awful.

(Written by jsnell)

We tried to do a Liveblog. Ken was smart – he didn’t show up. Some of you did. Then Cal gave up 42 points in one half. We gave up. Go do something more productive with your life. We’ll figure out what it all means, later.

Divisional alignment set?

(Written by kencraw)

Well, it looks as though some unintended leaks have happened on how the divisions might split. Jon Wilner writes what he learns from WeAReSC.com. The athletic directors voted 7-5 in favor of putting Cal and Stanford in the north.

Now… that’s not the vote that counts. The President’s vote next week does. And since it was 7-5, all it takes is a swap or two and we’re back to a different plan. Also not decided is whether the conference will preserve the annual California school games like it has in the past. The USC guy calls that the 5-2-2 (5 division games, 2 games against the other California schools and 2 non-divisional games).

I’ve always thought the 5-2-2 doesn’t have a chance in Hades. There’s no way the northwest schools will accept the resulting loss in exposure in California, particularly southern California. Ted Miller thinks that revenue sharing changes will allow for a compromise, but I highly doubt that.

Personally, I don’t really care if we’re in the same division as the soCal schools, I just want to play them every year. Particularly if the Pac-12 decides to only count divisional record for who goes to the championship game, something I’m told the SEC does, the 5-2-2 would probably be the most desirable result as we’d get to play all the northwest schools and the soCal schools every year, the teams I care most about, while not having the tough games against the soCal schools counting against our conference title chances.

But as I said, I just don’t see that happening.

So if this news is true and holds true through the president’s meeting, the annual games with UCLA and USC may be down the tubes. Or it might mean we’re on track to the best case scenario. Or not.

Belated thoughts on last Saturday’s games – week 2

(Written by kencraw)

Here are my thoughts on the competition across the conference:

  1. UCLA at Cal:
    • I’d write a lot more, but since I wasn’t at the game and haven’t yet been able to watch it on the Tivo, (when’s the last time THAT happened?) I’ll just give a couple quick thoughts.
    • Looks like this Cal defense is for real. 144 yards and 26 net rushing!?! Unbelievably awesome. This is going to keep the Bears in a lot of games (and will likely get us some more great defensive recruits late in this year’s recruiting game).
    • Sounds like the offense was hit and miss, particularly in the 2nd half. For some reason I find myself surprisingly optimistic that they’ll find their rhythm as the season continues.
    • I’ve got a lot of optimism about USC in LA next week right now that they’ve lost two in a row, are unranked, and probably already realize they’ve officially got nothing to fight for. Plus they look pretty mediocre.
  2. USC at Stanford:
    • What did I say last week? (“Let their be no mistake, USC is downright mediocre.”) So the question is, is Stanford similarly mediocre? I mean, Stanford looked great in the 1st half versus Oregon, but they were also gifted a lot and got shutdown in the 2nd half.
    • That’s another way of saying these two team were pretty equally matched.
    • USC for two weeks in a row lost on a last minute field goal drive. That defense is not well conditioned nor all that impressive early.
  3. Oregon at WSU:
    • This was somewhat of a letdown game, but it does raise an eyebrow that Oregon’s offense was it’s least potent of the year versus WSU and WSU put up 23 points (3 TD’s and a FG) even though Oregon won convincingly.
    • And that’s all I have to say about that.
  4. ASU at UW:
    • Washington really needed this win and didn’t get it.
    • Two weeks in a row ASU has gone on the road and played tough.
    • Looks like my preseason prediction for UW is right (weaker than expected) but that ASU is the positive surprise of the conference. I’m more and more glad this game is in Berkeley.
    • Note that Threet only threw one INT in this game. I think his consistency of play is going to be key to what games ASU wins.
  5. OSU at Arizona:
    • Looks like OSU is following their usual trend of coming out of their non-conference schedule far from unscathed but ready to kick everyone’s rear in the conference. That’s a pretty good feat to go down to Tucson and win.
    • As for Arizona, live by the sword (beat Cal in the last minute), die by the sword (lose a close one to OSU).
    • In many ways this is good news for the Bears as they need Arizona to lose a few to help their bowl situation. Of course they still need to beat the Beavers, but that’s still in their control.

Go Bears!

Belated thoughts on last Saturday’s games

(Written by kencraw)

Here are my thoughts on the competition across the conference:

  1. Stanford at Oregon:
    • Stanford had a lot of trouble running between the tackles, which was very surprising considering that their whole schtick is about the power running game.
    • Luck looked brilliant in the 1st half and downright mediocre in the 2nd half as Oregon ramped up the pressure. While he impressed me in the first half, my overall feeling is still that he’s an over appreciated QB and Cal’s strategy in the 2009 Big Game will work again in 2010: Rattle him early and often.
    • Oregon’s offense continues to look awesome. If someone beats Oregon this year it will come down to whoever can slow their offense down, which considering how they like to run the up-tempo game, will only happen with a team that both comes with a great defensive effort AND does a lot of ball control to keep the Oregon offense off the field.
    • Darren Thomas is FAR further along in his progression as a QB than either of Oregon’s previous QB’s. Both Dixon and Masoli took a whole year to “get” the offense and have both the running and throwing skills to make it work. Thomas is probably their best QB yet.
    • Oregon’s defense on the other hand, looked exposable, particularly in the 1st half. I must admit they definitely dialed it up a notch in the 2nd half and looked pretty strong, but I think that was in part because they figured out Luck’s schtick and brought the heat.
    • Boiling it down for the Bears, I have lots of hope the Bears can beat Stanford in the Big Game, but beating Oregon is going to be quite a struggle unless they have road issues this year.
  2. Washington at USC:
    • Let their be no mistake, USC is downright mediocre. This wasn’t a great
      performance by UW nor was Locker some unstoppable force. I guarantee you that USC doesn’t give up that game winning FG drive at the end of the game back when Carroll is coach. Heck, if UW doesn’t get conservative once in FG range, they easily score a TD on that drive.
    • This wasn’t like last year’s game where USC was without their star QB or anything like that. USC had all the pieces and stunk anyway.
    • USC got lucky in the 2nd quarter when a good forced fumble turned into a touch-back isntead of the TD for UW it was about to be because the refs made a bad call. While you can’t blame the on-the-field refs for making a tough call about whether the ball crossed the goal-line inside the pilon and it’s understandable that the replay refs didn’t overturn it because the one good angle was obscured by Locker’s body, I can guarantee you that ball did not go inside the pilon. This was a pivotal moment in the game and USC might have lost a blowout if it wasn’t for this lucky break.
    • I’ve got a lot more hope than a week ago that the Bears can go down to the LA Coliseum and beat USC and I still think the Bears will lay waste to UW when they come to Berkeley at the end of the season.
  3. WSU at UCLA:
    • I didn’t see this game, but based on the stats and drive log UCLA’s secondary got exposed and that’s why the game was closer than expected. Riley’s performance is going to be key because we’re not going to win this one on the ground. Their rush defense continues to look stingy.
    • On the flip side, UCLA is getting rolling with their Pistol offense running game. 437 yards of rushing!?! This doesn’t worry me much though. I don’t think it was the fundamentals of the Pistol that got the Bears, it was the particulars of how well Nevada ran it. UCLA doesn’t have the personnel or the experience to do what Nevada did.
    • For those who don’t know, WSU was down 14-20 at halftime and scored two TD’s to have a 28-20 mid-3rd quarter lead before UCLA rattled off 3 TD’s including a 2-point conversion on their 1st to tie the game at the end of the 3rd quarter. The final score doesn’t well indicate just how close it was.
    • Also for those who don’t know, Prince didn’t play due to injury, it was backup Richard Brehaut who was executing the offense, but he didn’t rush much. It was the two running backs who did the damage. Prince will be back for the Cal game, or at least that’s the way it looks.
    • As for WSU, while they’re not as improved as I thought, they’ve clearly got more heart than last year and I still think they’ll pull an upset or two just to make the conference more interesting. The Bears need to be ready to play a good game up on the frozen potato patch (not to be confused with the frozen tundra).
  4. ASU at OSU:
    • Arizona State might be undefeated right now if their QB wasn’t so mistake prone. Threet has the look of a very good QB, but he throws interceptions like they’re going out of style. 3 against OSU and FOUR against Oregon.
    • The other reason ASU keeps losing games is their penalties, although they did better versus OSU.
    • Overall I think ASU is a dangerous team in that they’re going to put together a couple of complete games and beat some teams that will look like head scratchers when all is said and done. All you can do is hope they don’t bring that game against your team. At the same time, they’re inconsistency is their downfall.
    • OSU continues to be an enigma to me. How good is Boise? How good is TCU? Can they put a win together when the other team isn’t mistake prone? I’d sure love for the Bears to play them sooner rather than later, because as always you get the feeling they’re slowly putting it together and are going to be tough to beat in Corvallis in November (well, two days from it, anyway).

Go Bears!

UCLA tickets still for sale

(Written by kencraw)

I’ve still got 6 tickets for sale for the UCLA game. This is shaping up to be a great game between a better than expected UCLA and a Cal team that always does well at home (particularly against UCLA) and has shown a lot of grit (particularly versus Arizona).

And I’ve got great seats…

While I don’t have donor seats, I still think I’ve got some great seats. First of all, I’m on the isle, in two rows of 3. This helps with knee issues as the person behind you is a friend, not some random dude. Second of all, there’s no seats in front of me. We’re the first two rows above the concourse tunnel, which also gives you more room to stretch out. Add in being close to the tunnel for easy in/out access, that they’re at the right height to have good visibility across the whole field and I think they’re as of seats as you’ll find in the non-donor section. (FYI, this is section DD).

I’m asking face value for the tickets: $53 each. I’d prefer to sell the block of 6 to one person but I will consider breaking it into two groups of 3 if no one is interested in the full set for the game.

E-Mail me at tickets AT excusemeformyvoice DOT com if you’re interested, or leave a comment in the comment section.

Cal cuts 5 sports

(Written by kencraw)

Breaking news: Cal has cut 5 sports. Here’s the list:

  1. Baseball
  2. Rugby
  3. Men’s gymnastics
  4. Women’s gymnastics
  5. Women’s lacrosse

The one sport that is a little misleading is Rugby. It will be given “special” status as a “varsity club” sport. They will still have access to most of the facilities reserved for varsity athletes and they’ll still have admission spots reserved for them (non-scholarship). It’s unclear if their coaching staff will have to find a different way to generate their salaries and how they’ll be paying for their travel budget. I do know Rugby already had a pretty sizable income/donation base that covered most of their expenses, so chances are they’ve already figured out how to deal with those revenue issues.

I suspect the reality is that the only reason Rugby got demoted was Title IX reasons. I have plenty I could say on that subject, but considering Rugby took the lightest blow of the 5, now is not the time.

But the rest of the programs… they’re gone. Done. No more. A school with a proud tradition of across the board athletics, has taken a significant step back to just be one of the crowd. It went from the 2nd most sports in the Pac-10 behind Stanford and the 2nd most nation-wide amongst public schools with 27, to just one of the pack with 22.

What a blow to the University.

What’s worse?

(Written by kencraw)

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

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

Saturday Viewing: Stanford at Oregon

(Written by jsnell)

For those who listened to us lament that the Stanford-Oregon game on Oct. 2 would be starting after 11 p.m. Eastern time, good news! Not only has the start time been moved to 8 p.m. ET/5 p.m. PT, but it’ll also be the ESPN GameDay location Saturday morning.

Should be a nice showcase for two Pac-10 teams ranked in the top 10. Would be nice if the GameDay crew makes it to Berkeley some year, though…

Saturday Night Dead (OTRH/EMFMV 2010 #5 combo)

(Written by jsnell)

Usually after a game, Ken records his thoughts. Well, Ken was sitting at home, Jason was sitting at his home, neither of us were going to sleep anytime soon, so we let it all out. Here it is. A dramatic post-loss podcast that serves as both an On the Road Home and an EMFMV combo. And to the guy in the liveblog asking why we posted our podcast on Thursday last week: enjoy this early one!

We talk about Cal losing 10-9 to Arizona. We are confused about the Pac-10. We don’t know what to make of UCLA. We don’t think the UCLA-WSU game will tell us anything. We are happy about Cal’s defense but confused about the offense. We are confused in general. Also, we mention still-beating hearts being ripped out of chests, get Tucson confused with San Diego, Jason does live play by play of a game that is now over, and more. If you ever wished you could bottle the feeling of two guys talking about Cal in the immediate aftermath of a loss, WISH NO MORE!

You can also subscribe to the podcast on iTunes.

Cal-Arizona Deadblog

(Written by jsnell)

Want to see what we said about the game while it was going on. It’s all there after the jump. But whatever you do, don’t mention the score. Read the rest of this entry »

Looking back on ’09: Arizona

(Written by kencraw)

(We continue the looking back series for the 2009 season. We’re going to continue the trend of doing these in “matching order” instead of chronological order. Today we look at the Arizona game. Go here for past looking back posts.)

Pre-Game notes and thoughts:
When Arizona came to town, there was only one thing on the minds of Bear fans around the nation: Nothing. We were in shock, in disbelief, in disarray. Jahvid Best’s injury the previous week against Oregon State left everyone shell shocked. We almost didn’t remember that we had lost the game. If we could manage the mental discipline, we’d remember that after similarly terrifying back-to-back losses to USC and Oregon, Cal had ripped off 3 consecutive wins, including a gritty road win over Arizona State, clearly showing that the Bears had rebounded. But now, where were we? Was the rebound over? Was Arizona going to beat Cal for a 3rd year in a row (they were ranked 17th after all)? Who’s asking these questions (because it wasn’t the shell shocked Bears fans)? They only had one question: Will Jahvid be OK?

Scoring and momentum changing plays:

  • The Bears manage to get far enough down field on their first drive, a fairly balanced one, to kick a 46 yard field-goal which Tavecchio nails right down the middle. Bears first to score: 3-0
  • Tavecchio follows up the good FG with a very short kickoff and Arizona starts their drive on their 35.
  • Alualu is so physical pushing his lineman back he’s thrust into the RB who fumbles the ball. Cal recovers at the Arizona 32.
  • Cal gets a somewhat generous pass interference on 3rd and long to keep their drive alive.
  • Vereen spins out of a backfield tackle that would have lost the Bears 10+ yards and turns into a 9 yard gain. An outstanding run.
  • Riley fumbles while running the option play on 3rd and goal from the 2, but luckily the Bears recover. Tavecchio kicks the easy FG. Bears scoring, but only FGs: 6-0
  • Arizona’s RB busts one open for 40 yards getting the ball down to the Cal 18, their first big play, over half way through the 2nd quarter.
  • After getting down to the 2 yard-line by converting a 3rd and 12, Arizona punches it in. Cal’s inability to add points through their domination early, puts them in a hole: 6-7
  • After forcing a 3 and out for Cal and using timeouts to give them one last shot before halftime, Arizona kicks a 37 yard field-goal. Bears down by 4: 6-10.
  • Cal takes advantage of the 30 seconds left before half and on the back of a long pass to Tucker, Tavecchio kicks a 50 yard field-goal to negate Arizona’s. Down to a one-point game at halftime: 9-10
  • On the opening drive of the 2nd half, Josh Hill intercepts a ball that Foles tries to thread into too small a hole. Unfortunately the drive stalls and Tavecchio misses this one, his third long field goal attempt of the game.
  • Riley under throws a wide open Boateng for what should have been an easy TD but instead is a interception at the Cal 3 yard line.
  • After the D forces a 3 and out and a shanked punt gives Cal the ball back inside the Arizona 30, it just takes one chuck to Skylar Curran in the endzone, who manages to come down with it despite the aggressive pass interference call. Bears go for the 2-point conversion and fail but Bears back in front: 15-10
  • Jeremy Ross has a strong punt return back inside the Arizona 30, giving Cal yet another short field to work with.
  • But Riley throws what has to be the most ridiculous interception of his career, panicking when the rush came through quick and floating a duck into the endzone where no Cal receivers are and is easily caught by the waiting safety for an interception and touch back.
  • Cal gets called for two (correct) pass interference calls on an Arizona drive that keep it alive and eventually Foles connects with his TE on 1st and goal from the 9. They too go for the 2-point conversion and fail. Bears back down by one: 15-16.
  • After Riley connects with Tucker to get on the right side of the field, Vereen and DeBoskie trade off runs that get the ball down into the redzone. Alas the drive stalls yet again when Cal can’t convert on 3rd and 9, but Tavecchio kicks his 4th field-goal. Bears back on top: 18-16
  • Tavecchio saves a long kickoff runback, tackling the runner with his legs at a critical moment in the game (4:30 left)
  • After getting in field position mostly on the back of Foles passing, Foles throws the ball twice in one down after it is batted down on 3rd and 3 from the 25. Instead they have to go for it on 4th and 17 from the 39, which they don’t convert.
  • On Cal’s next play, Vereen busts through a big hole for a 61 yard touchdown run. Bears miss the extra point giving Arizona just a smidgen of light leaving it a one score game: 24-16
  • Cal breaks up a long pass by Foles, then sacks him twice (2nd and 4th down) to put an end to it.

Observations:

  • Even though the Bears were able to force a punt on Arizona’s first drive, the Arizona running game was working pretty effectively, picking up 5+ on most runs.
  • After that first drive, the Cal defense was a lot stiffer than the first. Forcing a number of punts and getting the ball back to the Cal offense.
  • The Cal offense had pretty good rhythm but no finishing power in the 1st quarter.
  • Foles, while not particularly fast, did a pretty good job of avoiding would-be sackers and extending the play a number of times throughout the game.
  • The Bear defense was definitely firing on all cylinders on this day. Their stretch plays weren’t working with both corners, Syd in particular, doing a great job of shedding their blockers. The inside run game was just not working for Arizona and the pass coverage was good enough to get the job done. A very strong performance.
  • At one point Arizona was so frustrated with their offense’s play that they benched Foles and brought in their young running QB. He was no more effective as Cal collapsed on his obvious run plays. It didn’t even last a full drive before Foles was back out there.
  • Riley was most definitely not having one of his best performances in the 2nd half. There were a couple opportunities for Cal to stick a knife in Arizona but his interceptions kept killing otherwise promising situations.
  • As much as the penalty on that double throw was big, the reality was that it was trouble the minute it was batted down and Foles caught it. He was unlikely to get past the 30 yard line with the defense in pursuit, and that’s being generous. Either way it’s 4th down and a long FG attempt for a weak kicker or go for it on 4th down.
  • Overall the Cal defense played a gritty game that gave the offense enough opportunities to score the points needed to win.

Implications for 2010:
There’s no doubt that Cal matches up well against Arizona with their return to a more traditional offense. Cal had them bottled up all night. If Riley can play a good consistent game, Cal can provide enough balance to move the ball against Arizona. There should also be some open receivers down the field the way Arizona plays an aggressive defense. Riley couldn’t hit them in 2009, but if he can make a couple of those in 2010, it could really break the game open. But I have a fair amount of optimism that the Cal D-Line will do well enough to allow the linebackers to be disruptive like they did in 2009. All of this is predicated on not letting the crowd dictate the emotions on the field, but based on the teams on paper, Cal most definitely has a shot at this one.

Conclusion:
This game was stuck in a fog for me between the Best injury and the Big Game. It was good to re-watch it. The reality is the defense was the key to the game. The bottled up the Arizona run game and kept Foles in check (although he got stronger as the game wore on). I had forgotten just how mistake prone Riley was. Had he been more consistent, the game wouldn’t have even been close.

Looking back on ’08: Arizona

(Written by kencraw)

(We pick back up the looking back series for the 2008 season after it fell apart when the traveling schedule started taking it’s toll (starting with UCLA) last season. I didn’t even get to these games from 2 years ago in the off-season! So now you’ll get two years worth of looking back games in some weeks. Go here for past posts.)

Pre-Game notes and thoughts:
The Bears entered this mid-October game ranked 25th, and 4-1 (2-0 in conference), having rebounded from their ranking killing loss to Maryland in September with 2 wins over Colorado State and Arizona State, both at home. Longshore had taken back over the starting spot from Kevin Riley the previous week against ASU after inconsistent performances in the Maryland and CSU games lost Riley his job. Longshore would be starting for the 2nd straight week. Was this Longshore’s time to shine as a senior? They were also the only team undefeated in conference play, admittedly having played two of the weakest teams (although that wasn’t as clear about ASU at the time as it is in retrospect), with USC having lost to Oregon State. Could this be the year that Cal broke through? Would the Arizona game be their downfall again as it was in 2006? Would Longshore have another mistake filled trip to the desert as in 2006 at Arizona and 2007 at ASU? Arizona didn’t seem like that big of a challenge in 2008, having lost to New Mexico and having been destroyed by Stanford, also considered poor at the time, in Palo Alto. But the 2006 edition of Arizona wasn’t very strong either. Only time would tell if the Bears were going to continue to roll.

Scoring and momentum changing plays:

  • Nyan Boateng does a false start on 3rd and 4 when Arizona had jumped offside, forcing a 3rd and 9 that the Bears can’t convert on their 1st drive of the game.
  • Arizona’s RB Grigsby fumbles the ball when Felder punches the ball out on their own 43 giving the Bears the ball back quickly and with a short field.
  • Longshore hits Verran Tucker on a slant for a 35 yard gain down to the 9 yard line.
  • Verran Tucker makes a diving catch in the back of the endzone on 3rd and goal from the 2. Bears start the game off right: 7-0
  • Tuitama throws a middle screen over the head of the intended receiver right into Anthony Felder’s hands, giving Cal the ball back at midfield after the run back, killing an otherwise promising drive for Arizona.
  • Longshore overthrows a wide open Tucker on the long ball right after the interception, giving up a nearly free opportunity for a 14-0 lead. Alas he was off the mark.
  • Tedford decides to have Tavecchio kick on 4th and 3 from the 34. Tavecchio’s 51 yard kick was long enough but wide right by just a foot or two.
  • The Arizona run game wears down the Bear defense and a 20 yard run finishes off a power drive. The game is tied: 7-7
  • Arizona’s Thomas busts off a 40 yard punt return to setup Arizona on the Cal side of the field after Cal 3 and outs.
  • A pass to the TE after the linebacker suck up and a 10 yard power run up the middle was all it took by Arizona to score another TD. Bears loses two scores in 2 minutes: 7-14
  • After Cal and Arizona trade punts, Best busts out one of his signature long runs accelerating away from the safety and into the endzone. Game is tied: 14-14
  • After an Arizona 3 and out and Best continuing to work well in open space, Longshore gets a long ball down to Tucker at the 3 yard line.
  • Even after a 15-yard chop block penalty gives Cal a near impossible 1st and goal from the 18 yard-line, Longshore gets a great pass to Morrah in the corner of the endzone. Bears rebound to take lead back: 21-14
  • After a couple punts back and forth, the Bears manage to get a 43 yard field-goal off before halftime and the Bears get one last score before the half. Halftime score: 24-14
  • On the first drive on the 2nd half, SydQuan gets beat on a deep slant (an unusual occurrence if there is one) and Arizona gets an all too easy TD. Lead is down to the pre-halftime FG: 24-21
  • Follett gets a monster sack on 3rd and 12, sacking Tuitama on the 2 yard line, forcing the short punt.
  • The Bears get just enough to get into field-goal range. Bears slowly growing lead: 27-21
  • The Bears go with some weird defensive alignment of the d-line (a tight bunch) and Arizona exposes it for a 50 yard run that only Ezeff is able to save from a touchdown. It only takes two goal-line runs to ram it in. Arizona back in front: 27-28
  • Longshore throws what has become his signature throw: The quick out for an interception for a TD. This one is a bit odd as Verran Tucker and the DB fight over the ball, but eventually the DB strips it away for the TD. Puts a stake through the heart of Cal with another streak to two quick TD’s from Arizona: 27-35
  • Tuitama throws a nice ball to their stud TE who bowls over Felder and Ezeff en route to the 35 yard touchdown. Make that 3 quick TDs: 27-42
  • After Longshore is given a couple more chances, and looks desperate slinging the ball down field every play, Riley comes in as QB with 10 minutes left in the game.
  • Riley over throws Morrah who tips the ball, which is then tipped up by an Arizona DB and finally intercepted. A bad throw, but also a bad bounce.
  • Ross catches a tough ball on 4th and 9 with just over 4 minutes left, keeping hope alive.
  • After failing to convert on another 4th down, the defense steps up and gives the offense the ball back with 3 minutes left.
  • Riley is sacked on 4th and 15 with 1:30 left, effectively ending the game.

Observations:

  • Tavecchio was in for David Seawright after Seawright strained his groin muscle and looked really shaky, particularly on kickoffs.
  • Although the didn’t have the ball much, Arizona’s outside run game was working well on their first drive. It was creating nice running lanes for them and they were still running with power.
  • Cal really had the chance to take the Arizona crowd out of the game early with the two turnovers, but the lack of execution on the second opportunity, made it so one TD from Arizona was all it took to get them back in it.
  • It’s easy to forget how good the linebacker crew was in 2008. Felder, Follett, Williams, Mohamed and Young. We just don’t have the same quality of guys these days.
  • The Bears inability to get some distance from Arizona with stalled drives kept the crowd in the game. Just like early in the game, that TD to start the second half took it down to a small 3-point lead. Then when the Bears only scored a field-goal later in the quarter, it still kept it a one score game and the crowd was still in it.
  • At the time I watched the game, I felt like Arizona dominated physically and Cal was the scrappy team holding in. But watching it now, Arizona was the team that really was on the weak side and kept coming up with key scores. Their two sets of back-to-back TD’s were the key to this game and both where the result of mistakes by Cal, not by dominating play by Arizona.
  • The crowd went into over-drive after that pick-6. You could visibly see the difference in how Cal played after the interception.
  • If the 2 quick scores had the Bears rattled, the 3 quick scores had the Bears desperate. It was all long throws on the next possession.
  • After that 3rd quick score, the Bear defense tightened substantially and really locked down the Arizona run game.

Implications for 2009/2010:
If I had done this review in 2009, I think I would have had a lot more confidence in the Bears ability to upset Arizona at home last year. This 2008 game was really all about those quick strikes by Arizona and in a lot of ways Cal showed as the stronger team. Tuitama was also a big factor and with a new QB in 2009, that had to go against Arizona (which it did). Moving on to 2010, the key to Arizona is to get the crowd out of it and KEEP them out of it. Cal had lots of opportunities in this game to break it open early and they ended up settling for field goal attempts, one of which was missed. The Bears could have been up 31-7 at halftime with the turnovers that Arizona handed them and the mistakes that Cal made. That would have kept the crowd at bay and allowed Cal to focus on stopping the passing game. A lone TD to open the 2nd half wouldn’t have energized the crowd. Cal needs to come out strong on Saturday and get up by a couple scores and stay that way.

Conclusion:
As I said a few times, this game was a lot closer than I remember and there’s a lot to suggest the Bears were the better team that day but mistakes and the bounce of the ball didn’t go the Bears way. You take away the signature Longshore interception and the freebee TD’s given up and the Bears win this game.

What Happens in Reno, Stays in Reno (EMFMV 2010 #4)

(Written by jsnell)

Sorting through the ashes of Nevada and looking forward(?) to Arizona, it’s the latest EMFMV podcast with Jason and Ken! We come to grips with Cal’s loss to Nevada. But there’s hope! We are both optimistic that there’s definitely a chance Cal might win in Arizona. And what’s being a Cal fan about, other than hope in the face of long odds? We also talk the Pac-10, Ken shows his optimism for the rest of Cal’s season, we cheer the soon-arriving Pac-12 conference, and discuss whether or not Jeff Tedford should be fired. (Spoiler alert: Not.) Plus the secret word turns into a math problem. Please listen, won’t you?

You can also subscribe to the podcast on iTunes.

Colorado to join conference in 2011

(Written by kencraw)

Well, Larry Scott pulled off another one. He managed to play enough hardball with the Big-12 to get Colorado into the conference next year.

You can read more details from Ted Miller.

It’ll be nice not to have a transitional year and get straight to the Pac-10 and the conference championship game. Other than that, it’s not a huge deal, although it’s nice to see Larry Scott continue to negotiate issues skill.

All that we need now is the division alignments. That will be a far larger and much more controversial deal and should be decided during the October Pac-10 meeting.

Garbage from ESPN

(Written by kencraw)

OK, this is one of those things that getting too worked up about is stupid, but nevertheless, it’s ridiculous:

Check out ESPN’s bottom-10 worst teams in the nation and who comes in at #5. Cal.

Completely.
Un
Be
Leave
A
BULLSH… (Oops, family safe site)

Look at all the other teams on the list. Not a single one has a win, much less two. Heck, not a single team on the “waiting list” has two wins. Notice that the FBS team we beat soundly, Colorado, is not on the list, nor even in the “Waiting list” (of course the FCS team wouldn’t be on the list, so that’s why they’re not relevant). It’s just stupid. There’s no way to objectively justify their being on the list nor have a reasonable reply to my above objections.

It’s nothing more than this bozo Mark Schlabum just not liking that Cal was ranked and picking on them because he doesn’t like that Cal occasionally gets respect he thinks we don’t deserve. It’s the pinnacle of a lack of objectivity.

The reality is quite different. Cal is still a top-50 team who lost a shootout to another top-50 team. There’s no way they belong in the bottom-10 (teams “ranked” 110 to 119).

Bogus move Mark Schlabach.

Update at 5:00 PM: Reading the comments on the Bottom-10 article, the #5 spot on the list is reserved for teams that didn’t live up to expectations that week. In that case, I change my objection. He’s not an idiot for thinking too little of Cal. He’s an idiot for not knowing how to make a list. If he wants to have a “team that most under performed” item or list, that should be, you know, outside the bottom-10 now shouldn’t it?

Again, nothing to get too worked up about in either case.

Minor Pick’Em change

(Written by kencraw)

For all of you who participate in the Pick’Em league, a minor change to let you know about:

I’ve slightly changed the format of the tables where you enter your scores. I’ve done two things:

  1. The rows are shorter so it’s more compact on the screen.
  2. I put each score next to each team, instead of “away@home” followed by both entry boxes, it’s away (entry box), home (entry box).

Both changes are meant to help with the same thing: user error where people are swapping the scores for the two teams. I’ve gotten a number of minor complaints about being frustrated with making that mistake. By way of hypothetical example, imagine someone, oh I don’t know, put 17 for the Nebraska score and 30 for the Washington score instead of 30 for Nebraska and 17 for Washington like they meant to. They’d be pretty frustrated, that imaginary person, don’t you think? I’m definitely not making the change now because of this theoretical person who made such a stupid mistake and would be in 4th place instead of 9th if I’d, errr, they’d, entered it right.

Nope, making sure that never happens to “them” again, that’s got nothing to do with it.