(Written by kencraw)

Here are some various thoughts from the game:

• If you don’t think the defense did a great job, then you weren’t watching closely enough.  Name a game where the offense gave up 6 turnovers and the opposition only scored 30 points?  The defense did GREAT.  Other than the one 40 yard touchdown run, they really kept the Utah running game in check and gave the Bears every chance to win the game.
• I think too many people (and I’m as guilty of this as anyone) were of the thinking that the only way the Bears win was if Goff had an incredible game, and that is at least in part to blame (luckily I’m sure Goff doesn’t listen to me so I’m off the hook… phew!) for his poor performance.  That was a QB who thought he had to perform miracles and every drive had to be a success.  It’s the only explanation I have for the majority of those interceptions.  There’s been no game I’m aware of where he’s forced balls into so many bad spots.
• Actually, I have one other theory, but it isn’t as comprehensive as the prior one.  Don’t forget the Bears were playing at 4000 feet.  He had a few too many balls sail on him and that could in part be because of the thinner air.  As proof it makes a difference, did anyone notice that all of a sudden our kickoffs were all touchbacks?  In any case, a couple of the interceptions were over-throws.
• Was I the only one who noticed that Muhammad was conspicuously absent?  Yes, yes, yes, I know we’re all watching Lasco like a hawk, so his missing is the bigger headline, but Muhammad rushed 4 times in the 1st quarter (OK, the 4th was early 2nd quarter) averaging 6 yards a carry, and then was seen no more.  My gut tells me he got injured and we haven’t been told yet.
• BTW, Lasco shouldn’t be blamed for that fumble.  He had both hands solidly on the ball and just happened to get hit by a helmet right on the ball.  Just about any RB puts that ball on the turf.  I don’t question the decision of the coaches… without detailed analysis of the specifics of what happened (something the coaches don’t have the luxury of mid-game) it’s a fair conclusion that if the 1st time he touches the ball he fumbles, his head is not back in the game.
• Lawler may be able to make incredible catches, but the last few games he’s been a little weak in the consistency department.  He had two pretty bad plays, one that caused an interception and the other cost us a touchdown in the redzone.
• Back to the defense, yeah Booker had 222 yards, but it took him 34 rushes to do it.  Here’s predicting Booker either is rested a lot in the next few weeks or the Utah rushing game falters late in the season.  A back can’t do 34 rushes every week very long.  It really hurt Vereen at the end of the 2009 season.  He was toast after the Big Game.
• Finally, while I’m not one to let this sort of thing bother me, it was DEFINITELY pass interference on the failed 4th and 5.  There’s no way the defender gets his hand in there if he doesn’t use the WR’s weight to turn himself around while holding on to him.
• If there’s a conclusion to take from this game (and to some degree from the rest of the games played this past weekend), Cal can beat any team in the conference.  The wins of UW and WSU show that Cal should be able to beat USC and Oregon with a solid effort.  The way the Bears hung in with the physical play of Utah shows the Bears should be able to compete with Stanford.  Since ASU lost to USC and UCLA lost to ASU, one has to believe that Cal can compete with ASU and UCLA as well.  None of this is to say the Bears *will* win all those games, but it does say there’s not a game left on the schedule we should be assuming will be a loss at this point.

Bring on UCLA in a week and a half!