I know Cal had some great defenses (better than very good, less than stellar or fantastic or dominant), but lack the brain to articulate just why, though several of your own arguments (like offensive ineptitude) should make it clearer to you as well, factoring in the conference compared to national rankings. Then again, maybe I am delusional.

Anyways, I’ll try rereading all of this if I ever get some sleep where I don’t wake up with 3 or more limbs dislocated (honestly, just one shoulder out would be such an improvement!). I’ll give it a better read and offer a real apology or a more apt insult, whichever I feel is more needed.

I am honestly sorry I’m writing this, but I wanted to respond, but can’t read past the first paragraph without zoning out. And I opted for being honest.

Just one question, to see if I am delusional or not, because this drives me batcrap crazy every time it’s on. Cymbalta – Because Depression Hurts. That’s —-ing BS, right. My limbs dislocate by gravity alone, countless times a day, AND I GET DEPRESSED BECAUSE OF IT! It is not the other way around.

This is what happens when holidays and birthdays make me load up on pain pills to get through events and then have to deal with cost of those outings.

So much for laying off the ad hominem attacks.

Now let’s address the new assertion of “incompetent.” Your argument appears to be that I supposedly only was comparing Cal’s 2012 defense to La Tech’s 2012 defense. Indeed, you emphasize that “some” equals more than one, and then say I countered “‘some’ with last year’s defense compared to LT’s, that was a mischaracterization of [your] argument.”

Ok. So let’s just make sure I got this right. I said “Tedford coached great defenses? Really? Tedford coached poor offenses, which entirely wore out our defenses. 3 and outs every time destroy the best defenses.”

I’m not sure how that only applies to 2012. Indeed, the plural “defenses” necessarily implies more than one. But just to make sure, I’m sure you saw my post where I actually went through Cal’s defense over the last 5 years. That suggests I was focusing on “some” defensive teams, not just 2012.

Let’s make sure I cover my bases, so that you don’t change the rules of the argument (again).

You didn’t give any time frame in your initial assertion. That being said, you referred to “Clancy,” which suggests you only were considering 2010, 2011, and 2012. As I have already noted, in none of those years did Cal have a great defense (as I defined as being in the top 10). I also included 2009 and 2008, two years prior to Pendergrast, for comparative purposes. One decent year (2008), and one bad year (2009). You have not countered with any other definition, so I assume you agree that none of the defenses were great. If you think my definition of a great defense is incompetent, or that your use of the word “great” has a universal definition I have blatantly misrepresented, by all means let me know.

You also failed to state what is the standard for measuring defense, though you now saw yards per game does not tell the story. But that is why La. Tech had the worst defense in 2012, which is what has been one of two points of all of your posts. No other statistic I am aware of shows La. Tech as last in the nation. I suppose you could have referred to points per game, or sacks, or tackles for loss, or turnovers caused. But you didn’t.

You also now assert that I was comparing Cal’s defense to La. Tech’s when I first responded. Far from it – I was challenging the premise that Tedford coached “some” great defensive teams. But, since you now think we should engage in a comparative analysis, let’s compare to La. Tech during the same period 2010-2012, since in addition to Pendergrast starting in 2010, so did Dykes. As we have established, in 2012, La. Tech had the worst defense, as measured by total yards. In 2011, they were 30 spots behind Cal (one behind U$C), which puts them pretty much in the middle. In 2010, they were not last, but pretty close to last.

So what does that show? La. Tech has not been a defensive powerhouse. It showed improvement in 2011 over 2010, only to have a significant drop-off in 2012. Its defense has not been, on average, better than Cal’s. Ok – can’t dispute the facts. Not sure how this relates to Tedford’s defensive prowess or lack thereof, but at least we have the comparison.

“he should be grateful his pathetic team even made it to a bowl”

HAHAHAAHA this is ridiculously embarrassing. What a joke the Pre-season #1 has become.

When you countered “some” with last year’s defense compared to LT’s, that was a mischaracterization of my argument. If it wasn’t blatant, it was incompetent.

I did go back and read what I wrote (quoting what you wrote). You accused me of “blatantly misquoting” you. I think, based on the plain language, it is clear I did not.

Now You have changed your story. Now you say that Tedford has history, implying that is what needs to be considered. You are right that Tedford has a history. I thus I pointed out (in the other post) showing the last 5 years of total defense statistics. The average total defense (by per yards per game) over the last 5 years is #47 in the nation. Slightly better than average. Definitely not “great” because I measure great as in the top 10. Tedford’s best defense was 20th in the nation – very good, but again not great. My point, all along, was to challenge your statement that “Tedford coached great defensive teams.” He didn’t.

So when you wrote “Tedford coached great defensive teams,” I took issue with that. I still for the life of my cannot understand how you can say I “blatantly misquoted” you when it is clear I didn’t. Even worse, you admit you aimed a disrepectful comment my way because of you perceiving (incorrectly) that I was “blatantly misquoting” you.

Whether Tedford coached or did not coach “great defensive” teams is a matter of debate and opinion. But if you decide to elevate it to ad hominem attacks, get it right.

All of this started because you have come out disfavoring the hiring of Dykes. Again, an issue of fair debate. But be prepared to meet fairly critiques of your analysis, or, as my high school sons woudl say, “if you can’t take out the trash, don’t take the trash.”