The only thing that is comical are your comments, which show a consistent ignorance of football, particularly Cal football. I have never seen such consistent criticism of anyone who comments on this blog as you are. I would suggest that you switch over to comment on the team you truly favor, USC, but for the fact that you would get lost in the midst of all of those readers who think its really “great to be a Trojan.” Better to stand out by commenting on a non-USC blog, try to make fun of Cal, but end up being a total buf___n on a blog devoted to Cal fans.

Only a person who doesn’t understand football, or any other sport, for that matter, would not know that there is a vast difference in blaming a loss on an inadvertent slip by the offensive player compared to stating that a win could have been had if only the defensive player had not made a tackle. In the first instance, there is an inadvertent (and very rare) mistake made by the Cal player. In the second, reliance must be made by an opposing player making a mistake for Cal to win, which one would not expect to occur Totally different, but only a m___n like you would not know that difference.

gobears49 Says:
November 15th, 2012 at 10:03 am
I was at the SC game in ’04. We probably would have won that game if Makonnen (sp) had not slipped in the end zone on the last Cal drive. Rogers’ pass to him probably would have been on the mark if not for his slip. That wasn’t Tedford’s fault. It didn’t help that Lyman couldn’t play in that game (or for the rest of the year, as I think he got hurt right before that game.

First, slipping is part of the game. You might as well say, if the guy didn’t get tackled he would have scored a TD.

Second, injuries are part of the game and winners compensate for injuries. Good programs build depth too.

This is why I stick around here. It is pure entertainment.

Thank you.

My opening salvo will be:

“With all due respect, I do not respect you.”

I respect the post you made (much better than others who defend Tedford) but I respectfully disagree. Aside from the fact that he is the losingest coach at Cal, a few other things to keep in perspective:

- During the Tedford era, Cal has played 12 games a year, 1 to 2 more games than the other coaches you are comparing to.

- During the Tedford era, the number of bowl games, and the Pac-10′s allocation, has dramatically increased, so we get to play in bowl games with 6 or 7 wins, when 15 to 20 years ago, that wouldn’t have happened.

- During the Tedford era, particularly in the last 5-6 years, we have played a large number of cupcakes – D-1AA schools or really, really bad D-1 schools from non-BCS conferences, almost always at home. There are a good 6 wins that Tedford pads to the resume that no other Cal coach had.

- Tedford’s salary, even adjusted for inflation, blows away any other Cal coach. It would be interesting to see how much Cal has paid to Tedford for each win, and then compare to Pappy Waldorf (adjusting for inflation).

- Tedford has cycled through a large number of assistant coaches; that lack of stability has greatly hurt the program.