Comments on: Football: Sunday night update

By: Calduke

Calduke — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 22:27:17 +0000

I think OSU looked good because of the OL.
Cal’s OL can’t handle most PAC 10 defenses and the Cal’s DL doesn’t seem to be around.

Please don’t use WSU and UCLA as examples of our OL and DL capabilities.
Both the UCLA QB and the WSU QB had career days against Cal.

There is no miracle cure for the pass defense and the offense will have to score lots of points the rest of the year.

By: BluenGold

BluenGold — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 22:02:44 +0000

One thing that really stood out while watching the WSU game (and was driven home later while watching OSU vs the U. of Sports Corruption), was that the pass defense seems to be way too passive. I did not see any Cal defender going after an interception. The approach seemed to be to wait for the receiver to catch the ball, then go for the tackle. I get that they are trying to avoid PI calls, but why not be more aggressive in trying to break up the completion and, at least on occasion, intercepting the pass?

BTW, OSU looked really good on Saturday. Cal will need to really step up both on O and D in order to beat them.

By: cal85

cal85 — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 17:13:05 +0000

Having an LB blitz, and therefore, takes a man out of coverage isn’t a valid point. That still leaves 7 in coverage and two rushing. I think the D really misses Follett’s play making abilities and how it changed opposing offenses. He made the secondary look better because of the fear of his speed coming off of the edge.

I don’t know if anyone’s ever studied if their is difference between a “speed” sack (from a LB, secondary or unblocked lineman) vs. pocket crumbling or coverage sack, but it seems to me that a speed sack would lead to more interceptions.

By: Eric

Eric — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 16:39:02 +0000

Here’ my take on the 3-4. The 3-4 has made our run defense better, because it allows the linebackers to close with speed on runs. In many ways, it is a defense designed to deal with the Oregons/Washingtons of the world. Other than the Oregon game this year, the run defense has been good (U$C)to great (every other game).

The 3-4 is not great at creating pressure on a QB unless we are using a LB in the rush, which can be good because can come from all different angles (again, think of the critical delayed blitz in the UCLA game in the third quarter), but is bad because it creates a hole in the coverage.

The most significant problem is that our secondary has not stepped at all. Part of the problem is personnel. Syd is good, but I think all of the hype got to him this year, and he has not been where he needs to be. Hagan has been repeatedly exposed, and the replacement (Hill, etc.) have been mediocre. And our safeties are just not playing great – virtually no help to the CBs on deep plays. But a significant problem is coaching. Too often our CBs are starting plays 10 yards off the line, and then retreating at the snap. That gives receivers too much room to work. And our LBs are either not playing the right lanes or the coaching is not adequately adjusting – too often pass plays to FBs and TEs are wide open.

Even though our secondary is a lot weaker this year, I said it before – our defense lives and dies with the LBs. If the LBs make plays (like UCLA and Minnesota), we win or are put in a position to win. If the LBs play like they did against Oregon, we’re toast.

By: GoldenBear 77

GoldenBear 77 — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 16:30:11 +0000

Robert,

I sometimes think that we confuse what they say in public, with what they are really thinking. I am sure that “they” (and in this instance I mean Tedford) are asking the same questions that you are. Whatever the questions, I don’t think they are the type of people to “air their dirty laundry” so to speak — and I, for one, think that is the right thing.

By: Bears

Bears — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 16:26:19 +0000

I like that the D’s base is 3-4 but they are willing to go to 4 down linemen at times. It’s good to have the option to mix it up and give the opponent other looks. For Cal to win the majority of the rest of their games and finish 2nd or 3rd in the Pac the defense has to step up its game. Especially the LB’s and DB’s, really surprised at the DB’s struggles. D and special teams need to create turnovers, have not made many this year, especially in first half of games. I know these guys are capable but when are they going to get pissed and say enough, we are a good D and will show it every saturday? Our team used to show disciplined swagger and physicality, do these guys have it in them? Each game left will be a tough contest, the Bears will need to bring it to win the greater majority and to prove they are a good team.
Starts in the desert at 12:30pm saturday. Is our D any good? Can our offense be consistently good vs good competition?
These last 5 games are key! Go Bears!

By: Robert

Robert — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 14:55:12 +0000

Next year’s Gregory excuses: The secondary is young. We lost Syd. We lost Tyson. We are only in our 3rd year of the 3-4.

By: Robert

Robert — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 14:53:12 +0000

I guess the story is: Why is the pass D so soft with 8 starters back on a unit that was pretty good last year? Or The comfort level with the 3-4 was supposed to increase, which would lead to more variety and better D. Or Why is the linebacker excuse deflecting attention away from Gregory’s “coaching?”