Utah initial post-game thoughts
(Written by kencraw)
Here are some of my thoughts after the game:
- This defense is getting better every week. It was obvious after the 2nd week of the season that this Bear defense was not going to be as good as we were expecting. The loss of talent of the “Big 3” was harder to absorb than we all thought. But as it turns out, it looks like this defense might be every bit as good as last years was… we were just unfairly comparing the defense at the end of the season versus the team at the beginning of this season. Lest we forget, last year’s defense did give up 52 to Nevada’s offense in week 3 last season. It started coming on very strong after that, although the setback versus USC is still hard to swallow. But the point is, this year’s defense may just be taking a couple more games than last season to come on strong. Last week’s performance against USC was a vast improvement over the previous season and the Oregon game was half of what the previous season’s effort was (being half way through the season compared to last year). That performance yesterday had the feel of the UCLA and ASU games last year, when the defense turned the corner and never really looked back.
- Another way to look at the above thought is all of you who are complaining about poor coaching at least need to limit it to the offense. There’s no doubt that the defensive coaching the last two years has been excellent and it’s easy to see how the defense continues to improve each week. Pendergast and his staff are doing great things.
- Moving to offense, I saw one that looked to be significantly improving this week. It had the look of a unit that was getting back to the basics and having confidence in the players. It felt like the coaching staff did all the right things in the last week of practice and game planning.
- Maynard had corrected all of his major problems from the prior weeks. While he had one pass that he was very lucky it didn’t get intercepted, my gut feel on that one was the wide receiver (Michael Calvin) didn’t run the right route, or at the very least the DB beat him to where he was supposed to be going. It wasn’t clear that was Maynard’s fault. But it wasn’t just the lack of stupid INT’s. Utah forced him to throw a lot of balls to the outside and Maynard was on target for almost all of them. There was a time or two he could have put a little bit more touch on the ball. There was a time or two he over-threw it a little bit. There were a handful of times he threw low forcing his receivers to go down to the ball to catch it. But overall, I thought this game was a substantial improvement. He also looked a lot more comfortable in the pocket. Plus, mark my words on this one: He’s going to escape the pocket up the middle in some game soon for a big gain. He had two plays where he was about to run for a big gain but got tripped up just as he was running for it.
- Another player I’m really pleased with right now is Tavecchio. His kickoffs are good, his extra points are getting up quick, and he has yet to be the cause of a missed field-goal (he’s 11-of-13 and the two misses were both blocked at the line of scrimmage with too much penetration). I think he’s getting that senior season magic.
- The offensive line deserves a lot of credit for this win. Maynard had time and the holes opened up for Sofele, while not great (particularly on the inside) considering how good the Utah front 7 is said to be, the offensive line made them look somewhat average.
- Overall this felt like an offense that was getting back on track and should be in good shape to be at the top of the heap of all the “also rans”. We’ll see when Cal plays ASU, but the team might have been good enough to be the south winner, were we not in the North.
October 23rd, 2011 at 9:00 pm
I think the win has a lot more to do with the competition then the coaching/team. Utah is not very good, Oregon and $C are good. We should beat UCLA, WSU, OSU and get bowl eligible. Likely lose to the stupid Furd and my guess is a loss at ASU bc of their D and the time of the game (after big game, after thanksgiving, etc)
7-5 go to a decent bowl and hope for better next season
October 24th, 2011 at 2:03 pm
Nick, I think it was both the competition and improved play. The turnovers and mistakes that plagued Cal against USC could have make the Utah game a nail biter.
October 24th, 2011 at 2:24 pm
Yeah, but that’s the competition. U$C forces those turnovers Utah is not very good. Luckily we have 3 more not very good teams coming up, then Furd and ASU.
October 24th, 2011 at 4:02 pm
Even if Utah isn’t that good of a team, it is still nice to get a win and not be known as the team that Utah got its first Pac12 win against.
I think it is impressive how we completely dominated them. Give credit to the offense, who moved the ball against a stout Utah defense.
Going into this game I thought we had a very good chance to win and thought that we should win by two scores but I would have taken a one point win as well so it felt great to see Cal jump out to a 34-0 lead and cruise to victory. This made me feel a lot better about the win.
October 25th, 2011 at 8:57 am
When Cal loses, it’s because of the coach. When they win, they got lucky or played a bad team. Get used to this message, this is what we will hear from the “fire Tedford” group for the rest of the year.
Thanks to Ken, the rest of us can see that there are reasons why a team does well or poorly. Ken’s analysis shows that some issues are coach related, and some or not.
It’s true that over a large number of games (20 or more), well coached teams make fewer mistakes. But saying that the 5 turnovers in the Cal-USC game is because of Tedford doesn’t follow. Against Utah, Cal received 3 turnovers. Did Tedford magically become a better coach in one week?
Here’s what the “fire Tedford” crowd doesn’t understand. Most college football players are inconsistent in their performance from week to week. There are a handfull of top programs that combine solid coaching, with excellent facilities and strong community support. Because of superior recruiting, these coaches can select the consistent performers from a large group of great athletes. Their key players have been selected to perform consistently well.
Cal doesn’t have the luxury of picking one QB from 3 or 4 five star players. Each season Tedford has one guy who has the potential to be a Pac 12 QB. Sometimes he turns out to be Aaron Rodgers, and sometimes it’s Zack Maynard. This has little to do with coaching and everything to do with recruiting.
Three years ago, Mark Sanchez left USC early and coach Carroll had to make a choice for a replacement. He had three top QB recruits and he chose the freshman Barkley. He looked over sophomore Aaron Corp, the Southern California High School Player of the Year! Why? He must have saw something in Corp who now pitches the football for the Richmond Spiders.
Barkey is a top Pac 12 QB. Is it because Carroll is a great coach, or is it because he had three top recruits to pick from? I say high performing players come from programs that have it all — coaching, recruiting, facilities and community. Cal can’t match USC is all these areas. It’s not just the coach that makes great teams.
This is why I say that the stadium rebuild is the more important event in the history of Cal football since 1923. And Jeff Tedford is the single most important person responsible for the facility upgrade. Remember coaches Snyder and Mariucci? After winning at Cal they left. Tedford stayed and rebuilt the stadium.
I’ve been to Lincoln, Auburn, Gainesville, Knoxville, Tempe, Eugene, Austin and Madison. The facilities matter — perhaps as much as the coaching. It’s a miracle that Tedford built a ten year winning program in a condemed house.
And you cretins want to fire Tedford.
October 25th, 2011 at 11:03 am
Rick, in all fairness to Snyder his leaving had more to do with Cal administration low balling him in contract negotiations. Had Cal paid Snyder the way they have paid Tedford I believe he would have stayed.
Mariucci, well he really did use Cal as a spring board to his career.
October 25th, 2011 at 3:06 pm
Bruce Snyder was a very good coach and human being. He received a better offer from ASU so he left. I’m sure he made the best decision for his family.
It’s my understanding that after he received the second Pac 10 Coach of the Year award, Tedford also had significant offers. He chose to stay and work towards building the program. Among other things, it included the stadium work which required much patience with the Berkeley City Council and some tree sitters.
Yes, Jeff has been paid well. But he had other offers that could have been more lucrative. He chose to wait out the tree people and deal with city politics. He feels strongly about this program and he has risked his career on its future.
My experience tells me that this kind of passion produces good results.
October 27th, 2011 at 6:11 am
I think the Utah game reflects very well upon the offensive coaching staff, as they played to Maynard’s strengths and had him roll out more often. He is such a better QB when he’s rolling out of the pocket. I know Tedford’s O is built upon a foundation of run and play-action passes, so it was encouraging to see some flexibility and adaptation.