Football: Tedford on Pac-10 call

Jeff Tedford made his final appearance on the weekly Pac-10 media teleconference today (I don’t cover these during the season because they take place at the same time practice is wrapping up on Tuesdays and then we move on to the weekly press conference).¬† A couple of highlights:

  • On the offseason plan moving forward: “It starts immediately. Obviously, right now one of the main focuses now is on recruiting. But while that’s going on, it’s very important to evaluate everything that we do. Obviously, we need to improve. There were games that were close and games that weren’t. Schematics, offseason work — whatever it is, my job as head coach is to go back and evaluate everything we do. I’m going to gather information (from talking to coaches and players).”
  • On the quarterback competition: “It’s going to be wide open. We have some candidates there. We have some young guys that haven’t got an opportunity because of injuries and youth. There are going to be five or six guys in the competition. Our challenge will be trying to evaluate that many guys with the practice time. It’s not just a two-man race. It’s everybody. Brock got some invaluable experience down the stretch. Obviously, we have to play better at that position. And we need to do a better job of putting them in position to be successful as well. It’s all-encompassing. It will be a wide open competition at that spot.”

Tedford also pointed out that Cal averaged 34 points per game with Kevin Riley at quarterback and 13 points with Brock Mansion at quarterback. “Obviously, we have to create some depth there,” he said. “We have to regroup and get ready to improve in the spring.”

Tedford also had some interesting comments about scheduling. Speaking about the dearth of bowl-eligible teams in the Pac-10, Tedford said the reason is because the conference is so difficult that all the teams are beating up on each other. He said he expects¬† teams to not “over-schedule.”‘ Translation: Teams may be more motivated to bring in inferior opponents if they are concerned their overall win-loss record will suffer because of conference play.

Jonathan Okanes

Jonathan Okanes is in his fourth year covering Cal's football team. Previously, he covered Cal's men's basketball team for four years. He can also be followed on Twitter at twitter.com/OkanesonCal.

  • abe

    how about doing away with the 9 conference game schedule and being smart like the other conferences and play 8 games instead? the single handed reason behind playing 9 conference games was the moral and idealistic, however impractical, argument that the only way to crown a true champion is through a round robin system. Sure, except that no longer is the case as of next year. so why are we still playing 9 conference games? the fact that we are playing 9 conference games instead of 8 like for instance the SEC means an extra 12 conference match ups which guarantees the whole conference 6 extra loses thereby hurting the leagues overall win-loss record. if this is unimaginably stupid i don’t know what is. oh in addition to reduces the intra league schedule from 9 to 8 we should also be a bit clever about now who we play in non league match ups but also when. i dont know if you all have notices but again if you study the SEC, the so called strongest conference of the nation, not only do they mostly schedule patsies but they start of their season with a couple of those patsies to get warmed up and save the remaining patsy opponents for mid and late season match ups, there by, in effect, creating multiple bye weeks within the season, as most of these blow out wins are over in a quarter. example before playing Auburn, Alabama was having fun with Georgia State the week before while Auburn was beating up on Chatanooga a couple of weeks ahead. sure this means unattractive match ups in november but i dont see their fans complaining about it. yep you got to hand it to these guys they are really smart.

  • rollonubears

    There’s no question Riley gave us a better chance to win, but that stat about the offense rolling up 34 vs 13 is grossly overstated by the early patty cake games and the fact that brock went up against oregon and stanfurd. Nice try though.

  • Eric

    Rollon – 100% right. Take out UC Davis – the real cupcake (hard to argue Colorado and Nevada are!) and that drops significantly. How about running the comparison of just Pac-10 games?

  • Kevin


    UC Davis.



    I’m shaking.

  • PC

    No disrespect to Brock, but with Riley we would’ve likely put way more points on the board against WSU and UW. Maybe not 50 but maybe around 2 extra TDs per game.

  • Ken

    Why are we comparing bad apples to bad apples? Kevin Riley, as we found out the hard way, is significantly better than Brock as Tedford as informed us all season, but what would have happened if we had just a better QB at the helm, say.. another Aaron Rodgers caliber from ’04? Despite all that, crucial point this off season is getting some good recruits in every down players, like OLINE and QB, not just WRs. What good are 5-star WRs if we only have a mediocre QB who has poor accuracy, protected by a mediocre line that can’t create a pocket? It starts with the OLINE, so QBs would want to play at Cal knowing they will be protected, and the rest will follow.

  • ac

    Is it me or does it sound like 2009 all over again…re-evaluate everything they do and open up the quarterback competition…

    Tedford needs to do whatever he did when he first came to Cal because I don’t foresee any improvements next season at this rate.

  • Juancho

    Ac, completely agree with you. That’s the first thing I muttered to myself. “Isn’t that what we just did last year?”

    The positive I will note is that I like Tedford’s comment that he needs to develop depth at QB. For once it seems he’s heeding the alumni yells that we need to be ready in case a QB goes down.

    I also like that he said 5 or 6 guys will be in the mix next year. That means he’s thinking of not redshirting Boehm. That will be a big step forward, for me, if he does not redshirt him. He needs to be bold to turn around the image of our program. Give the youngster a start. If there are upper class guys that aren’t as good as the youngsters, then too bad. They got their scholarship and a great education.

    What I didn’t like is that Tedford explicitly says that some guys didn’t get a chance to compete because of youth. That to me is proof of one of the problems I’ve seen in the program. It’s not about talent, or ability to play, sometime’s it is about upper vs. under classmen and seniority, nepotism, etc.

    If the youngster has the most talent and can win, then play him. We have to become a more internally competitive football culture. I even like how Hairball brought the helmet stickers to Stanfurd. He said he did it because he wanted to reinforce that competition and provide players with even more incentive to challenge themselves. At this point we need to be open to all these things. Something a little more driven at building that culture of competing in practice with the best guys (regardless of class or history) playing.

  • rollonyoubears111

    what Cal needs is a total deconstruction of the coaching styles/etiquettes. Tedford should start from scratch, like he did when he first arrived. Even with mediocre talent, he showed that he could coach up a great team. The paradigm should shift again.

  • Jim

    Finally – THE ANSWER
    What has Cal been lacking that’s caused the program to fail

    *** helmet stickers ***