Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 63

Thread: Calling out Kevin Riley.....v2

  1. #16
    drunkoski
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by CrimsonBear View Post
    actually, it was a nonfactor if cal makes the FG at the end. the missed FG is the reason cal lost the game. of course, it can easily be argued that if cal played better on O, the missed FG would be irrelevant. but they didn't. make the FG, cal wins. that's it. it was really simple.

    that loss is not on riley. just like the win would not be because of riley. if tavecchio makes that FG, the D and GT's kicking is the main reason for the win.

    riley is not the main reason cal won against ucla. it was a truly suffocating D and a dominant running game. if you put the AZ loss on riley (not sure if you do), then do you give the credit for the UCLA win to him as well?
    not sure i'm following your logic. in one game what riley did directly effected the result of the game. in the other Cal won in spite of riley. i don't put it just on riley. tedford has equal blame.

  2. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by Cal84 View Post
    First off, I don't think one needs to "call out" Riley. I've seen no indication that he doesn't try or that he gives up.
    +1

    "calling out"? Come on. Debate the merits of Riley as a QB, fine. Been done lots lately. But "calling out" one of our players? This is either a weird armchair-psychology attempt at motivation or it's in poor taste.

  3. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by LafayetteBear View Post
    Crimson: If Xul's point was to note that we would have beaten AZ regardless of Riley's play had Tavecchio made one of those two fourth quarter field goals, fine. (The point has been made, and is obvious.)

    I interpreted it as pointing the finger of blame at Tavecchio, largely to get the finger pointing at anyone other than Riley. Fair enough. Riley has take a lot of criticism, and I have been a vocal critic. I did not get to watch Saturday's game, and I am very happy with the outcome, so I made no posts regarding Riley, other than the one you responded to. I'm tired of our passing game being so anemic and JT doing nothing to get any other QB a little game experience. but I'm even more tired of debating Riley's merits. JT said all that needed to be said anyway. He has to improve if we're going to beat a quality opponent like Oregon, OSU or Stanford.
    I think that was his point. Xul can decide to respond or not.

    You missed a truly great performance by the D and a dominant running game. Riley was Riley. Played well enough to support the win, but was far from lights out on his attempts. That's Riley. The D won the game by halftime although the offensive efficiency in the red zone by Cal was amazing (4 for 4 TDs).

    If JT truly believes that Riley will need to play a lot better for Cal to beat Oregon, OSU and Stanford (I would add SC), then we are in big trouble. If we are depending on Riley to win the big games against tough opponents by airing it out (35+ attempts), I think we are going to be bitterly disappointed.

    The D and our running game will be the reason Cal gets 8-9 wins. It will also be the reason Cal gets 5-6 wins. Riley will be Riley. He's like a supporting actor in a movie. Except we all want him to be the star.

  4. #19
    I don't know that Tedford puts all the blame on Riley. He said the offense had to improve. That includes more than Riley.

    He also said what he said before he watched the tape, which sometimes changes his view as to what went wrong.

  5. #20
    drunkoski
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by CrimsonBear View Post

    If JT truly believes that Riley will need to play a lot better for Cal to beat Oregon, OSU and Stanford (I would add SC), then we are in big trouble.
    that's a given. we don't need him to throw 35 times and be light out, just complete to the open receiver and stop taking sacks and don't turn it over. he's had games where he's done just that. MSU in 08, furd in 09, ASU in 09, just to name a few. i don't really think people are expecting anything unrealistic. half of the qbs in the pac-10 at least could do this and do it just fine.

  6. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by drunkoski View Post
    not sure i'm following your logic. in one game what riley did directly effected the result of the game. in the other Cal won in spite of riley. i don't put it just on riley. tedford has equal blame.
    my only point was that riley is not to blame for the AZ loss NOR should he be given the bulk of the credit for the win (if GT had made the FG). the D played amazing that day. it just couldn't hold them on that last drive, but the unit easily played well enough to win (holding the Wildcats to 10 points in AZ is amazing).

    cal lost the game on the missed FG. GT makes it, cal wins. GT missed it, cal lost.

    in the ucla game, riley was fine. he did a great job of handing the ball to Vereen and Isi (I am being facetious) and let the defense dominate the game by not turning the ball over. i wouldn't say cal won in spite of riley, but riley's performance was not the reason cal won the game. it was the D and running game.

    at the end of the day, the wins and losses ultimately fall on JT. fair or not, that's it. and i think it's fair. it's his program, he gets compensated well and cal/donors are finally delivering on the facilities. it's on him, completely.
    Last edited by CrimsonBear; 10-11-2010 at 12:57 PM.

  7. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by drunkoski View Post
    that's a given. we don't need him to throw 35 times and be light out, just complete to the open receiver and stop taking sacks and don't turn it over. he's had games where he's done just that. MSU in 08, furd in 09, ASU in 09, just to name a few. i don't really think people are expecting anything unrealistic. half of the qbs in the pac-10 at least could do this and do it just fine.
    the difference is that this year's:

    -definitely oregon
    -probably arizona, osu and stanford
    -possibly sc

    are better than your examples. a lot easier for Riley to "manage" the game in your examples. yes, even the furd last year. riley played well, but vereen was out of his mind. 40+ carries was nuts. his running and mikey mo's interception were the main reasons for the win.

    i don't think half the qbs in the pac10 can "manage" the game against the 3-4 top teams (almost by definition). and also, i think riley is probably an average to a possibly better than average QB in the pac. he is definitely not a top 2 or probably 3 QB in the pac. we have to deal with that. i have a feeling JT knows this.

  8. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by drunkoski View Post
    that's a given. we don't need him to throw 35 times and be light out, just complete to the open receiver and stop taking sacks and don't turn it over. he's had games where he's done just that. MSU in 08, furd in 09, ASU in 09, just to name a few. i don't really think people are expecting anything unrealistic. half of the qbs in the pac-10 at least could do this and do it just fine.
    Yes, we just expect he is capable of having a good game against a good opponent. We know he's not going to do what Luck and Barkley did on saturday night but Ryan Katz threw for 393 yards against the same Arizona defense and beat them. The notion that we will win 5 or 6 or 8 or 9 independent of his performance makes no sense. We can win five or six with him being the sixth best qb in the league but not 8 or 9

  9. #24
    drunkoski
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by CrimsonBear View Post

    i don't think half the qbs in the pac10 can "manage" the game against the 3-4 top teams (almost by definition). and also, i think riley is probably an average to a possibly better than average QB in the pac. he is definitely not a top 2 or probably 3 QB in the pac. we have to deal with that. i have a feeling JT knows this.
    the following qbs would unquestionably do better than riley:
    luck
    barkley
    fowles

    the following qbs would probably do better than riley:
    katz
    tuel
    thomas
    threet
    locker

    the following would do worse:
    prince

    he might be a mid level sec qb, but in the pac-10 he's most definetely bottom half. and the only one on this list with 3 years starting experience.
    Last edited by drunkoski; 10-11-2010 at 01:28 PM.

  10. #25
    I rewatched the game last night too. Kevin missed on 2 passes imho. A couple of the sacks he could of dumped it off to the flats to a RB..but he was running for his life on both those, so his eyes probably came down lol. The only thing I want Kevin to do...if he steps up in the pocket and there is green grass...take the layup.

  11. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by GB54 View Post
    And no he doesn't need to be just serviceable; he can be serviceable and beat UCLA, WSU and ASU but he has to be much better and good if we are to beat USC, Stanford, Oregon State or Oregon. His psyche is not the problem.
    You're confusing a pipe dream with reality. Our chances of getting big passing stats out of Riley is slim to none. In fact, if we are passing a whole bunch then we aren't playing to this team's strength which should be ball control (i.e. running the ball) and playing solid D. Our O-line has proved time and time again pass protection is not their strength and we really only have 2 decent receivers...one of whom is a true freshman. Riley is not a superstar QB, nor should we pretend that he is. I never said his pysche was the problem, I was simply commenting that having a false sense of bravado (drunkoski's words) isn't necessarily a bad thing for Kevin.

  12. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by MinotStateBeav View Post
    I rewatched the game last night too. Kevin missed on 2 passes imho. A couple of the sacks he could of dumped it off to the flats to a RB..but he was running for his life on both those, so his eyes probably came down lol. The only thing I want Kevin to do...if he steps up in the pocket and there is green grass...take the layup.
    But a layup is only good for 2 pts.

    Ohhhhh....I get it.

  13. #28
    Quote Originally Posted by OzoneTheCat View Post
    You're confusing a pipe dream with reality. Our chances of getting big passing stats out of Riley is slim to none. In fact, if we are passing a whole bunch then we aren't playing to this team's strength which should be ball control (i.e. running the ball) and playing solid D. Our O-line has proved time and time again pass protection is not their strength and we really only have 2 decent receivers...one of whom is a true freshman. Riley is not a superstar QB, nor should we pretend that he is. I never said his pysche was the problem, I was simply commenting that having a false sense of bravado (drunkoski's words) isn't necessarily a bad thing for Kevin.
    I agree. We aren't going to get big numbers from him nor do I expect same. I would just like someone who could compete 60% of his passes, hit open receivers and some play action to complement the running game. I don't expect we will be a pass first team but I do think we need to be more than 9th in the conference in passing. I would settle for Reggie Robertson.

  14. #29
    I'm not sure Riley is really all that serviceable. If he is the 9th best QB in the league despite having the most starts and playing time - then something would seem to be very wrong. Not just in terms of talent but in terms of his psyche.

    I think this past game has given us a formulaass the ball when you want to - run the ball when you need to. We have two good RB's that shouldered the load. This can work against USC as their defense seems a bit porous. Riley will not beat USC by passing the ball. Short range passes of 5-15 yards is all we should risk with him and only to set up the run.

  15. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by GB54 View Post
    I agree. We aren't going to get big numbers from him nor do I expect same. I would just like someone who could compete 60% of his passes, hit open receivers and some play action to complement the running game. I don't expect we will be a pass first team but I do think we need to be more than 9th in the conference in passing. I would settle for Reggie Robertson.
    I'm with you GB. That's what I would call being....serviceable.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •