Combined feed (RSS)
Football: From the press box
By Jonathan Okanes
Saturday, October 16th, 2010 at 6:23 pm in Football, Gameday.
- Jeff Tedford said “He gives us the best chance to win,” when asked why he left QB Kevin Riley in for the entire game. He also said he wanted Riley and the first team offense to have some positive results to build on in the second half.
- For the record, I thought Tedford probably should have played Beau Sweeney in the second half. Not necessarily all because of Riley’s performance — the dropped passes hurt but he still had the two picks– but because the game was clearly out of reach so it’s a perfect time to take a look at other people.
- Tedford said the Trojans did a few things on defense they weren’t expecting, things that allowed them to get consistent pass pressure on Riley.
- Riley said he never expected to come out and was “throwing the ball pretty well besides those two interceptions.”
- A clarification: The 42-0 deficit actually tied the worst halftime deficit in school history.
- Tedford said linebacker Keith Browner was fine after the game. He said Browner just had his leg landed on.
- He also said running back Shane Vereen was fine after “getting his bell rung.”
- Cal had a season-low 245 yards of offense.
[You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.]
October 16th, 2010 at 6:38 pm
Let there be no doubt about it. It was an ugly, ugly game for Cal. And there have been too many ugly games the last year and a half (USC — twice, Oregon once, and maybe I should throw in the Nevada game), a trend that has only recently started to occur. Our performance certainly cannot help recruiting in So. Cal.
But if we beat ASU next week, and there is an excellent chance that will happen, we will be set up with the opportunity to have a decent, but certainly not great, season. I see us beating WSU, and have a good chance against Washington and even Stanford, as nobody can tell what will happen in the Big Game. The best I see, however, is a 7 – 5 season.
October 16th, 2010 at 6:42 pm
> Riley said he never expected to come out and was “throwing the ball pretty well besides those two interceptions.”
just curious – is there any snickering or raised eyebrows at these sort of … ridiculous comments? Riley did not throw a decent ball, not once, in the first half. The drop by the tight end was behind him, catch-able but behind. The overturned throw to Jones was very high when it didn’t need to be. Balls were in the area but never on target and usually causing the player to have to slow down/change direction in order to catch. And the interceptions, the one to the lineman… well I guess you could call that well thrown.
Interesting that there was no comment about the inconsistent defensive play. But until the offense can learn to stay on the field I guess we’ll be forced to get used to that.
> Tedford said the Trojans did a few things on defense they weren’t expecting, things that allowed them to get consistent pass pressure on Riley.
any question from the reporters on what, if any, in-game adjustments the Bears tried to make in response to these few unexpected things? or did they just try to play the same overmatched schemes against the unexpected defensive changes?
Riley had a freaking 10.7 QB rating at half – 10.7!! If that is our “best chance to win”, then lord help us all.
October 16th, 2010 at 7:09 pm
And if we win next week, and then IF we win, and IF we win, and IF we win. We’re starting to sound like 49er fans. This isn’t going to be a strong season. I am okay with a bad year. But, I think we need to use this time to help us have a strong year next year. Sweeney should have played the entire second half. Tedford needs to realize he’s a football coach, and not a protective father. Time passes and the program will continue – get the kids ready for next year. Get Sweeney or Mansion game time. Meaningful time with meaningful pressure. Not everything works out for everyone, and Riley’s college career didn’t pan out. So what. Hopefully the kid will have a great career in what he pursues. But let’s stop acting like he’s Andrew Luck or Locker. Get another kid in there.
October 16th, 2010 at 7:14 pm
MikeD:
Thank you for pointing out the placement of the throws, and not being a Riley apologist. The frustration shown by the WRs says it all; we need change!
October 16th, 2010 at 7:17 pm
Maynard will start next year
October 16th, 2010 at 7:18 pm
Those drops by Marvin Jones and Ladner really hurt, because the Bears field position was affected by it. The entire first half seemed as if USC was inside the 50 yard line.
October 16th, 2010 at 7:19 pm
Sorry for the spam responses I’m putting up. But I forgot to mention that what also bugged me to no end is the young receivers not playing. Jeremy Ross and Calvin (who reminds me of “hands of stone” rickey dudley) need to be dropped for the young guys. Get those kids experience so we don’t start next year with the same questions as to which of them will be good in game action.
October 16th, 2010 at 7:23 pm
Things you NEVER want to hear during a Cal-USC broadcast (but heard tonight): “Nice play by yet ANOTHER USC walk on…” This was a disgusting effort in every way. Truly sad that in Tedford’s first 3.5 seasons Cal NEVER lost by more than two touchdowns, yet the teams of the last 4 years routinely get blown out, despite having much more talent than those early Tedford teams.
Simply put: Tedford’s. Days. Are. Numbered.
October 16th, 2010 at 7:27 pm
i think it’s going to take being bowl INELIGIBLE to get the new guys in. that’s sad.
October 16th, 2010 at 7:41 pm
Gruden still has a home in the bay area. Beg him to take the job. Offer him a huge contract, like say $2.8 million.
October 16th, 2010 at 7:55 pm
If I hear that “Riley gives us the best chance to win” one more time, I’m going to puke. I applaud Rich Neuheisel for yanking an ineffective Kevin Prince in the UCLA-Cal game last week and declaring an open quarterback competition during UCLA’s bye week before playing Oregon.
Prince has won some games for UCLA, as has Riley, but NO ONE’s job should be safe if they are not performing. Give the other kids a chance, Jeff.
October 16th, 2010 at 8:02 pm
It’ll be a cold day in Hell before Teford benches Riley or Guarnero,both team captains.Tedford hasn’t the guts or the brains to bench two underperforming team captains.
October 16th, 2010 at 8:04 pm
How can you not be ready to play a big game? SC absolutely dominated both sides of the line of scrimmage. It always starts there. Barkley throwing on us is one thing. However, we weren’t even close to stopping them on the ground. The bottom line: Tedford’s not a big game (and I don’t mean The Tree) coach. Besides the JV’s (UCLA) we’re the only Pac 10 team w/ no threat @ the QB position. On to next yr.. At least Riley will be gone.
October 16th, 2010 at 8:17 pm
Too much focus on Riely. The game was over after the fourth offensive series and that was due to (1) the OL and (2) play calling.
Guarnero was back in, and so the DL push up the middle was back with a vengeance. There was also ZERO gap control, and Schwartz did a piss poor job of controlling his edge. The OL footwork is just atrocious. Add in the ridiculous drops by Jones, Allen and Ladner and you have a recipe for disaster.
The play calling is whole other level of stupidity. JT is deathly afraid of having Riley throw the ball, so much so that makes inevitable the most dangerous situation for a QB lacking confidence — third and long. How many times are we going to see a crap run between the tackles and a predictable fly sweep before JT realizes that combo = 3rd-and-8? Opponents bring the house on third down, and it’s game over.
Tedford, mini-me Ludwig and Marshall are black death for this team. They’re monstrously incompetent.
October 16th, 2010 at 8:23 pm
Tedford is close friends with Mike Leach. He needs to ask his buddy to come in as O Coordinator / concussion specialist. Work with him for a year or two, then move in as AD and give Leach the head coaching job. I don’t care if he’s a jerk. His job is to be a football coach. Not a community activist.
October 16th, 2010 at 9:03 pm
The anger and frustration comes form those folks that overestimated the teams talent level. I hear talk about all the great athletes on the team and if there is a blowout it must be the coaching. You set your expectations too high for this team.
Sorry – the talent level is only so-so and is at the 7th place level that most ‘gurus’ predicted for this team. Most ‘posters’ on this site probably are unaware of the talent levels on the other PAC-10 teams and think that Jones-Allen is the best WR tandem in the league, Veeren is in the top 5 RBs in the league, Riley is average and that the defense is an aggressive,
group of monster-studs.
Boys and Girls – this team is below average in talent and the results today and this year prove this. We expect too much from this talent-challenged team.
I won’t even begin on the coaching.
When I look at the talent, I feel they are performing to the best of their ability. I don’t have unrealistic expectations for this team, this year. I am disappointed and frustrated, also, but also realize the
reason for the poor showings.
October 16th, 2010 at 9:08 pm
Konamike – Excellent points! As I’ve said in an earlier post, Cal has got to get past the Big Game with the Furd as only Big Game. It’s embarassing that the only game that Cal has shown up for is the Furd game. How is it every other Pac 10 team can see outside of there own area as big games!
October 16th, 2010 at 9:20 pm
Calduke – please explain to me how talent level at UCLA beat Texas – when then turned around and beat Nebraska – which then got blown out by Cal?? It’s not talent level! It’s coaching, QB inconsistency and poor execution. Does Boise State really have more talent top to bottom? No, they are better coached, have a better QB and more heart! Ditto Oregon State and Washington. They (Boise) know that everyone is out to beat them and prove that they are over rated – but they still show up, play hard and beat everyone regardless of the level of competition – something Cal has not done since early in the Tedford era.
October 16th, 2010 at 9:20 pm
I wonder how many So California recruits jumped on the Cal bandwagon today?
October 16th, 2010 at 9:25 pm
I agrre with calduke; what’s changed from the past several years? We still have severly underperforming quarterback and a pass defense that leaks like a seive. And, of course, the coach hasn’t an answer to the teams problems, and his numbers will decline again in 2010 for the fourth straight year. Even more worrying; what sort of recruting class are we likely to have with the programme in disaray? I simply can’t understand why the administration continues to turn a blind eye to Tedford’s shortcomings. Don’t our views carry any weight?
October 16th, 2010 at 9:35 pm
As I said in response to an earlier article by Okanes, it is very hard to be a very good to great team without at least a very good quarterback. Cal doesn’t have one. There are six teams with either great (Stanford, USC, and Washington) or very good quarterbacks (OSU -Katz has tons of promise, Arizona, and Oregon, though the latter QB will never be a pro). It is not a coincidence that five of these teams, excluding Washington, are doing very well this year.
Cal hasn’t had a great QB since Rodgers, which seems like ages ago. Longshore started out well, but ruined his career at Cal by trying to play on a bad ankle (at that time I thought he should be benched for Riley, who actually was better then). Next year, Cal needs to find a super QBl who can lead the team and not force it to be so reliant on the run game. However, I have my doubts that the QB’s Cal has recruited, at least those who are now attending Cal, meet the bill. I don’t think any are Elite 11 QB;s, except for Mansion, who I think is now a junior. But maybe one of them will stand out from the rest. After all, Rodgers was not an Elite 11 QB. And I hear we have a super local QB recruit coming in next year.
As for Tedford, he has led us admirably for several years. His overall winning percentage is very good. Unless things fall apart at the seams, I think he should remain as the Cal coach. I agree that Cal’s recruiting could improve, but it should with the retrofitted stadium and new athletic facilities. Cal could soon have some great recruiting classes, after which everyone will forget all of the sour comments made above.
October 16th, 2010 at 10:02 pm
Greetings. I am not hiding under a rock.
If you read my posts, I have made it a point to defend Riley as I believe that much of the critcism directed his way is undeserved. He is not an awful quarterback as many of you claim.
I watched the SC game to the middle of the fourth quarter. Except for Riley’s two interceptions, which were accomplished by very good defensive plays by SC defenders with exceptional reach, I thought that Riley passed the ball where the balls should have been caught by his receivers. Almost everyone, including Vereen, Jones, Ladner, Calvin, and perhaps others dropped very catchable balls. I do not put this loss on Riley at all. His offensive line and his receivers let him down. The dropped balls killed the offense. A few times he was able to beat the SC blitz by short passes to receivers who ran slants over the middle.
I would have gone for it on 4th down, in the second quarter when we were down by 21. We should be able to convert on short yardage against anyone. I rather lose trying to win rather than lose by trying not to lose by too much. At that point of the game, a first down and a drive to a possible score would have made the score 21-7 and kept the SC offense off the field for a longer period of time. It would have meant a lot to our players’ psyche to convert to get the first down and TRY to win.
Our defense simply did not make plays. The pass defense at times appeared tighter than in the Gregory days of allowing opposing QBs to play catch with the receivers, and I appreciate that very much. In the Gregory days, it appeared that our secondary defenders could not come within 5 yards of an opposing receiver. However, even with the tighter pass defense, the Cal secondary today did not play well enough to stop any passes that were thrown to the SC receivers, who were taller and more athletic. At other times, our pass defense left the SC receivers uncovered as when Conte blitzed (can’t fault the defense for trying to sack the SC QB). Our run defense looked like a sieve and allowed SC to run at will.
Our coaching staff did not prepare the team for this game and did nothing in terms of adjustments to help slow down the slaughter.
Bottom line, our coaches and plenty of Cal players let us down today. Riley does not deserve to be the whipping boy.
October 16th, 2010 at 10:28 pm
Except for the interceptions he passed well? Yeah. And except for the mistakes I make in my life, I don’t make mistakes.
October 16th, 2010 at 10:48 pm
Boalt – that’s a good dodge; you must have taken trial ad. The criticisms I and others have raised, and continue to raise, to which you responded, are not about Riley. They are about the overpaid coaching staff.
Having fun watching OSU/UW. Mike Riley is an awesome coach. Down 21-0, in a hostile stadium against a team that just had a disappointing loss (sound familiar), and with their second best player, OSU storms back. Don’t know who will win (in 2OT), but Riley is worth every dollar he is paid.
October 16th, 2010 at 10:49 pm
I don’t understand the Cal coaches. Every team in the Pac 10 knows that Riley (or the offense) is very inconsistent qb and every game that Cal won this year was due to Vereen’s talent and running game. So if I was an opponent or the opponent’s coaching staff, I would just put 8 or 9 on the box and put plenty of pressure toward Riley and make him beat me/us. So that is what USC did. When Cal was facing 2nd or 3rd and long, USC just put linebackers and defensive ends cheated close to Cal’s O-line and when the ball snapped, Riley who has NO presence in the pocket and his reputation as an inconsistent qb just gave more confidence to SC’s defense to bum rush him. Think about it, if you were a defensive coordinator for USC or a linebacker, knowing that Riley is not a Jake Locker or an Andrew Luck, you wouldn’t second guess your decision for a second to send everyone on defense to sack Riley in long yardage situation. So my point is why are Cal coaches surprised that USC put pressure??? I mean read this comment by our Cal coach – (Tedford said. “They did some things that they hadn’t done yet early in the game, they put pressure on the quarterback”) Really??? How could that be a shocker??? Seriously…what planet did Tedford come from? I am just tired of it especially when Tedford is the 2nd highest paid coach in the Pac 10. C’mon, time for a change.
October 16th, 2010 at 11:19 pm
“(Riley) gives us the best chance to win?” Did JT really think we were going to win after that 1st half? If he wanted us to have a chance to win, he should have found a way to keep the deficit reasonable.
He has no concept how to craft an offense. Whether he’s head coach or OC, Tedford seems clueless on: 1) How to coach his players to succeed and 2) How to make in-game adjustments. People can blame Riley (who got us within a few seconds of being #1) or Ludwig (who got Utah to beat Alabama in the Sugar Bowl), but I blame JT. He should have instructed Riley appropriately before that final play against OSU, but he did not “coach,” and we lost. He doesn’t know how to use the strengths he has on offense or to hide his weakness (ie getting the ball out of Riley’s hands quicker). How ’bout some quick slants/WR screens/ shorter drops? Especially with a poor O-Line. Get the ball to your playmakers and let them do the rest.
I no longer consider him even a good assistant coach anymore. None of his QB’s has gone one to be anything in the NFL, except Aaron Rodgers, and I would say that has more to do with natural talent vs. coaching. (I so wish my Niners would have picked Rodgers over Alex Smith!!)
Thanks for the ride JT. I can’t wait to see who we get next. I am keeping my fingers crossed the Barbour finds an equally good replacement for you that she found for Braun. C’mon Sandy!!
October 16th, 2010 at 11:58 pm
Congrats to Hawaii!! They beat Nevada and played USC tougher than we did. If that’s not an indication that we need a new coach, I don’t know what is. A program that is more successful with less talent than CAL.
October 17th, 2010 at 8:36 am
Did Tedford really say “We came back and won the 2nd half” !!!??? You gotta be kidding!
October 17th, 2010 at 9:27 am
1. There are a lot of knuckleheads posting here. At times I am one of them.
2. What is the # of posts we get after a Win vs. how many we get after a Loss?
3. Does anybody happen to remember that USC has been getting top recruiting classes nationally for years? That might have something to do with us getting pushed around on the line. That might have something to do with lots of things, because the last time I checked, players make plays.
4. Does anybody realize that all of the other 9 Pac 10 schools, and (gasp) even up at Nevada and elsewhere, they have athletic departments, alumni, coaches, players, media, that ALL want their teams to go out and win? It’s not like we are playing in the bush league here. It’s called competition. All these other teams recruit and practice, study film and scheme.
5. Those who want to just fire Tedford and get some jerk like Leach so we can get 3 more wins are really shortsided.
a) It’s not as simple as that. Nobody can predict which coach out there is suddenly going to turn a program into a winner. Dozens of teams try this every year and they probably have a success rate of 50%. Look at what Notre Dame has gone thru trying to stay on top. It’s just not that easy, folks.
b) If you did win, but won the wrong way, then you’d be complaining about that.
c) If you did bring in a jerk like Leach and won, what else would have have to complain about.
d) While this is not an all-encompassing seal of approval comment, I’m proud of the job Tedford has done, the graduation rate, the lack of scandals, the way he seems to care about the individuals on his team. You know, he is a father figure to them, and as a father, I’m sure he sees things with a compassionate heart at times. I’ll leave it to JO et al to flesh out those stories of kid gloves and tenderness.
6. Speaking of fatherhood, I wonder what dynamic having his son on the team creates, both on the + and – side of things.
7. Everyone wants to trash Riley, and that may not be a bad idea, but it just reminds me of two sayings:
a) grass is always greener
b) the devil you know vs. the devil you don’t know.
c) which means we don’t know what would happen, but then it would bring out more critics and QB controversy talk across the nation, which is a pain in the ass and would really rile the team, as it drives all conversation and creates paranoia and division. I view the Riley play and Tedford’s holding the line and not cutting tail and retreating at the height of the battle. If a full Riley retreat is in order, then it’s going to be a FULL RILEY RETREAT, not the half-assed Longshore-Riley show again. That did neither player nor the team any good. Even after the first half, even now after the loss, we still have something to play for.
8. When JT said he stuck with Riley b/c it gave him the best chance to win, I don’t think he’s necessarily talking about the USC game. Anyone could see that was lost! He’s talking about the best chance to win the rest of this season. Maybe we don’t win out, but we don’t lose out with Riley either. Go ahead and debate that all you like, but be realistic of the tradeoffs and with your expectations.
9. I don’t understand why we can’t bring in the BEST recruiting classes annually. Cal is a great place – but I’m biased. I’m sure an off-the-record one on one with Foti Mellis would be 50x more fun than reading all this trash.
10. In my younger years, I was a DIE HARD fan. After a while, I realized I was DYING HARD 50% of the time with all my teams. That’s not a good mental space to be in. So, I’ve accepted that losing is part of the game, 50% of the time statistically speaking, and I’m a much happier person.
October 17th, 2010 at 9:30 am
I agree that Tedford’s comments about winning the second half are ridiculous. However, I agree with Tedford’s decision to at least start Riley in the second half. Playing another QB at that point would send a very bad message to the team that he (Tedford) had given up. You can’t quit at halftime, even if the game is lost — that would be totally ridiculous.
Perhaps Tedford should have played other QB’s in the fourth quarter, which is normal and the traditional time to make substitutions, and would not have sent a bad message to the team, since clearly the game was over at that point. However, there will undoubtedly be several other times during this season that we can see how Sweeney and Mansion can perform. From what I’ve seen so far this year and last, when they do get a chance to show what they can do, we will conclude that, at least at the present time, Riley is clearly the best QB Cal now has, though he is in the second tier of current Pac 10 QB’s.
October 17th, 2010 at 9:50 am
They say you learn more from losing than from winning. Having said that, I have learned a lot over the last 3 years. As a Cal fan I have come to the realization that winning football is not the reason that Cal is a great university. Our identity and greatness is not dependent upon a 22 year-old kid playing QB!
We are Golden Bears! We are great for reasons that extend far beyond what happens every fall saturday afternoon. I want to win as much as anyone, I’d love to show up on the job and make fun of those who attended the University of Second Choice after a football game but that hasn’t been our lot.
We have a competetive program and a great school and I can live with that as opposed to being a jerk water private school that has NO identity except winning (and cheating) in football. I don’t know if JT will get us to the Holy Grail but we have had a great ride. I’ve been a fan for 40+ years and I’ll continue to be one as long as we don’t move in the direction of USC and Oregon by running winning programs which are ultimately embarassing to the university.
October 17th, 2010 at 10:41 am
Uh Oh. I respect your comments, and you are absolutely right that U$C has had incredibly high recruiting classes. So why is it that Oregon State, Furd, UW, Arizona, Oregon, and UCLA have all beaten U$C since 2005, all with lesser recruiting classes, and we have not. Only ASU (which has the same overrated coaching issues) and WSU (which since 2005 has been a total tailspin with coaching and lack of atlent). We won in 2003 (lesser recruiting class for us) and we should have won in 2004 (great QB, but with lesser recruiting). Since then, we have had a couple of competitive games, but lost because of gutless coaching decisions. And we have been blown out.
Shouldn’t this be screaming to you that the common demominator is coaching? EVERY team to play U$C this year was far more competitive than us. Hawaii easily could have won. Virginia – which has no talent – had a chance to win at U$C. Minnesota – which is 1-6 and just fired its coach – was leading in the third quarter. UW and Furd won. WSU was as competitive for it as it can be. The only team that was absolutely humiliated was us. Why does this keep happening?
I would much rather be 6-6 with a hungry, competitive team and young, competitive coach than 6-6 with an overrated and expensive coach with talent that has fallen far short of expectations.
As for the arguments that Tedford will be better with new facilities. Let me go back to the Minnesota. The gophers are in the second year of their gorgeous new stadium. Coach was fired today.
October 17th, 2010 at 10:46 am
I don’t disagree with you Easy Ed. But as a University if we are going to settle for being competitive, then Tedford needs a pay reduction. That’s my simple take on it. If he’s the second highest paid coach in the pac-10, that has to be tied to winning. Not to “not being an embarassment” on our school.
October 17th, 2010 at 10:54 am
And, I am one of those fools who wants to win, regardless of the coach. I want the best physics professors, the best business professionals, the best law professors, the best administrators, and the best coaches. I don’t care about their personal lives and how great they are outside of their job. As insane Mike Singletary would say, “I want winners”. I’m somewhat concerned that I just quoted an insane person to express my feelings. Oh well. The drop away from sanity will be precipitous.
October 17th, 2010 at 11:06 am
Eric:
Beating USC is not the sole measurement of the success of the football program. I wouldn’t stoop that low. Look at the entire package before you go over to the dark side.
Sure, we want to beat them, but it’s not the beginning and it’s not the end. Beating USC will not define the players’ lives.
October 17th, 2010 at 11:14 am
Juancho:
Take two aspirin and reconsider in the morning. If you still support your statement:
“I don’t care about their personal lives and how great they are outside of their job.”
then please replace all the Cal attire in your closet for that of any other morally bankrupt program.
October 17th, 2010 at 11:37 am
I’m a little bit confused. Our Bears were just crushed and we have people on these messages boards talking about how they are alright with a competitive program. Perhaps it is just me, but getting spanked on the road does not constitute competitiveness.
In the last two years alone, we have seen five games where the Bears have been absolutely lost. Please refer to the table at the bottom of Crumpacker’s article here http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2010/10/16/SPJJ1FTQAL.DTL
I was on hand at yesterday’s game and can assure you that yesterday was not an example of a competitive team. The best examples of competitive programs are Fresno State and Oregon State. Both teams will travel any where at any time to go against big time opponents. While not winning much of the time, they are always in the game until the very end.
Yes, Tedford salvaged an inept program. Yes, he has done a great job with graduation rates. But like Ben Braun, he can not elevate the program.
Suggestions of Mike Leach are foolhardy. Obviously my first choice would be Jon Gruden. Bay Area Ties. NFL experience. Offensive Guy. If he could groom a Raiders team under Al Davis, one would think he could build a strong program, much like Pete Carroll.
But I will give one choice that I realize is somewhat out of left field, but could be a great pick. Steve Mariucci. He’s been here before. He was a relatively successful NFL coach. He is someone who has credibility and who isn’t a lunatic. Mooch would not be a drop off by any means.
October 17th, 2010 at 11:41 am
Uh oh mind your beeswax with regards to my attire.
I don’t care what they are like outside of their job. I just don’t. I get all of my “feel good” pride from our academics, I don’t need moral victories in sports. I want them to be excellent at their job. Plus, it’s not like Tedford is the only person who can run a clean program. I respect the opinion that Tedford has done an amazing job at representing our school. Nobody can deny that. Hell in an earlier post I said that to me in a lot of ways Tedford is the program. This is his work. He built us into relevance. That’s why I want him as AD long term. I think he’s plateud as a coach and could do great things for the athletics department as a whole now. Plus with the stories every year of how he’s “changed” to better handle stress and all that, I just get the sense that he’s tired and burnt out.
It’s simple to me. I went to Cal because I wanted an elite public education. I get all my feel good vibe from the academics, the lectures, the debates, the history, the campanilie. As a fan of the sports programs, I’m going to watch regardless. But I want winners. Ben Braun was a great guy. But guess what we brought in someone who immediately won the pac-10 with an average at best squad.
If we are going to be happy with our program being competitive and always top 4 in the Pac-10, which I think Tedford is perfectly capable of then that’s fine. But Tedford needs a pay reduction. Sorry but we’re cutting sports programs, classes are super impacted, and the state is in shambles. And I don’t care that his salary is largely from private donors. Those donors could be giving that money to other members of our athletics. That’s the truth. A good AD makes sure that private donors are funding the programs, not individuals.
October 17th, 2010 at 11:46 am
Has anyone ever seen Riley and Alex Smith in the same place at the same time? Just wondering. I know there’s an age difference but…
October 17th, 2010 at 11:55 am
Uh Oh – take the measure I did suggest. If every Pac-10 school could hire Tedford, would any do so at $2.8 mm? At $1.4 mm? I think the answer is no, but give me an argument to the contrary.
October 17th, 2010 at 12:28 pm
I can agree with that Juancho, if Tedford isn’t even fielding a top 5 team in the PAC 10, then he shouldn’t be paid like he is. I think Sandys hand will be forced if games like yesterday(and Oregon, SC, osu and UW last year) keep happening. Face it, those private donors are not going to keep shelling out that kind of money to lose like we did yesterday.
October 17th, 2010 at 12:55 pm
The other elephant in the room is that donors are not happy with what the stadium remodel is doing to donor seating. I was talking to a mentor of mine who is an old blue from the 50s and it will be the first time he does not keep donor seats because essentially he would have to commit something like $100K. And well, the team doesn’t really warrant it right now. I agree with House. Sandy’s hand will be forced if we continue to have bad games, and then there are rumblings amongst donors that they’re getting the short end with the new seating licenses.
October 17th, 2010 at 1:47 pm
Tedford’s postgame comments make me completely embarrassed to be a Bear!!!!!!
Sandy please do something!!!
Does tedford speak to the team like he does to the press? Maybe that would explain 6- 30 point loss games in the last YEAR AND A HALF!!
The team folded in 2007 and now these losses are happening regularly.
What a joke the program has become nationwide!
October 17th, 2010 at 2:31 pm
It maybe too harsh to call your team both patsies and cupcakes. However it would also be lying not to.
that was our easiest win of the year. We played such stellar teams as
Aloha U
Mini-soda
Virgin-inty
Washington State
You guys were the easiest win of them all. I will make you a prediction. The Coogs will beat you guys if the weather is unfavorable. Locker will trash you. Oregon will kill you guys. Stanford will kill you too and Harbaugh will run up the points.
You better hope you can beat ASU. It’s your last chance at a win.
October 17th, 2010 at 3:01 pm
Bear in the Woods
I can’t explain the UCLA-Texas-Nebraska thing.Can you?
I guess you are saying UCLA is great team, or, Rick knows how to coach.
Apparently when Cal beat UCLA it was the personnel.
And
When Cal loses it’s the coaching.
Sub-standard personnel play can sure make a coach look stupid.
Another subject – most posters say Cal personnel are in the upper talent level of the PAC-10 and it’s the coaching that has cost us. Question for anyone – who is the best DB on the Bears team? and how does he rate against other DBs in the league.
October 17th, 2010 at 3:07 pm
The Bears were playing against the 100th rated defense in the country – and scored 14 points.
Riley is a bust, but, he would have had to score 50 points to win.
Why should the offense try when the defense gives up 48 points? More venom needs to be thrown on the defense; and please, don’t start the thing about the defense getting tired. Were they tired the first 10 minutes of the game
October 17th, 2010 at 3:10 pm
Calduke. You make some great points. The reason why I put a lot of blame on Tedford and the coaches is:
1. The constant defense of Kevin Riley. I just feel it shows a lack of willingness to take a risk and hurt the kids feeling by essentially ending his football career.
2. The coaches recruit and develop the talent. They are highly paid. If they aren’t doing a good enough job of recruiting and developing top level talent – how do you justify Tedford being the 2nd highest paid coach in the pac-10?
3. I don’t feel like the coaches have taken enough decisions to prepare for next season. Let’s be honest. None of the current receivers other than Jones and Allen are very good. So get the freshmen more time. Not in garbage time, in real time. So that when they play USC next year they don’t have the same deer in the headlights look our team always has. Again, sit Riley, let him make the best out of his future with his degree and get a young qb meaningful time / preparation / pressure situations now, so that 2011 we don’t here the same crap excuses.
So yeah, our talent is at mid pac-10 level or worse. But who’s responsible for that? The people who get paid, the coaches (in my opinion). And team leaders like Riley and Mohamed have to take some blame too, of course. I miss the days when we had guys who would fire teammates up. I feel like since Tedford mismanaged Desean Jackson the team has lost vocal leaders, players with swagger, players that will get in someone’s face. You make a great point on the secondary. Our dbs are not playing well. Neither is the O line. Neither is qb. Neither are the linebackers. The d line gets no pressure on the qb. It goes on.
October 17th, 2010 at 3:15 pm
Robert + 1. I totally agree with you with regards to the post game comments. He’s starting to remind of president bush at his best / worst with the obviously oblivious rhetoric.
I’m in a bad mood because my raiders are letting this game get away from them. So I’ll also share this frustration. From everything I read Chris Martin was supposed to be that fiery leader that was going to take our core group to another level again. And he decided he’d rather leave to Florida. Family stuff played the major part in that decision of course. But I can’t help but feel like part of it is also that Florida offers a better culture for a player of that calibre. Urban Meyer is a fiery guy who gets in people’s face. I know that doesn’t “fit” with our school, but I feel that the successful elite coaches in college are those red ass guys. Take a type A personality, those folks want to work for high-demand people that will push them.
October 17th, 2010 at 3:25 pm
Juancho
I have brought up the ‘personnel’ thing because most all posters are saying that the results(negative) of the past few years are solely coaching.
I am just as disappointed in the coaching as I am the personnel talent level and effort. The DBs are slow and that is why the zone defense is used so much. They play far off the receivers because they are aware of their speed compared to most receivers. Can you coach or teach speed to the DBs. I go to all home games and when the opponents have 3rd and long, obvious passing,
I’m a nervous wreck – I know there is a pass coming and the DBs are helpless.
October 17th, 2010 at 4:23 pm
Calduke – yeah, it is coaching. Can you name the DBs of Oregon, OSU or Furd? Can you name the DBs at Utah, Boise, or TCU? I know Richard Sherman of Furd – only because Robert Woods lit him up last week. Furd still won, because U$C scored too quickly, and Harbaugh called a great 2 minute drive sequence. We had a DB last year I could name – Syd. He got drafted. His name didn’t help last year.
But defense isn’t the real problem. U$C has a great offense. That is not disputed. U$C had a weak defense, and we didn’t exploit it, but fed right into it. It is a reminder of the 2004 Holiday Bowl – the start of the downfall. It is like Oregon last year. We were playing a great offense, but terrible defense. The key to winning – running with our 2,000 yard rusher, instead of throwing with injured receivers and causing 3 and outs. Guess what happened?
Also, our DBs were all rated fairly high when they were recruited. Why haven’t they progressed? Yeah, ratings can be wrong, and maybe one or two are busts. But all of them? That’s coaching, either at the recruiting stage or in the game progression stage.
Again, answer my question – would any Pac-10 team pay $2.8 mm for Tedford now? I assume everyone would agree no. Would they pay $1.4 mm? Same response is my guess.
October 17th, 2010 at 4:31 pm
Good points brother Eric. You know what’s always weird to me. If you look at Oregon on tv and our team, their team just looks bigger. It seems like all their players are ripped, and our guys are always skinny or pudgy. That’s one area I’m optimistic about because I think the new facilities will help with that.
But even our top guys like Marvin Jones are slim build guys instead of the monsters Oregon has, or USC with Robert Woods.
October 17th, 2010 at 5:45 pm
So, Boaltblue, still smoking the unbranded cigarettes, huh.
“I watched the SC game to the middle of the fourth quarter. Except for Riley’s two interceptions, which were accomplished by very good defensive plays by SC defenders with exceptional reach, ”
Riley badly underthrew the first interception and the second interception went right into the hands of a DEFENSIVE TACKLE. “exception reach”, riiiiiiiiiiiiight.
Have another toke.
October 17th, 2010 at 6:22 pm
It will be interesting how long the University puts up with a non-emotional, non-”QB guru” .500 coach and an AD who puts up with this crap paying Tedford over $4M a year!!! Tedford is WAY OVERATED, the players show no emotion and Riley should have been benched some 2 1/2 years ago….Cal Football is pathetic to watch!!! Good luck selling those $250K PSL’s Ms. Barbour!!!!
October 17th, 2010 at 6:36 pm
Ok all you Golden Bear “fans”, looks like Sugar Daddy Phil Knight has finally succeeded in fielding the best team money can buy! Go Ducks, #1 in the country! Just think, you did so with only about a half dozen felons on the team! I’m sure U$C is green with envy. Next time you buy a pair of his ill fitting ugly piece of crap tennis shoes just think Quack Attack. I still say that they can keep it. We came close once doing it clean and we will again, patience grasshopper!
October 17th, 2010 at 10:45 pm
Easy Ed- Awfully bitter, which sounds as bad as you are making the Ducks out to be. If Phil Knight was throwing all that $$$ at Cal, you wouldn’t be hatin’, would you? Cal has had its own Sugar Daddies, named Haas, Fischer, etc- right? Really unattractive, stooping low and making excuses. Cal should aspire to show class, even when times seem bleak. You sound greener with envy than the brightest green Duck uni.
October 18th, 2010 at 9:25 am
You’re darn right I’m bitter. We have had our own Sugar Daddys like the Haas family, the Hearst family and Zellerbachs. But at least they have donated to create nice buildings and extensions to our school in general rather than to our sports programs in particular. I guess I just hate Nike and what they’ve done to sports from Michael Jordan to Tiger Woods they have created a corporate mentality that has made sports a little less enjoyable. Having said that, you are right, it was classless and I stand corrected.
October 18th, 2010 at 11:29 pm
Easy Ed, you’re alright buddy. That’s the class we like in the Cal nation.
But with that said, I’m bitter too, but I hope I have some perspective and I point my criticism at the $2.8 million dollar (per year)man, the CEO of the Cal football program.
If Cal had gone to a couple of Rose Bowls in the past 9 seasons and was making us proud out there on the field, plenty of money would be coming into the program from all directions- increased ticket and concession revenues, increased TV revenues (our game with OSU is not being televised- it’s like we are now WSU), increased donations, etc. We would have plenty of sugar daddy money.
Take care Ed.