Combined feed (RSS)
Football: Where Cal stands
By Jonathan Okanes
Monday, November 29th, 2010 at 1:24 pm in Football, off-season stuff.
Here is a story I wrote for today’s paper, looking at what’s happened to Cal’s program in recent years and where they go from here. Later this week, I will have a more thorough season review and look ahead to the future.
[You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.]
November 29th, 2010 at 1:37 pm
http://nfl.fanhouse.com/2010/11/29/andy-reid-reportedly-chews-out-desean-jackson-after-loss/?ncid=txtlnkusspor00000002
November 29th, 2010 at 1:52 pm
Lots of questions raised, no opinions of what’s wrong. We all already are aware of all these problems.
So what’s your opinion of what’s going on JO?
Otherwise, what’s the point of this article other than to inform the very casual sports fan? Cal football fans already know all this.
November 29th, 2010 at 3:18 pm
You need to write a separate article just to speculate what will likely happen at the QB position next year. Most everybody agrees it was a major cause of Cal’s downfall this year. Even the Washington fan who wrote in said that is Cal’s major weakness this year. And don’t leave out considering any incoming freshman QB’s (I’m sure others are sick of my mentioning one name).
November 29th, 2010 at 3:22 pm
Dan is spot on.
November 29th, 2010 at 3:41 pm
I will miss Mohammed, Jordan, Conte Vereen and Hill but am so glad that I will never have to see Hagan again. I am routing for Bridgeford and Yarnaway to take over.
November 29th, 2010 at 3:54 pm
what happened to loggy? he never dropped passes. was tedfurd just mad that he made a rap video? why wasn’t galas playing center all game, every game? who is going to placekick next year?
November 29th, 2010 at 4:12 pm
I have to disagree that the receiver corps is “suspect”. Dropped balls definitely hurt us this year, but drops are a part of the game. We return a solid receiver corps next year: Jones, Allen, Calvin, Lagemann, tight end Anthony Miller.
I think the performance of the offense next year relies on finding a quarterback who can consistently hit receivers in stride and significantly improving pass protection, both on the offensive line and among running backs and tight ends.
November 29th, 2010 at 4:58 pm
JT is a great person, but he has lost his passion, ability to motivate,recruit,administrate. Hopefully, this past season will provide the appropriate motivation to help him make major changes in coaching philosophy, coaching staff, recruiting and intensity of the overall program. Otherwise, Sandy Barbour will have to pull the plug.
November 29th, 2010 at 5:03 pm
Hey Otro Dan-
I am a former D1 receiver. To me, our receiving corps, at least the starters, are supremely talented. But they have 2 problems (other than not having QBs that can get them balls consistently and accurately, or an offense that utilizes them properly).
#1 – they drop WAY too many balls. As a former receiver, I can tell you if a ball hits your hands, you didn’t do the job if you didn’t catch it. Any receiver worth anything will tell you that, because it is true. Occasional drops ARE a part of the game. Plethoras of drops are not, and that’s what we saw from a few of Cal’s receivers Cal this season.
Marvin Jones dropped more balls in this season alone than a good D1 receiver would drop in an entire career. My estimate is that he dropped about 13-15 must catch balls this year- at least. So for all his ability, and he is very gifted, that many drops are not a part of the game- that many is unacceptable- he killed MANY drives this year with these drops. Anthony Miller and Mike Calvin have been the other major offenders- though Calvin seems to finally have eliminated the drops.
#2) The receivers are not consistently open enough. A lot of people have criticized them for not getting enough separation, and as such that is their fault. While I strongly agree that they are not open enough and don’t have enough separation, I am not sure that I believe it is the receiver’s fault. I think the issue here is it is more the plays, the routes- they just don’t fool the defense, they don’t pressure the defense enough.
Also, Cal frequently runs “Max Protect”, meaning they keep extra guys in to pass block, like the RBs, the TEs and even receivers lined up tight. What that leads to are a lot of 2 and 3 receiver routes/plays. It is very difficult for 2 or 3 receivers to get open vs. 4 and 5 dbs.
Final point here- Cal’s patterns are very basic and formation predictable. Opposing defenses know what routes Cal is running as Cal is so tied to formation, down and distance that predicates what routes get run. Many opposing defensive players after playing Cal have mentioned how they knew what Cal was going to run, that their coaches prepared them that well. That is a very loud statement about the often mentioned predictability and conservatism of Cal’s offense.
Re: Lageman- L ove him, he catches the ball, but he is apparently seriously considering not coming back for his senior season. He hardly plays (though I think he should) and also has serious opportunity at a rap career. He has offers, has a concert tour set up this spring break. Hard to to say I blame him for not returning, but I’d hate to see him not come back.
But in the end, we don’t optimize our receivers worth a darn, so will it really matter?
It is hard to develop a good receiving corps with an inconsistent, bad passing offense.
November 29th, 2010 at 5:29 pm
Whoa, is there now a Dan and an Otro Dan ? This is awesome.
I’d like to see an article where JO tracks the “issues heading into offseason” from the past 5 years. And then puts together a timetable / chart that shows coaches being hired / fired. I bet that would unearth interesting findings.
I am just not convinced Kevin Daft is the answer as WR coach for us.
I also would just find it interesting to see how consistent the issues are each offseason. I.e., QB.
And if we look at the top returning players from the past 5 years that may be fun too. For instance one thing that frightens me about next year – is that for the past few seasons we’ve always had a couple of stars on defense coming back. I don’t see any established stars on D coming back next year. We have guys with potential, but no Alualu coming back, or Mohammed, or Jordan, or Mebane, or Follet, or Sydquan, etc., etc.
I’d say this is the offseason with the fewest “sure thing” contributors coming back to the team. That of course is in the event that Vereen goes pro. Which he should. Look at Locker as an example of how you can hurt yourself long term by coming back for one more year on a bad team.
November 29th, 2010 at 5:44 pm
In case anyone is expecting a breath of fresh air with the current QBs in the system a little local news (Buffalo). My nephew with the AD at University of Buffalo, states Maynard is not a DI PAC Ten QB, If so we better hope the two Freshmen come up big!!
Bison Bob
November 29th, 2010 at 6:49 pm
Where does Cal Stand? How about the botton third of the Pac-10…and will likely be in the same position next year. There is no reason to think that Tedford and his staff will be able to adequately coach either Mansion or Sweeney. We can only go on blind faith that one of the new QBs (incoming transfers/freshmen) will be better.
As for the defense…no reason to think that the talent level will improve, either.
Bottom line is that Cal will likely finish in 8th place next year. All I can say is that Tedford is woefully overpaid!
All I know is that my expectations rose greatly when Tedford got that salary increase…as a fan…my expectations was for Tedford to lead the Cal football program to legitimately compete for a conference Title every year. My expectations were to win games against quality opponents…defeating USC and Oregon on more than just a rare occurance. My expectations were for Cal to get to a Rose Bowl (or BCS) before 2010. I don’t think these are unreasonable expectations given his salary level.
Sandy Barbour and the Cal adminstration must decide what type of football program do they want at Cal? One that is happy with “being competitive” i.e. in the 80’s and 90’s Cal would be “over the moon” with an 8-4 type of season…the only thing that was unaccpetable was multiple years of 1-10 and 2-9 type of season….everything else was OK.
So, Sandy…and other Cal Administrators…do you want to have Cal compete for conference Titles? If so, then you need to find a replacement for Tedford. If being 6-6 is OK…then you need to lower Tedford’s salary to below $1.2M or find a coach willing to accept a lower salary.
November 29th, 2010 at 7:20 pm
Otro Dan, best analysis I’ve ever seen on this blog from a poster. Not surprisingly it comes from someone who actually played in college and knows what he’s talking about.
Hopefully others on here speak up if they disagree with what you wrote, because you (gasp!) went against the “Fire Tedford” party line.
If anyone bothered to read the entirety of JO’s post they’d see that this article is the first in a series he’s planning on where Cal goes from here.
Also, Dan, the articles which appear in the newspaper or in the CC times website’s sports section always appeal to a more casual fan, so chill out with JO. He’s just doing his job. And finally, remember Wilner and Poole are the BANG’s “opinion” guys, on college and the East Bay, respectively. JO has editors to answer to…
I hope we can shake off this disappointing season and get back to challenging for Pac-10 titles! Go bears!
November 29th, 2010 at 10:23 pm
Bobby, I think you meant Dan (the D1 receiver), not Otro Dan. Too many dammed Dans, but lots of great points here.
Let me add:
I think many of these receiver problems fall on the coaching staff. Not sure if it is the fault of Kevin Daft, Tedford, or someone else, but these receivers have been underachieving since Desean, Lavelle, and company left town.
I thought Marvin Jones would develop into the “go to” guy this season. What happened to Anthony Miller this year? He was projected as one of the top T.E’s in the nation. Calvin looked like a player when he got here. Veran Tucker is now playing on Sundays for the Chiefs, but did very little here on Saturdays.
Quarterbacks and receivers are going backwards in this program. Kevin Riley and even Nate Longshore showed something as Freshman. They never developed, and probably went backwards. I hope Keenan Allen in not the next victim.
I honestly think Tedford needs to re evaluate this offensive coaching staff, and bring in a new O coordinator. It is ironic that Tedford has a reputation as a QB guru, and has not recruited or developed a decent QB since Arron Rogers, who was recruited as an afterthought and passed over for the starting job initially.
I disagree with the Dans on MC Lags. He should stick to the two turntables and a microphone. Looks more like a walk on than a D1 player, to me. But then again maybe that’s what this team needs.
November 29th, 2010 at 11:00 pm
The problem is, imho, that the HEAD coach is the type to kneel on the ball or punt whenever given the opportunity and that this mentality has somehow trickled down and poisoned what used to be a confident and winning football program. There is absolutely no reason not to throw the hail mary at the end of the 2nd qtr when down by 31 points to your rival at home! wtf Jeff? Do you really think the fans want to see your QB kneel?
No, I haven’t done what would amount to torturous research but I would bet that Tedford has chosen to kneel with nothing to lose at the end of halves or punted on 4th and less than 2 at least 20 times in the last 2 years alone. Tedford plays not to lose, who can deny that? Remember the Big Game last year and Tedford playing for the 6 point lead that absolutely miraculously held up? Or the AZ/Oregon games this year when he continually played for FGs? How’d those turn out?
Look at Chip Kelly, always going for it on 4th down. He has the exact opposite mentality that Tedford has. He is confident and brazen, just how we saw the Bears play in Tedford’s EARLY years. Kelly’s team is gonna play for the NC. Our team didn’t even deserve the toilet bowl this year.
WAAAA!!!! I want my good Golden Bears back! Because all of us know, there really is nothing better than a day spent at Strawberry Canyon excited about the team. I skipped the last 3 home games this year because I wasn’t excited about the team. You could call me fair-weather, but I prefer to consider myself a connoisseur of enjoyable football (win or lose), and that wasn’t even close to enjoyable football, and that is the fault of the man running the show: Jeff Tedford.
November 30th, 2010 at 1:13 am
Something has to significantly change during the offseason for the football team to improve in 2011. Everyone who watched Cal FB over the past several years knows that the offense has declined every since Tedford has become more of the CEO of the football program. I do give Tedford some credit for hiring CPendergast as the D has improved this season and hopefully he will do the same by identifying the obvious missing components to a once potent offense. For whatever its worth, I think Marshall should be replaced as he had enough time to improve the O-line and failed miserably. I also think K Daft should be gone too…I mean how could an ex QB turn out to be a wide receivers coach? Shouldnt you hire an ex pro or D1 college wide receiver to do the coaching by teaching the Marvin Joneses of the world to run correct routes, look for holes in the zone, and get separation? There were plenty of dropped passes too under Daft and just a lot inconsistency under his tenure. And while Daft can’t be blamed for the miscues 100%, perhaps a share of the blame should be going to Ludwig who calls the passing plays. Ludwig has been such a disappointment for the past 2 yrs – since he was highly regarded from Utah. His playcalling has been so elementary and repetitive…I dont know whether he has no trust in his offensive players or the players are just inept. Either way, Ludwig is the CEO of the offense and he (or somebody) needs to fix it quick. Now when I think about it, I dont mind both Daft and Ludwig packing their bags. The offense is just putrid…so so PAINFUL to watch. Anyway, Tedford I believe should come back to being a hands-on QB coach which is his expertise to begin with. Since 2007, he has left that up to Daft and/or Ludwig and their mix/guidance obviously didnt show improvement, in fact, it has digressed so much so that CAL losses are so large and vast as the Grand Canyon.
As for Mansion, he just doesnt have what it takes…sorry to say. He had his chances and lost it. I mean he just looks horrible like a grade school kid being chased by a bunch of bullies – scared and indecisive. And if Sweeney is worse, then take a look at the others…maybe Maynard…who has some playing experience in Buffalo and that’s worth something. Anyway, I’m done analyzing and I’m just hoping for a miracle next year because it will be another long season.
November 30th, 2010 at 7:53 am
We all need to cut Coach Tedford some slack. Remember that he stuck with Cal when things were going good & the Chicago Bears & Alabama Crimson Tide came to him with job offers. Tedford has shown a real love & loyalty for Cal, so he deserves another season or two to get the football program heading back in the right direction.
November 30th, 2010 at 8:31 am
Every coach has down years and those years usually revolve around the fact that there is no good QB. Look at Urban Meyer this year, everyone said Brantley was going to be great, he wasn’t, Florida wasn’t good. Hopefully either the Maynard kid or my favorite (but maybe not for next season) Kyle Boehm steps up. I think those are the two most talented guys coming in.
Got to say though, through all the negativity, how about the new D coordinator…I love Pendergast, that guy is a real coach. Taking a team with the same talent as last season and turning them into a very solid defense. Great job.
November 30th, 2010 at 8:40 am
If we are going to be so predictable on offense, at least open up practice again so we can updates from JO. Closing practice this year really gave us a chance to roll out our new schemes. Pathetic. Where are the crossing patterns or QB dives instead of 3rd and 11 up the middle or that tired old wide receiver screen pass. Reminds me of the old Roger Theder days of short side sweep.
November 30th, 2010 at 8:45 am
I was delighted with Pendergast’s ability to adapt to the ridiculous trickeration offenses that teams like ucla and oregon run, but we got torched by pro-style offenses, mostly because our secondary was just bad. but i think we took the same defensive approach to each game, after nevada, and for teams that try to run a modified pistol, sure, multiple blitzes pay off, but against a strong o-line, we were in deep trouble. overall, though, i was happy.
on the offensive side, how many new OCs do we have to go through before we realize that’s not the problem?
and every time i’m about to agree that tedford deserves more time give how loyal he’s been, i’m reminded of the 2.8mm he makes every year. that’s an insane amount of cash. i’m the kind of person who would never work again if i got my paws on that much cash, even 1.4 after taxes, so i guess i just don’t understand, but why take all the pressure? why not go volunteer at a local high school and spend time with your family? does making 2.8mm still provide validation of success when you’re a .500 coach over the last 3 years and haven’t developed a single QB to even average conference standards?
November 30th, 2010 at 9:05 am
BlakeStreetBear-
Great post, or at least I think so because I agree with you 100%. You summed Tedford up perfectly and I think you explained equally well the trickle down effect (more like a waterfall effect) his play not lose mentality approach has had on his players, on the team, on the entire program.
I like what I saw out of Pendergast for the most part, however I am less optimistic about the defense next year. One the one hand, I would hope that all the players with another year in his system would be better- that’s the optimistic view, and I can see (and hope for) that. What concerns me is the loss of a stars at DE (Jordan), LB (Mohammed) and DB/Safety (Conte). All three will play on Sundays, and I sure don’t see anywhere near that talent on next year’s defense. Hopefully some guys will really work their tails off and step up next year.
Finally, I wonder if Pendergast has designs on getting back to the NFL? I hope not for awhile at least.
November 30th, 2010 at 9:11 am
Dan: I imagine Cal’s uneven defensive performance will keep Pendergast here for another year or two until he can get a consistently dominating season under his belt.
After that, totally agree he’ll move back to the League.
I wonder how people will react next year when Tedford becomes Cal’s all-time winningest (not even sure that’s a word) coach. I hope hope hope it happens at home (er, AT&T) and he gets a standing ovation. Regardless of how you feel about his performance since 2008, he deserves praise for becoming the best coach of the modern era
November 30th, 2010 at 9:15 am
+1 for D1 Dan. The route combinations and schematics are simply not working or fooling anymore. You tell me, it’s 2nd and long, what play is Ludwig about to call ? _____________
I bet 80% of you who have watched the Bears this year know the answer.
November 30th, 2010 at 9:33 am
Bearupthere: Slip screen
November 30th, 2010 at 9:41 am
As Nebraska coach Bo Pelini said “It’s effort, not scheme” (that brings football success). IMHO, Cal needs to adopt a simpler offense that the players can catch on to fast & execute consistently well, plus an Oregon-like uptempo, no huddle approach to put defenses on their heels more often. The uptempo, simpler style might just add the confidence & aggressive nature that the O needs to succeed. Anyway, worth a try.
November 30th, 2010 at 9:42 am
Another note, here we have had Chris Conte as a reserve/nickel DB for the past three years and it’s not until his senior year that the coaching staff finds out he is a stellar strong safety with definite pro potential. Why did it take so long?
November 30th, 2010 at 9:55 am
Tedford’s biggest problem is his inability to put the players in a position to succeed. The fact that we have so many guys in the NFL that make major contributions, while the Cal teams are just mediocre highlights this point. Conte is one example of someone out of position. Not allowing the qb’s to run a little bit, and an overall lack of creativity in getting his playmakers the ball are other problems. The offense has way too many playmakers and speed guys to be that awful the past few weeks, even with Mansion at QB. There were not enough short passes, bubble screens, etc. Cal needs to be a spread team. With the speed of Jones, Allen, Vereen, Sofeli, etc, can you imagine throwing all of them out there and letting opposing defenses try to cover them? Tedford just doesn’t know how to use the strengths of players, but rather tries to make them into players that they are not. He needs to realize that his ancient ways of running an offense are not working
November 30th, 2010 at 10:47 am
Bobby- VERY funny… and true. You think Pac 10 DCs know the answer??? LOL!
ScottyBear – Conte was an absolute stud this year, mind boggling they kept trying to play him at CB. Do we recall he wasn’t even a starter at the beginning of the season, it took Cattouse getting dinged up & missing practice and Josh Hill to play poorly a lot for Conte to get a start this year- helloooooww??? Is anybody home?
CalHipHopHead- great name, by the way. I am trying to conjure up a visual, lol. You wrote what I have been saying for several seasons. Agree, agree, agree- well stated.
It boggles the mind how Cal has all these weapons and can’t come close to optimizing them. It’s like they wasted so many weapons, especially- ironically, in there later seasons at Cal. Desean Jackson, Jahvid Best, Vereen this year- they’re under-utilizing Keenan Allen this year.
My best friend, a former college roommate and teammate (not a Cal fan) has been going to a game or two a year with me for years and watches others on TV and has been nicely hammering Tedford to me- I don’t argue, I agree- how Cal has so much speed, so much talent, so many weapons and just continually disappoints. They other thing he mentions is how not only does Cal have SO many guys in the NFL, but so many are GREAT in the NFL. How can’t Cal have been better than they are every year? Hard to argue. He’s preaching to the choir.
November 30th, 2010 at 11:54 am
bearupthere Says:
November 30th, 2010 at 9:15 am
+1 for D1 Dan. The route combinations and schematics are simply not working or fooling anymore. You tell me, it’s 2nd and long, what play is Ludwig about to call ? _____________
I bet 80% of you who have watched the Bears this year know the answer
—
yup, how about this one. It’s 3rd and 6, Vereen is in the backfield. ______
November 30th, 2010 at 1:54 pm
Question about hiring of coaches/coordinators:
Could one issue be that Tedford is not good at identifying a good coach/coordinator? Think about the top coordinators under Tedford — Ron Gould, Michalzik (sp?) — both from Holmoe’s staff. Tedford personally hired Gregory, Marshall, Genyk, Daft, and the smorgasbord of OC’s, only to see each of them fail.
Might the first step in righting the ship involve having someone else help Tedford with the inevitable coaching hires this offseason?
I just don’t think Tedford has the right skill in identifying what makes a good coach/coordinator, while that is 50% of Sandy Barbour’s job. Not sure if she’s knowledgeable enough, but I honestly believe that Barbour has done a magnificent job in identifying and hiring coaches throughout the athletic department (in addition to Monty, she’s brought in some impressive coaches in Womens’ BBall, Soccer, V-ball, etc). Maybe Tedford needs to ask for some help in forming his initial list of candidates from Sandy?
Hiring the right person is a skill that must be developed.
November 30th, 2010 at 2:05 pm
I think we have a massive problem on offense and it goes stem to stern. Our offensive scheme is lousy. It fools nobody. We do not have clever well designed pass routes. We don’t use our tight end. We have no designs to get our guys open. “just run a hook” or “cut to the sideline” is not a pattern unless you have something in the overall play design that is conceived to make it work. So Ludwig MUST GO. Our offensive line coaching is terrible. So are our running blocking schemes. If we get an undersized opponent we can occasionally muscle guys out of the way. But zone blocking almost all the time does not work. Ever heard of trap blocking?
So the O line coach has got to go.
And then we get to the receivers. Underperformers who have not been coached to get better. They drop balls, the don’t block (compare our bubble screens to Oregon’s). Name an outstanding game winning catch this year. Can’t do it. I can name lots of game losing dropped balls. When a receiver drops a pass that would have given us a first down and then we otherwise don’t covert, that dropped ball is effectively a turn over. We should use all our receivers. Max protect will not work. Instead use all the receivers and design the play for a throw in 2 seconds. Give the quarterback a quick read so he can get the snap and unload. We don’t do that.
Finally the biggest problem of all. Our quarterbacks. There has been ZERO development. In fact over time both Longshore and Riley have gotten worse. Riley played better in the Oregon State game when he made the running mistake than in any other game in his career. He MADE plays. Coaching converted him into an innaccurate, tentative, game manager who could not win a game. SAme with Longshore.
If these offensive failings are the result of Tedford delegating, then stop delegating. Take over the offense.
Here is the question we should ask: Is the team performing at its level of talent? I maintain that when Tedford arrived he made the team play better than its talent level. Now the team plays MUCH worse than its talent level.
November 30th, 2010 at 3:47 pm
Jeff-
You make a lot of strong analysis that I completely agree with, how you recap each position group is spot on. And blaming the position coaches is hard to dispute- the only offensive position that is impressive every year, that performs close to talent level and circumstances permit is RB coach Ron Gould. You KNOW he’s doing a great job. What limits the running backs is the predictability that brings 8-9 men into the box and limits what our RBs can do with the developed talent that Gould has ready to go every game, in addition to the ever decreasing line play.
Where I differ with your viewpoint is on the highest level, this offense- philosophy, strategy down to the formations and plays themselves- to me none of this is on the OC or the position coaches, that’s all about Tedford, his system and his wimpy, loser, play not to lose approach to play calling and football overall.
I don’t think Tedford delegating less or being more involved in details offer much opportunity to fix this offense. We have gone through several OCs and several QBs with similar results, things just happen to be getting worse every season. The offense keeps getting worse, the QBs regress and get worse. We now have a minimum 4 consecutive season sample size here. This isn’t about position coaches or coordinators. Even if it were, Tedford hires these guys and they run his program.
I respectfully disagree with you and many others that think that Tedford being more hands on is a road to the dramatic improvement needed here. I think that misses the point of so many of the true reasons for all the struggles, so many which have been eloquently pointed out here on this blog for several seasons.
Finally, NO, the team performs nowhere near it’s level of talent. When Tedford arrived, the team played up to, and perhaps past, it’s talent level- that lasted about 3-4 seasons. Since then, they have played below, further below every year. With the trend and momentum headed that way, the odds are very slim that you can see a radical enough change in the other direction.
This is true, short of a drastic change in offensive strategy, philosophy, approach, game planning, play calling and execution. You’ll know if that is going to happen within 30-45 days, because you’ll see him fire Ludwig (scapegoat) and bring in an innovative, new approach OC.
Tedford had a great solution when he brought in Mike Dunlap, but he castrated the guy and his approach- Dunlap ran the plays Tedford wanted called, Tedford avoided the spread that Dunlap was reknowned for. Dunlap oddly left after one year, and to some of the earliest whispers of issues on offense, Dunlap was blamed by many for the decrease in offensive production that season- which I pointed out way back then was bunk, as I had seen Dunlaps’ high flying, high scoring, exciting offenses (with mediocre talent) at Northwestern in the few years preceding his year at Cal.
So even if brings in a new OC with a whole new philosophy, he has to step way out and let him run the entire show on offense. That’s probably ain’t going to happen, it’s not in Tedford’s makeup. It’s Ben Braun all over again.
November 30th, 2010 at 4:07 pm
This post, based on Cal’s performance and the numerous detailed posts, should have been titled “Where Cal has Fallen” rather than “Where Cal Stands”.
Cal was successful when Tedford was trying to justify his promotion from OC to HC, sleeping in his office, hungry. Now he IS the HC with a long-term lucrative contract and is far, far from hungry. Maybe he should go back to camping in his office and let his frustrated sex drive loose by being a football coach again who NEEDS to win.
At $2.8 million/year, the results are abysmal and the financial hit from the poor results will be immense. They might as well reduce Memorial Stadium to 50K, ala the junior u, and hope to get 40K of die-hards. With so many alternatives in the SF Bay Area for discretionary bucks, paying to watch Cal in person is becoming a poor choice. Hell, most of the games are on TV and the net and can be turned off when “enough is enough”.
November 30th, 2010 at 5:10 pm
this is why i think we need booze in the stadium. pacify the faithful, and pay for the coach.
November 30th, 2010 at 6:04 pm
Jim- The financial impact you mentioned is going to be tremendous not only on game tickets, but all the very high end donor seats that are to pay for the stadium remodel.
Also, your point about discretionary dollars and things to do in the bay area is also a factor that I think will come back to bite the football, and sports, program.
Going to a Cal game is also huge time investment- when I go, I leave 3+ hours before kickoff, stay at least 60-90 minutes after to let traffic clear out, hang out w/ friends and grab a bite. For me, it’s a 9+ hour day, where I spend quite a bit of money both on and off campus. Spending last Saturday watching Cal lose and be unable to score vs. a very mediocre UW team, in the cold and rain was not the most enjoyable thing I’ve experienced. Quite a bit short of my love of spending fall Saturdays in Strawberry Canyon watching a competitive Cal team play with heart, win or lose.
While I might scale back the number of times I do that in a season (I used to never miss- this season I passed on ASU and the Big Game). Other less devoted fans will pass altogether.
In fact, it is already happening- that whole college area around Telegraph was a ghost town before the game- I have never seen it like that in the entire Tedford era. Then there were well under 30,000 in the stands at the game- that’s pathetic, even for a cold rainy day on Thanksgiving weekend- even for a 5-6 team. It was like it was in the last Holmoe year. I can’t even imagine how many millions of dollars this ends up costing the athletic program.
If you think it can’t happen to an extreme level for football, those that regularly attend basketball games at Haas, including this season coming off a Pac 10 championship, can attest to the disappointing, small crowds at Haas the past few years. Braun killed Cal basketball, hopefully Monty will be able to revive the passion and energy at Haas. Football has already started that same process at Memorial Stadium.
November 30th, 2010 at 7:02 pm
“It’s all about bucks kid, the rest is conversation.”
Gordon Gecko
Fact: No way Tedford quits or gets bought out. Anybody have a loose 10 million?
Fact: As Dan said, “…whole college area around Telegraph was a ghost town before the game- I have never seen it like that in the entire Tedford era.” Absolutely true. Walking up to March to Victory I thought the game time had been changed.
Fact: The Bay Area’s college football fan base is small; maybe 60,000 total between Cal, Stanford, and San Jose State. Heck, Stanford may be the second best team in the country and they can’t fill their stadium.
Question: How in the name of Pappy Waldorf is Cal going to collect 321 million in ESP money to pay for the new Memorial, or as I like to call it, “The House that Aaron Rodgers Built?”
November 30th, 2010 at 7:05 pm
Dan, Jeff, TC, Blake, Bobby, Kent –
Great posts — some of the best I’ve read on this board over the years.
I agree with those who have questioned the assistant coaches. I would love to see Marshall gone. And several people have articulated strong cases for why Ludiwg should go. Let’s get a fresh start on the offense. I’m less sure that Daft needs to go but I do know I’d be thrilled to read that he’s gone in favor of a promising replacement.
Gould is a stud and I think Lupoi is valuable too — it’s too bad his reputation took a hit with the fake injury issue. I say forgive Tosh and keep him around.
As for Tedford, I’ve been a supporter. In years past I thought the message board criticism of Tedford was ridiculous. This season tested my faith and people have made some very good points on this thread. If Tedford is as good a coach as I’ve thought he is, he will address these issues.
I say give Tedford two more years to turn this back around. As others have pointed out, he has done a lot for our program and deserves a long leash. I know some of you think he has already gotten a long leash, but there’s almost no way I would fire him after next year (barring a complete breakdown in effort and or discipline). Give him 2011 to get started and develop a QB, and then expect decent results in 2012.
As for the QB situation, my hope is that Hinder will be the guy. Boehm is too young for next year, Mansion doesn’t look to have it and would be on the hot seat almost immediately — not a good recipe for success. Sweeney is apparently even worse. Maynard could be interesting, but Teford has never had a successful running QB and my gut says it’s unlikely we can restructure the offense to suit that style quickly enough. Besides, Maynard seemed to be a mediocre QB for a weak D-1 team at Buffalo. I feel like some of the other young QBs might have more potential.
Bridgford is a wild card for me. Some on this board think he’s got a really high ceiling. From where I sit, he was never as exciting a recruit as Hinder.
Best case, in my opinion is if Hinder or Bridgford play well enough in Spring and Fall camp to win the job. Bridgford is coming off an injury and his arm strength is unproven, so I’m hoping it’s Hinder who distinguishes himself.
God help readers of this board if Tedford announces in late August that “Mansion is the guy for now because he’s just ahead of all the other QBs in understanding the offense”. Not only will that be a bad sign for 2011 success, but mistakes that Mansion may make early in the year will likely seem way too familiar and this board will explode in frustration. I actually think Mansion has a lot of talent but he’s used up his goodwill with the fans. Time to give someone else a shot.
Too bad we won’t have a bowl game to provide some extra practice time for Hinder.
Coach Tedford: do what you need to do to get this done
Go Bears!
November 30th, 2010 at 7:31 pm
we play at ohio state in 2012. an early victory there would win a lot of fans back into the tedford camp, at least temporarily.
November 30th, 2010 at 8:33 pm
Where Cal Stands: simply put, up a creek with no paddle for the foreseeable future.
November 30th, 2010 at 9:20 pm
AZ Bear- thanks for the kind words- good post yourself. I think you will get what you are suggesting, at least 2 more years for Tedford here. If nothing else, his guaranteed contract will necessitate that- Cal and it’s high end football donors can not likely afford to eat $2.8M a year X even 3 years (2013, 2014, 2015), so barring an epic collapse (2-3 win seasons) I don’t see how he’s gone in the next 2 years. It’s probably not even open for consideration for 3-4 more years.
I do think that Cal and Sandy Barbour are playing a huge game of Russian Roulette here. Many have commented on how the SAHPC and Stadium remodel are happening because of Tedford. I don’t believe that is accurate. I think these projects get planned and executed becuase of the football popularity and cash flow under Tedford, driven by the excitement and financial windfalls of early Tedford success, national rankings and promise of even better days and bigger accomplishments ahead.
That is actually not accurate. The SAHPC, I would say yes, credit to Tedford, as my understanding that it is completely or almost completely paid for already. And again, my understanding is that the Stadium is far from paid off (about 50% or less), and if Cal football continues to under-achieve /disappoint, then there is strong likelihood that the high end seat purchase donors and just general overall ticket sales will not come through, leaving Cal with a HUGE financial nut with no way to pay it off for much longer than was no doubt projected a few years back. So for those many posters here that have given Tedford so much credit for these two projects, you might want to without your applause for a few more years here until the stadium is in excellent financial backing- if it does achieve that. A BIG if right now.
Does anybody have any additional insights on this?
November 30th, 2010 at 9:35 pm
Dan:
Check out the site for the ESP. Most seats available, especially the most expensive seats.
http://calesp.com/index.asp
Remember, you can give all up front or pay every year. How many of the sold seats are on a year-to-year term? Who will continue to shell out tens of thousands of dollars for this product? The cheapest seat (plastic seat back, no cushion, 30-yard line) is $2741 per year.
November 30th, 2010 at 9:48 pm
AZ Bear- One other comment re: QB play. While it’s hard to believe that the QB play could be any more disappointing than what we have seen for several years, it’s hard to believe with all these highly regarded QBs on the roster that there isn’t one amongst them that can be not only better than what we have seen for several years, but that there wouldn’t be a star in there. Seems to make sense, right?
But I have zero confidence that Cal under Tedford can develop a solid QB, let alone another Aaron Rodgers, which is to say a first team All-Pac 10 caliber QB. I think Tedford was once a QB guru, now I believe he is a QB killer. Cal is where promising, talented, highly regarded HS QBs come to fall way short of their, and our, great expectations.
Between Tedford, his demeanor, his revolving door at QB coach and OC, the outdated and unimaginative offense, the doomed play calling, his uptight attitude, his negative thoughts that none of his QBs ever seem to be good enough except the starter … I could go on and on- but between all of that, I, again, have ZERO confidence we will see a top notch QB at Cal while Tedford is here.
The only way I see that changing is if he brings in a new OC who is a genius and an innovator and if Tedford gets way the heck out of the way. Just the way Mike Belotti did with Chip Kelly. This is where I differ greatly from the many posters that feel Tedford needs to go back to be way more hands on with the QBs, the offense, the play calling. I say NO WAY. Old Sourpuss has lost his mojo and doesn’t have it anymore.
Plus, Tedford has admitted several seasons ago that he can’t do all that and be head coach – too many other aspects that fall under his per view get neglected when he is too myopically focused on the QBs and the Offense. And he isn’t going to step down from being the head coach, so it’s not even an option that he becomes way more engaged in the QBs and the offense. He might say he’s going to do it, and he may, but it is a recipe other shortcomings in the program.
As great and naturally gifted as Andrew Luck is, he was good, but not great last season. This season he is so great in every way, it’s ridiculous. He needed development and great coaching to get there, which he has clearly gotten from Harbaugh and his staff. He is better this season without the force of nature that was Toby Gerhardt last season- and wow, that’s mind boggling great.
If Luck were at Cal, don’t you know he’d be a train wreck? In fact, maybe we wouldn’t know he was a train wreck, because he’d be standing on the sideline watching Kevin Riley, Brock Mansion and Beau Sweeney all flail in Tedford’s offense before he ever saw the field in any meaningful minutes. We’d hear how he doesn’t have enough grasp of the offense, or that Riley’s grasp was better than Mansion, whose is better than Sweeney’s grasp … blah, blah, blah.
I believe what I am saying about Luck in the same way I believe – no, make that KNOW – that Tedford would have kicked a FG at the end of the game Saturday to go to OT if he were in in Steve Sarkisian’s shoes.
There is so much off kilter in the program, it gives me a headache thinking about it. So I’m done for a week, off to Montreal and Houston (there’s a business trip for ya). Have fun all of you breaking it down during my hiatus.
November 30th, 2010 at 9:52 pm
707 Bear- $422 per seat per game (total divided by 6.5 home games per year) – wow. And those are some of the cheaper ESP seats.
Again, let’s see the stadium get paid for under this plan before we throw Tedford a parade. If it comes through, HUGE kudos to him. If not, he’ll be remembered by many in infamy for financial disaster. That’s some serious high stakes poker.
November 30th, 2010 at 9:58 pm
Monte Poole just wrote a great column on keeping Jeff Tedford on the job. It has been 52 years since Cal won the conference in football in 1958 & went to the Rose Bowl. During that 52 years, Cal was the co-champion twice, in 1975 when Mike White was the coach & in 2006 under JT. (Both times, Cal lost the head to head with the co-champion & thus sadly but correctly, did not go to the Rose Bowl.) This is an exciting era to be a Cal fan when we have a coach who produced a very rare co-championship.
Working back to 1958 through the coaches here is the history, with winnng seasons & bowl games if any, given after the coach’s name: Jeff Tedford (8 winning seasons, 7 bowls), Tom Holmoe (none), Steve Mariucci (1 bowl), Keith Gilbertson (1 winning season & bowl), Bruce Snyder (2 winning seasons & bowls), Joe Kapp (1 winning season), Roger Theder (2 winning seasons, 1 bowl), Mike White (3 winning seasons), Ray Willsey (3 winning seasons), Marv Levy (none), Pete Elliott (1 bowl).
In the 44 seasons after 1958 & before JT, Cal only had 12 winning seasons. That is the sorry doormat that JT inherited & turned into a winner, producing 8 winning seasons in 9 years.
Some of the coaches fired by Cal for losing, or bolting for greener pastures, had great success later on at other places. The hostile nickname for Marv Levy was “Marvelous Marv” when he was losing at Cal in the early 60′s. Later on, Marv Levy took the Buffalo Bills to 4 Super Bowls & was inducted as a coach into the Pro Football Hall of Fame. Yet even he had not been able to win at Cal. After Cal fired Mike White, he took Illinois to the Rose Bowl. After Bruce Snyder bolted, he took Arizona State to the Rose Bowl. After Steve Mariucci bolted, he took the 49ers to NFL playoff games. In other words, some very good coaches were not able to win much at Cal or get Cal to the Rose Bowl.
By 2006, JT had erased the loser image of Cal football. But then from late that year until September of 2008 Cal became a national joke with the tree-sitters & court order preventing work on the proposed new athletic performance center. When JT took the job in 02 he stressed the need for Cal to catch up with the rest of the Pac Ten in athletic facilities & even made required progress on that part of his contract. The Center is finally supposed to open in September 2011. Not until then will recruits be able to see first class, Big Time training facilities.
JT has been great for Cal. The time to evaluate his long-term performance will be about 2016, after he has had about 4 seasons of recruiting players who on their visit will see training facilities worthy of a Pac Ten school.
December 1st, 2010 at 7:51 am
Cal will not win enough games in 2011 for JT to pass Andy Smith. Not even close.
December 1st, 2010 at 11:30 am
Dan — I agree with your thought that, among all the QBs in the program, at least one should be better than what we’ve seen in recent years, if not a star. The lack of development/success from the post-Rodgers Cal QBs is hugely disappointing and certainly reflects in part on Tedford. But it’s also a small sample (Ayoob, Longshore, Riley, Mansion). [Also, some would argue that Mansion hasn't had a full chance, and others have noted that Longshore did has one pretty good year].
0 for 4 is not a very good record in QB selection/development, but it would not surprise me to see Tedford’s next guy work out. That’s where we differ, I think, and this is one of the biggest questions that will determine JT’s future and legacy here. Dan, you see the recent evidence and conclude that JT is a QB killer. That’s a reasonable conclusion and I certainly can’t prove otherwise.
The bull case is that things didn’t work out for the last 4 Cal QBs, but that it’s not because Tedford is actually a poor evaluator/developer of QB talent. Maybe they weren’t as good as we thought, maybe injuries hurt their chances, JT and/or our OCs didn’t do as good a job as they could, etc….
No one gets it right all the time and 0 for 4 is a tough streak but it could happen even to a good coach.
The bear case is what Dan said — that JT is a QB killer more than a QB guru.
My guess is that JT is in between the two extremes, but that he will find a good QB in the next year. A lot of that is based on hope but I’m a fan so I think that’s okay.
If JT can find us a decent QB by sometime next season and the team can have modest on-field success (i.e. at least make a minor bowl game), then I think there’s a good chance we can gain enough recruiting momentum from the new training center (and stadium retrofit) that the program can get back to where it was and have another shot at breaking though to the next level in a couple of years.
I think what reasonable people may disagree on is how long to give JT before concluding that he’s not the best person for the job (among realistic candidates). I say give him one more cycle (two years minimum, and more if the team is progressing). If at any point the decision is a close one, I say give JT the benefit of the doubt because of how he’s improved the program and how he’s done it with relative class.
December 1st, 2010 at 11:35 am
Bobsac — thanks for digging out the stats on Cal’s former coaches. Tedford has indeed been great for Cal when viewed in historical perspective.
I am fine with giving him another 4 years except that if performance were to continue to slide for the next two years it might be tough to not think about a change.
Let’s see what happens. I think there’s more chance we’ll collectively be singing JT’s praises in two years than there is that we’ll be lamenting two more years of decline in the program.
December 1st, 2010 at 12:20 pm
I think the argument that superior facilities relate to the best recruits is a bit overrated. I read in the LA Times recently that USC has some of the worst sports facilities in the Pac 10, and they consistently out recruit everyone on the West Coast.
In Autzen or Corvalis – cold, wet miserable places that California recruits normally want to go and live -having the nicest facilities certainly makes a big difference. Cal can sell itself on having one of the best universities in the nation with a diverse, active and fun lifestyle just outside the campus. Playing in a full house in beautiful Strawberry canyon doesn’t hurt things, either. Tedford has been able to attract great recruits during his tenure, as evidenced by the number of former Cal players in the NFL.
So, no, completing those great new facilities isn’t going to make a huge difference in the Tedford era unless he figures out how to make the already good athletes better on the playing field.
December 1st, 2010 at 1:29 pm
Bobsac brings up a great point: In short, Tedford is a victim of his own success. Yes, we pay him a lot but why did we do that in the first place? Because he made us believe we could compete to be conference champions and nationally competitive every year. Yes, it was his doing but Bobsac put things in great perspective.
I see a different story. I think JT from 2002-2006 ate, slept and dreamt Cal football and, in particular, ran the offense. These were the glory years. Starting in the 2007 season, he started delegating more of the duties. Since then he’s been playing with taking more or less of the offensive duties (game planning, play calling, etc.) and he hasn’t been successful at it.
I disagree with that JT has a play-not-to-lose mentality. I think he plays smart and can be bold and clever as evidenced by his first 5 successful years at Cal. I do think that our playcalling is predictable and sometimes too conservative but not enough to hang JT with. I wonder how much of this is either poor delegation or a poor OC.
I don’t get the sense that JT is complacent with his salary. If all that mattered to him was money, then he would’ve gone to the NFL when he had the chance. I think he wanted to leave his mark on Cal and turn it into a perennially competitive program.
People who say they would retire after making $X million are the type of people who don’t have the passion, will or drive to become the HC of a Div1 football team. If it was so easy to get this kind of money, more people would be doing it. The fact is that a lucky, talented fraction of percentage of coaches ever make it and I doubt they’re looking to cash in on year 1 and then sit back and relax. These are people who are extremely competitive and take a large amount of pride in success on the field.
December 1st, 2010 at 1:32 pm
@Steve W: Tedford himself said something like (paraphrasing) ‘It certainly won’t hurt us. Recruits go to other schools and one of the things all the other programs say against Cal is that their facilities are old.’ Other players could also take it as a sign that the school doesn’t care about athletics.
He himself says that facilities is something of an “arms race” in recruiting.
So I don’t see him saying it will get us the best recruits. I think he’s saying it was a huge knock against us before and now it’ll put is a better position.
January 2nd, 2011 at 1:44 pm
I think everyone who a comment about Cal’s offense woes have a point!!!!!!!HERES MY POINT CAL HAS GOOD TALENT AND RECRUIT WELL BUT THEY HAVEN’T ALTERED THERE OFFENSIVE PLAYS IN THREE YEARS, WHY DO THEY STILL WANNA RUN UNPRODUCTIVE FULLBACKS IN THERE OFFENSE,UNLESS HE CAN RUN THE BALL OR CATCH LIKE A TIGHTEND FULLBACKS ARE USELESS.WHY DO WE USE TWO RUNNINGBACKS ALL YEAR WHEN THEY THEY HAVE 5 OR SIX BACKS. TEFORD REDSHIRTS TWO MANY GUYS ON OFFENSE AND TRYS TWO HAVE 1000 YARD BACKS EVERY YEAR WHICH IS GREAT BUT THE REST OF THE CONFERENCE KNOWS YOUR PLAYS.CAL IS NOT GETTING THE BEST OUT OF THERE TALENTS, THEY GOT GUYS COMING IN TOO PLAY BUT HAVE TOO WAIT TILL TEFORD DECIDES WHO SHOULD BE ON THE FIELD.HE NOW HAS A RUNNING BACK PROBLEM LET ALONE QB PROBLEM,VEREEN IS GONE AND HE HASN’T USED THE OTHER RUNNINGBACKS WRIGHT.ISI IS A BETTER RECEIVER THAN RUNNINGBACK CAUSE HE IS TOO LIGHT TOO TAKE A POUNDING ALLDAY AND TEFORD HAS FORGOT ABOUT COUGHVAGHN DEBOSKIE REFUSES TOO PUT THE 225 POUND BRUISER BACK DASARTE YARNAY ON THE FIELD AND AS FAR AS THE RECIEVERS HOW CAN A GUY CATCH THE BALL IF HE IS RUNNING THE SAME PLAYS FROM 2002 AND GETTING DOUBLED TEAMED WHILE HE WATCHES A FULLBACK STAND AROUND AFTER THE GUY MISSES THE BLOCK FOR HIS RUNNINGBACK, BOTTOMLINE THE OFFENSE HAS TOO COMPETE WITH THE PAC-12 NEXT YEAR AND THEY NEED TOO GET READY QUICK NO MORE OF THAT I DON’T KNOW WHAT HAPPEND CAUSE WE PREPARED !!!!!!!!!!!!!!LETS SEE THE TALENT USED WRIGHT FROM THIS POINT OWN OR CAL WILL BE LOOKING AT THE CELLAR!!!!!!!!!!!!!