By Joe Stiglich
Saturday, November 5th, 2011 at 6:38 pm in Uncategorized.
It’s final: Cal beat Washington State 30-7, a dominant and much-needed victory to move to 5-4 (2-4 in Pac-12).
[You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.]
I’m not going to praise Tedford’s on field results for obvious reasons, but I have to disagree with your assessment that “rarely do athletes improve under his tenure.” We lag USC in recruitment of 4 & 5 star talent, yet we are close in numbers of alumni drafted, playing, and starring in the NFL. JT & Co. must be doing something right.
We need a win Saturday, and an upset in one of the last two, or I’ll consider this year a failure.
After watching poor Bridgdord fumble snaps and turn the wrong way on handoffs, I will never again post that Tedford should replace Maynard and insert Bridgdord as the starter. That does not excuse the woeful job that Tedford and his staff have done with player development and getting the backups ready to play.
Cal has no chance to beat OSU next week without a healthy Maynard. And the team has no chance to beat Standord and ASU the following week with or without Maynard. Those are good teams with defenses that will rattle Maynard into making a bunch of mistakes again. I am just resigned to accepting this reality and hope to enjoy a victory next Saturday.
I have to disagree. If we end 6-6 and go to a bowl game, it will be an improvement over last year, particularly if we win the bowl to go 7-6, and therefore neither “failure” nor “great success.” The team is young (particularly the more prized recruits) but the pressure will be rightfully on Tedford to produce a 9-10 win season in 2012.
7-5 would exceed what I predicted, but I would not say the season is a “success,” much less a “huge success” given who we beat to get to 7-5. 6-6 would not be a success. 5-7 would be what I predicted, and would be a huge disappointment. If we don’t beat the Beavers, we’re very likely looking at 5-7.
Rollonubears…I also have to disagree with you about your expectation for this years Cal football program. You effectively said that Cal will need to finish the year at 7-5 or you will consider the season a failure. Say What?!? This a Cal team picked to finish 5th (out of 6) place in the Pac-12 North. This is a team that will likely have been favored in only 7 games that it will have played this season (assuming both Stanford and ASU will be favored to beat Cal).
Cal has only lost 1 game, thus far, when they were favored (see UCLA). Of course, Cal does not have any upset victories and in the UW game, Cal was a 1pt underdog, and Cal played a close competitive game.
I would argue that finishing the year at 6-6 is right in the range of pre-season expectations. Not a great year…not a bad year…but just about where we thought Cal would be.
Trust me, I am no fan of “Teflon” Tedford. In fact my primary crticism of Tedford has been that he has consistently NOT met expectations for the Cal program during his career. I wrote a few lengthly posts last week, reviewing each year since Tedford has taken over the helm at Cal. What I argue is that EACH year between 2005 through 2010, the Cal football team has UNDERACHIEVED despite winning an average 8 games per season. During these past 6 seasons, Cal was favored to win on average 11 games per year. Cal lost at least twice and as many as 4 games per season as a solid favorite. Couple that with very few upset victories (2-16 as an underdog) which is why I consider each of the past 6 seasons ending BELOW expectations.
So, while I think most of Tedford’s career at Cal has been plauged with disappointment….2011 is NOT shaping up to be one of those seasons. (one caveat: If Cal loses to OSU next week and has not upset victories I may change my tune). But as of right now…I think Cal is right where we thought they would be when the season began and thus I can not agree with any comments that this season was a “failure”.
Southseasbear – why do you think Cal will be EXPECTED to win 9 or 10 games next year? You add Ohio St. to the schedule and now Cal is going to win 3 or 4 more games next year? What gives you confidence that the QB play will be any better next year? Do you think skill positions (RB and WRs) will be stronger next year with the loss of Marvin Jones and Anthony Miller? I’ll grant you that the Defense SHOULD be better next year (although didn’t we think that going into this year?).
Given Tedford’s play calling strategy that requires stellar play from the QB position, I don’t see a top flight QB on the roster that is prepared to shine next year. The upside to Maynard seems very limited to me. Expectations for 2012 will likely be similar to 2011…6-6 record and a 4th or 5th place finish in the Pac-12 north. Tedford has the Cal program stuck in neutral!
ok, ok … apparently some were offended when I said the manner in which Cal beat bottom-dwelling WSU was “unimpressive” when I could have used 20 words rather than 1 to describe the mediocrity of the “victory”.
ok, ok … I AM impressed that Cal did WIN against the bottom-dwelling Cougars even though WSU had a better 2nd team qb than Cal.
Students are facing the same choices that they’ve always had: looking a multiple reading lists and the books, the papers that need research and writing vs going to the stadium.
A few years ago, the team winning and playing exciting football, many students chose the stadium over the library.
Now, facing the reading list and assignments vs traveling to SF to watch mediocrity, the library wins which isn’t a bad thing because that’s why students are at Cal.
Cal’s failure to develop talent? Am I missing something in recent NFL drafts?
Not in the drafts, Alaska … but in the Win column, much is missing.
Tedford’s being paid to win games, not to furnish talent to the NFL.