heartofthebear said:

---

71Bear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

71Bear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

71Bear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

MoragaBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

MoragaBear said:

---

The QBs who transferred were 4th and 5th on the depth chart heading into this spring with a talented frosh coming in.

Transfers are rarely a one-way street, at least at Cal.

---

Hopefully we pick up a transfer or 2.

---

They don't want a transfer or two. The staff is happy with 3 back and a talented freshman coming in this summer. Too many reps to divide otherwise.

---

I didn't necessarily mean at QB. But, if the 4 can all substitute effectively for each other than yeah, no more QBs needed. Otherwise a transfer QB that might be an upgrade on say...Rowell, for example, would be a good idea. In 2019, our last full season, we were down to our #3 QB at one point. How did that go? Right now we have good depth (maybe 3 deep) at WR, TE, OL and RB. I would not say that is true at QB necessarily. I'm not picking on Robbie, but if we can get a transfer that is better than him, why not?

---

I would suggest the odds of finding a QB in the transfer market who wants to be a third stringer is non-existent. In fact, I would not want a guy who was willing to be a 3rd teamer. Of course, if D.J. U. wants to transfer from Clemson, I would find space for him. But he is a not a third string kinda guy.

---

I'm not saying we get a third stringer, just someone that adds competition and can compete for the job down the line or fill in effectively when injuries occur. Does anybody want to be a third stringer? All these guys come to Cal to compete for playing time. None of them think they are 3rd stringers, except maybe walk-ons. Johnson is having a good spring but he is 6'1". Even Garbers gets too many of his passes tipped. So, yes we can do better.

---

Your comment included the statement, "I'm not picking on Robbie, but if we can get a transfer that is better than him, why not?". That implied finding a transfer who would supplant Rowell as the third unit guy.

I think the piece of the puzzle that you are missing is the ramp-up time required to be an effective QB. Unlike other positions, it takes considerable time to master the O to a degree where you can function efficiently. Garbers and Rowell are seasoned vets and Johnson has been in the program a couple years. Unless the new guy is a savant, he would not be ready to take the reins until 2022, particularly because he missed spring ball this month. By then, the highly regarded Millner would also have a year under his belt. No, a QB transfer would be a waste of a scholie at this point.

---

On one hand you're saying nobody is going to come in to be a 3rd stringer but yet it takes a year or two to learn the system. Which is it? What I am saying is that 2 young guys left. We need more young guys to replace them precisely because it takes a while to learn the system. A transfer could come in now and would be ready to compete in 2023 after Garbers and Rowell are gone. Otherwise it is just Milner and Martin. Who would be our 3rd stringer at that point. As I have said, you need depth because we were down to a 3rd stringer in 2018 and 2019 and 2020 doesn't count. Who is going to be the third stringer in 2023 under your scenario, unless it takes less than 2 years to learn the system. In that case, you are contradicting yourself.

---

As noted elsewhere, Millner, Martin, Johnson and the guy Cal signs in Dec 22 will be the quartet (unless, of course, someone transfers or if Johnson goes pro early).

---

I don't understand the difference between getting a recruit that signs on Dec. 22 and getting a transfer to sign whenever. Either way, it is a 4th QB on scholie. Either way it is likely to be a 3 star. Either way the QB will have to learn the system.

---

Why the doom and gloom? Both Millner and Martin are four stars (247 composite).

The basic difference between a transfer and a HS recruit is additional years of eligibility, assuming the transfer is not a true freshman.

OaktownBear said:

---

MoragaBear said:

---

Big C said:

---

Oftentimes, Cal will have more than three scholarship quarterbacks on a given roster, like we would have now, if Casey or Brasch had stayed. In 2023, we can project to have four: Johnson, Millner, Martin and the true freshman they bring in in that class. Sometimes we bring in two, as was the case last year

The question is: How many do we NEED? We should be fine this fall, but yes, hopefully Garbers and Johnson won't both go down. It's not too unlikely a scenario, but we will have Rowell and Millner.

We bring in a scholarship QB every year, occasionally two, so that when a situation like this arises, we're still okay. This is why we also try and groom a walk on, as we did with Rowell, who seems to be working out!

---

Exactly. And I've said nothing to defend Rowell, only that he and Johnson were ahead of Brasch and Casey. He has had a good spring, though.

There was no need for 6 qbs in the fall when Milner gets here, or even 5 for that matter. The two on the bottom of the depth chart transferred, as they probably should have done. And when Garbers is gone by the '23 season, there will be another 1 or 2 qbs in that class to keep the numbers at least at 4.

---

I'm puzzled by this thread.

1. QB is virtually always the most shallow, least experienced position on any team because only one plays.

2. The second string guy is always unproven. See #1

3. If you are down to your 3rd string QB, you are screwed. If you are down to your 4th string QB, you are really screwed. They are either extremely inexperienced or they were not good enough to break the three deep or find a better offer elsewhere. Good QB's don't sit 4th on the depth chart. If I'm going to worry about losing 3 QB's in a season, I might as well worry about how bad it will be if we lose 8 receivers or 10 offensive linemen.

---

I do remember a year when Cal was down to its 4th string QB.
Chris and Steve of Bear Territory fame even had a program on trying to find a way to remove the hex on the Cal QBs.

I always get frustrated that when a game is essentially decided, whether we are leading or trailing by a bunch, that we don't bring in the backup to get more experience. I think there is too much fear of creating a QB controversy (or if trailing, the appearance of throwing in the towel).
Also, regarding Garbers, I know he will still have eligibility remaining for the fall 2022 season, but will he graduate before then?
Are some of the losses to the transfer portal caused by the players graduating? I'm glad they're graduating and understand that it might be harder for them to get into a Berkeley grad program than one elsewhere.

He'd probably leave to declare for the draft after next season; imagine him playing in the NFL

OaktownBear said:

---

MoragaBear said:

---

Big C said:

---

Oftentimes, Cal will have more than three scholarship quarterbacks on a given roster, like we would have now, if Casey or Brasch had stayed. In 2023, we can project to have four: Johnson, Millner, Martin and the true freshman they bring in in that class. Sometimes we bring in two, as was the case last year

The question is: How many do we NEED? We should be fine this fall, but yes, hopefully Garbers and Johnson won't both go down. It's not too unlikely a scenario, but we will have Rowell and Millner.

We bring in a scholarship QB every year, occasionally two, so that when a situation like this arises, we're still okay. This is why we also try and groom a walk on, as we did with Rowell, who seems to be working out!

---

Exactly. And I've said nothing to defend Rowell, only that he and Johnson were ahead of Brasch and Casey. He has had a good spring, though.

There was no need for 6 qbs in the fall when Milner gets here, or even 5 for that matter. The two on the bottom of the depth chart transferred, as they probably should have done. And when Garbers is gone by the '23 season, there will be another 1 or 2 qbs in that class to keep the numbers at least at 4.

---

I'm puzzled by this thread.

1. QB is virtually always the most shallow, least experienced position on any team because only one plays.

2. The second string guy is always unproven. See #1

3. If you are down to your 3rd string QB, you are screwed. If you are down to your 4th string QB, you are really screwed. They are either extremely inexperienced or they were not good enough to break the three deep or find a better offer elsewhere. Good QB's don't sit 4th on the depth chart. If I'm going to worry about losing 3 QB's in a season, I might as well worry about how bad it will be if we lose 8 receivers or 10 offensive linemen.

---

And if going into a season find yourself short on QB depth you can get one of the many QBs who enter the transfer portal or grad transfer every year. Or the old fashioned way, a JC QB.

It is only in rare situations depth is ever an issue at QB. The big issue is quality of your #1. #2 only somewhat.

dmh65 said:

---

I always get frustrated that when a game is essentially decided, whether we are leading or trailing by a bunch, that we don't bring in the backup to get more experience. I think there is too much fear of creating a QB controversy (or if trailing, the appearance of throwing in the towel).
Also, regarding Garbers, I know he will still have eligibility remaining for the fall 2022 season, but will he graduate before then?
Are some of the losses to the transfer portal caused by the players graduating? I'm glad they're graduating and understand that it might be harder for them to get into a Berkeley grad program than one elsewhere.

---

I think Garber's enrolled in Spring 2017 hoping to compete for the starting job since we had no one with experience and had a new staff but then ended up redshirting. So this is already his 5th year. He may already be starting a certificate program. Can you take two years? Or start a second? Maybe.

dmh65 said:

---

I always get frustrated that when a game is essentially decided, whether we are leading or trailing by a bunch, that we don't bring in the backup to get more experience. I think there is too much fear of creating a QB controversy (or if trailing, the appearance of throwing in the towel).
Also, regarding Garbers, I know he will still have eligibility remaining for the fall 2022 season, but will he graduate before then?
Are some of the losses to the transfer portal caused by the players graduating? I'm glad they're graduating and understand that it might be harder for them to get into a Berkeley grad program than one elsewhere.

Coaches are conservative by nature...they imagine 3 straight on-side kicks etc. and total meltdowns more so than the fans would.
Being QB1 is about getting the first team snaps in practice...a handful of in-game snaps aren't going to be huge, especially if you are up and won't be throwing the ball. And if trailing, what might you get? The back-up going 4-6 for 60 yards? Sure, nice experience snaps, but a team with a solid #1 is going to think that's going to cause some big uproar.

---

One other point, in addition to the guys on roster and the incoming freshmen, there will likely be a walk-on announced once they are enrolled in classes this Summer but not before.

southseasbear said:

---

UrsineMaximus said:

---

Has decided to transfer. Heck one day prior to the final scrimmage. So, 2 QBs now gone this Spring. Doesn't matter how one spins it, that just ain't good.

---

Or maybe it indicates that the newer recruits are better.

---

Of course that's what it indicates. Brasch was a third-stringer on his way to fourth with no hope of moving up.

Because the other QBs are that much better. And frankly, he wasn't developing well. Anyone who watched his performance against Utah could have seen this coming. QBs generally don't go from having godawful first outings as a starter to becoming solid starters. Thank Oski Cal now has better talent.

This isn't some bad thing - it's a GOOD thing! It means Cal finally has talent and depth on offense, and doesn't have to rely on Modster or Brasch should our starter go down again. Those were not good days.

chazzed said:

---

HuaHin (fka Uthai) said:

---

southseasbear said:

---

UrsineMaximus said:

---

Has decided to transfer. Heck one day prior to the final scrimmage. So, 2 QBs now gone this Spring. Doesn't matter how one spins it, that just ain't good.

---

Or maybe it indicates that the newer recruits are better.

---

Of course that's what it indicates. Brasch was a third-stringer on his way to fourth with no hope of moving up.

Because the other QBs are that much better. And frankly, he wasn't developing well. Anyone who watched his performance against Utah could have seen this coming. QBs generally don't go from having godawful first outings as a starter to becoming solid starters. Thank Oski Cal now has better talent.

This isn't some bad thing - it's a GOOD thing! It means Cal finally has talent and depth on offense, and doesn't have to rely on Modster or Brasch should our starter go down again. Those were not good days.

---

None of our QBs would have had a good game that day against Utah. We were a shell of the team we were earlier in the year because of injuries.

---

I was there. The running clock should have started midway through the first quarter.

Doc-From-74 said:

---

I think it was in 1969 or 1970 (memory cells have faded a lot and can't remember the team we were playing). A QB named Reed Chastang lived in the dorm I was living in. He was like the 5th string QB and didn't even get a uniform to wear and was sitting in the stands with us. In quick succession two or three Cal QBs got hurt and then we heard the stadium announcer say "Would Reed Chastang report to the trainer's table." I don't remember him being too pleased.

---

This is a great story! I was trying to find more info about this game and haven't so far. I did find a 1971 article which included some analysis about various team's prospects and it included the alarming claim that we entered the season with "no quarterback": "California has more good running backs than it needs but no quarterback. Reed Chastang played only four minutes last year, sophomore George Fraser was ineligible for either frosh ball or spring practice, and the other two candidates are JC transfers."

But we ended up with a winning overall and conference record in '71 and appears we did field two QBs (Jay Cruze and Chastang). The next year Bartkowski took most of the snaps, followed by Jay Cruze and Ferragamo so it appears that Chastang's QB ship had sailed by that point.

Bobodeluxe said:

---

chazzed said:

---

HuaHin (fka Uthai) said:

---

southseasbear said:

---

UrsineMaximus said:

---

Has decided to transfer. Heck one day prior to the final scrimmage. So, 2 QBs now gone this Spring. Doesn't matter how one spins it, that just ain't good.

---

Or maybe it indicates that the newer recruits are better.

---

Of course that's what it indicates. Brasch was a third-stringer on his way to fourth with no hope of moving up.

Because the other QBs are that much better. And frankly, he wasn't developing well. Anyone who watched his performance against Utah could have seen this coming. QBs generally don't go from having godawful first outings as a starter to becoming solid starters. Thank Oski Cal now has better talent.

This isn't some bad thing - it's a GOOD thing! It means Cal finally has talent and depth on offense, and doesn't have to rely on Modster or Brasch should our starter go down again. Those were not good days.

---

None of our QBs would have had a good game that day against Utah. We were a shell of the team we were earlier in the year because of injuries.

---

I was there. The running clock should have started midway through the first quarter.

---

I was there. So was Addison on the Utah side with the defense....it was cold as hell.

How did Rowell do it? That must be quite a story

MoragaBear said:

---

SBGold said:

---

How did Rowell do it? That must be quite a story

---

He's been in the system longer, can make things happen with his legs when plays break down and had high level QB coaching at Acalanes with Floyd Burnsed. He helped develop Ken Dorsey at Miramonte before he got runner-up in the Heisman at Miami along with other D1 quarterbacks before and after Dorsey.

---

Is there a reason Burnsed isn't still coaching college ball? Maybe as a QB coach at a school located at the base of some rugged eastern foothills?

I thought the quarterback who was called out of the stands was Dave Pinhole (not sure of the spelling), but I could be wrong.

BBB

BillyBoyBlue said:

---

I thought the quarterback who was called out of the stands was Dave Pinhole (not sure of the spelling), but I could be wrong.

BBB

---

The guy you were thinking of was Dave Penhall. I remember a guy being called out of the stands but I do not remember who it was...