https://www.espn.com/college-football/insider/story/_/id/31682009/pac-12-north-college-football-offseason-preview

Quote:

---

Three combined wins over Washington and Oregon, five losses to UCLA and Oregon State. It's really hard to figure out what kind of progress Justin Wilcox is making in Berkeley.

2021 Projections
Projected SP+ rank: 54th
Average projected wins: 5.4 (3.5 in the Pac-12)

---

Defense:

Quote:

---

... in two years, the Bears have sunk from 13th to 78th in defensive SP+. Cal ranked 93rd and 119th, respectively, in rushing and passing success rate allowed. It was a bend-don't-break with too much bend. Nine starters return, but some new blood might not be a bad thing.

---

Offense:

Quote:

---

[In 2020] Opponents blitzed a lot, and both Garbers and his line handled it poorly. The Bears ranked 73rd in offensive SP+; almost no offense in the country produced fewer big plays.

Nine starters return, and many are multiyear starters, including Garbers and Crawford. The run game is semi-efficient, but does Garbers have a second breakthrough in him?

---

I see a team with no real weak areas, decent depth and something to prove. There is seeming to be a discrepancy between our hopes and expectations and the predictions of the national pundits.

Big C said:

---

I see a team with no real weak areas, decent depth and something to prove.

---

In terms of personnel yes but do we finally have the coaching in place to get our offense out of the bottom 20 nationally.

We did break in a new offensive coordinator during a pandemic. Garbers and the offense in general have had to adapt to new offensive play books and systems more than most.

Big C said:

---

There is seeming to be a discrepancy between our hopes and expectations and the predictions of the national pundits.

---

LOL!
Year, after year, after year.....
And I am sure it will continue that way for years to come.
For decades, "Cal Band Great!"....football, not so much.
Come for the band, stay for the game.
Go Bears!!!
Cheers!!

Big C said:

---

There is seeming to be a discrepancy between our hopes and expectations and the predictions of the national pundits.

---

There is a distinct difference between people who wear eyeglasses with clear lenses and those who wear eyeglasses with rose-tinted lenses.

The piece that is missing is a player who can turn a game around in a single play. Cal doesn't need an army of 5 stars but the Bears certainly need a couple who can put the team on their back and turn losses into wins. That is the missing link.

Until Wilcox can deliver a functioning offense, don't look for anything much different. The guy based most stuff on 2020, which is dumb, and the comment on the defense is getting softer is interesting until you actually look at personnel. This is a very experienced team facing a lot of teams that lost star players, and I also agree with '71 you gotta have guys that can put the team on their back and win close games with big plays. You have a senior running back and QB, and WRs, and you finally have two home run threat WRs. You have 2 linebackers who should be low round draft picks. It is time to make plays.

Getting the offense to where we as fans want it depends on better recruiting.

As fans we tend to think the players in Cal uniforms are great and it's only coaching strategy that holds them back, but as long as the Bears have an Oregon State level of personnel we are unlikely to see an Oregon level of results very often.

I hope the offense this year is more like 2019 than 2020, and hope for more wins than Connelly projects. And I expect more this year from that senior RB and QB, but not nearly as much as I would expect if they were Marshawn Lynch and Aaron Rodgers.

BearSD said:

---

Getting the offense to where we as fans want it depends on better recruiting.

As fans we tend to think the players in Cal uniforms are great and it's only coaching strategy that holds them back, but as long as the Bears have an Oregon State level of personnel we are unlikely to see an Oregon level of results very often.

I hope the offense this year is more like 2019 than 2020, and hope for more wins than Connelly projects. And I expect more this year from that senior RB and QB, but not nearly as much as I would expect if they were Marshawn Lynch and Aaron Rodgers.

---

Every year that a top kid shows interest, someone says that we're making progress even though the kid doesn't come. To me, it doesn't. As soon as the kid goes elsewhere, someone asks if it doesn't show that there's something wrong here. Losers are....

Strykur said:

---

Big C said:

---

I see a team with no real weak areas, decent depth and something to prove.

---

In terms of personnel yes but do we finally have the coaching in place to get our offense out of the bottom 20 nationally.

---

I want to believe that we do. We'll have a pretty good idea in a few months. This is what makes football so interesting.

BearSD said:

---

Getting the offense to where we as fans want it depends on better recruiting.

As fans we tend to think the players in Cal uniforms are great and it's only coaching strategy that holds them back, but as long as the Bears have an Oregon State level of personnel we are unlikely to see an Oregon level of results very often.

I hope the offense this year is more like 2019 than 2020, and hope for more wins than Connelly projects. And I expect more this year from that senior RB and QB, but not nearly as much as I would expect if they were Marshawn Lynch and Aaron Rodgers.

---

Hope for 2019? Oregon State level players?

In 2019 we had the #110 offense in yds per play, the #113 offense in points per game and the #114 team in yards per rushing attempt.

In 2019 Oregon State had the #56 offense in yards per play, the #47 offense in points per game and the #54 team in yards per rushing attempt.

In 2020 Oregon State had the #55 offense in yards per play, the #59 offense in points per game and the #16 team in yards per rushing attempt. Oregon State's Jemar Jefferson was the #5 RB in the PAC-12 at 6.5 yards per rushing attempt.

If we have Oregon State level players we have not been getting Oregon State level results. I think we would be ecstatic if a Wilcox team ever delivered Oregon State results on offense.

The good news is recruiting on offense is now good, nearer to the top of the conference than the bottom. We will have multiple 4 star players at skill positions so our talent should be much better than Oregon State's. Hop fully we can at least equal their results.

BearSD said:

---

Getting the offense to where we as fans want it depends on better recruiting.

As fans we tend to think the players in Cal uniforms are great and it's only coaching strategy that holds them back, but as long as the Bears have an Oregon State level of personnel we are unlikely to see an Oregon level of results very often.

I hope the offense this year is more like 2019 than 2020, and hope for more wins than Connelly projects. And I expect more this year from that senior RB and QB, but not nearly as much as I would expect if they were Marshawn Lynch and Aaron Rodgers.

---

Amen

71Bear said:

---

Big C said:

---

There is seeming to be a discrepancy between our hopes and expectations and the predictions of the national pundits.

---

There is a distinct difference between people who wear eyeglasses with clear lenses and those who wear eyeglasses with rose-tinted lenses.

The piece that is missing is a player who can turn a game around in a single play. Cal doesn't need an army of 5 stars but the Bears certainly need a couple who can put the team on their back and turn losses into wins. That is the missing link.

---

Cal would have been 3-1 in the conference last season had they had decent special teams play. That is the missing link as well.

heartofthebear said:

---

71Bear said:

---

Big C said:

---

There is seeming to be a discrepancy between our hopes and expectations and the predictions of the national pundits.

---

There is a distinct difference between people who wear eyeglasses with clear lenses and those who wear eyeglasses with rose-tinted lenses.

The piece that is missing is a player who can turn a game around in a single play. Cal doesn't need an army of 5 stars but the Bears certainly need a couple who can put the team on their back and turn losses into wins. That is the missing link.

---

Cal would have been 3-1 in the conference last season had they had decent special teams play. That is the missing link as well.

---

ST is not a missing link. They are something that can easily be addressed without adding personnel. A missing link is something that requires a presence that does not currently exist on the team.

I did a long range study of recruiting rankings vs. final team rankings for all teams. It turns out that Cal fairly consistently underperforms compared to their talent rankings. However, that could be misleading because the talent could be over-rated and their final rankings could be under-rated. The AP and coaches have rarely been very kind in ranking Cal at the end of the year.

In any case, I doubt that Cal's main problem is recruiting. I think the main problem is coaching. It is more about the coaching consistency. In good programs, key coaches do not leave the year before the team is expected to compete for a division title. But somehow there was a mass coaching exodus this off-season. Key Cal coaches rarely stay for more than a few years. This creates instability and difficulties for the players. The unwillingness to pay competitively for quality coaches has been and continues to be one of the major things holding back the Cal program. This cannot be measured in dollars but in buying power. The extremely expensive cost of living in the Berkeley area is a factor.

For whatever reason, it seems that UCLA does not have these problems to the extent that Cal does and, historically, has been more successful in both basketball and football. It has something to do specifically with the administrative culture at Cal.

heartofthebear said:

---

In any case, I doubt that Cal's main problem is recruiting. I think the main problem is coaching. It is more about the coaching consistency. In good programs, key coaches do not leave the year before the team is expected to compete for a division title.

---

Oregon lost its head coach after the 2017 season, lost its offensive coordinator after the 2019 season, and lost its defensive coordinator after the 2020 season.

Cal isn't the only team with coaching turnover. It's common.

I think the big issue is the OC. Did Wilcox pick right in selecting Musgrave? We have the talent; do we have the coaching to be a top 50 offense? Related - can Garbers consistently throw deep and stretch the defense? No evidence. Creative play calling is more essential bc I'm doubtful of QB1's arm. In a shortened season, I didn't see it.

BearSD said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

In any case, I doubt that Cal's main problem is recruiting. I think the main problem is coaching. It is more about the coaching consistency. In good programs, key coaches do not leave the year before the team is expected to compete for a division title.

---

Oregon lost its head coach after the 2017 season, lost its offensive coordinator after the 2019 season, and lost its defensive coordinator after the 2020 season.

Cal isn't the only team with coaching turnover. It's common.

---

Exactly. Wilcox is going into his 5th year. Which PAC-12 schools have had their HC longer? Stanford and?

calumnus said:

---

BearSD said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

In any case, I doubt that Cal's main problem is recruiting. I think the main problem is coaching. It is more about the coaching consistency. In good programs, key coaches do not leave the year before the team is expected to compete for a division title.

---

Oregon lost its head coach after the 2017 season, lost its offensive coordinator after the 2019 season, and lost its defensive coordinator after the 2020 season.

Cal isn't the only team with coaching turnover. It's common.

---

Exactly. Wilcox is going into his 5th year. Which PAC-12 schools have had their HC longer? Stanford and?

---

Utah.

I believe these commentators like Steele and Connolly are not impressed with our QB and this affects their interpretation of our chances in the season. Garbers is now a veteran QB who has experienced up and down seasons. I don't place much faith in the statistics gathered for the 2020 season. It was a plain crazy season and didn't allow the offense to show its stuff. However, this is a veteran team in 2021 with a vsteran QB. If Garbers is unable to deliver with all the superior blocking by the OL and catching by the WRs and TEs, then either Musgrave or Wilcox have forgotten all they learned over many years of coaching. I don't expect our coaches to miss a beat. Our players merely need to do what they know best - their positions.

If the above occurs we should efficiently and easily amass at least eight victories.

Strykur said:

---

calumnus said:

---

BearSD said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

In any case, I doubt that Cal's main problem is recruiting. I think the main problem is coaching. It is more about the coaching consistency. In good programs, key coaches do not leave the year before the team is expected to compete for a division title.

---

Oregon lost its head coach after the 2017 season, lost its offensive coordinator after the 2019 season, and lost its defensive coordinator after the 2020 season.

Cal isn't the only team with coaching turnover. It's common.

---

Exactly. Wilcox is going into his 5th year. Which PAC-12 schools have had their HC longer? Stanford and?

---

Utah.

---

Exactly. Only two schools with their most successful coaches of the last 50 years (or all time).

During Wilcox's tenure USC, UCLA, Washington, Oregon, Arizona State, Oregon State, Arizona and Washington State have all had much more coaching turnover than Cal has had. Often with better records than Cal has had. Coaching turnover is no excuse. Cal and Cal fans have been very patient with Wilcox.

The good news is that with the big leap we have taken in recruiting it looks like our patience and coaching continuity is being rewarded. Hopefully this is the year we get a winning PAC-12 record and challenge for the division title.

Jeff said:

---

I think the big issue is the OC. Did Wilcox pick right in selecting Musgrave? We have the talent; do we have the coaching to be a top 50 offense? Related - can Garbers consistently throw deep and stretch the defense? No evidence. Creative play calling is more essential bc I'm doubtful of QB1's arm. In a shortened season, I didn't see it.

---

I do think Garbers was perhaps better suited to Baldwin's spread offense. His strengths are decision making, accuracy over short distances and his own running. His weaknesses are arm strength and throwing on the move. Baldwin's offense did not allow for enough protection to throw long so arm strength was not that much of an issue. Plus we did not have much speed at WR the last three years. Garbers was a good enough runner that the fact he didn't throw well on the run meant he could be more decisive and commit to being a runner when the protection broke down.

I think Musgrave with his more traditional pro style offense would like someone who can throw deep and move around in the pocket and throw on the run, with running ability more of a plus than a requirement. Our 2022 commit Martin looks like that guy.

However, the mark of a good college OC is being flexible to work with what you have and maximize your strengths. Garbers has enough positive attributes that any decent OC should be able to put together at least an average D1 offense with him at QB. I know last year was not a "fair" test of Musgrave's abilities, but the excuse that circumstances necessitated vanilla offense and predictable play calling was concerning. Thankfully we won't have that experiment again and we will get to see what Musgrave can do with more time and better talent.

And yet Cal has still had a changeover of both coordinators and half (?) of the position coaches.

The issue has been more consistency in O, D or ST. For the last 10 years.

91Cal said:

---

And yet Cal has still had a changeover of both coordinators and half (?) of the position coaches.

The issue has been more consistency in O, D or ST. For the last 10 years.

---

Every other school has also changed including Stanford and Utah, plus 9 changed ALL the coordinators and ALL the position coaches and their HC. . Cal has easily had among the most coaching continuity in the PAC-12. The transition to Sirmon from co-Dc to DC was not a shock. Name a single school that has been the worst on offense in its conference for 4 years, one of the very worst in the country for 4 years with only 1 change in OC and position coaches retained. Coaching change at that level is the norm even in good years (look at Wilcox's resume before Cal) but especially when the results are so exceedingly poor.

The reason we are not being projected by outside observers to compete for the North title is not BECAUSE of coaching change. it is the opposite. We are going into our 5th year with a coaching staff that has yet to compete for a North title. Until they prove it on the field that is the way the media is going to predict it.

Bear8 said:

---

I believe these commentators like Steele and Connolly are not impressed with our QB and this affects their interpretation of our chances in the season. Garbers is now a veteran QB who has experienced up and down seasons. I don't place much faith in the statistics gathered for the 2020 season. It was a plain crazy season and didn't allow the offense to show its stuff. However, this is a veteran team in 2021 with a vsteran QB. If Garbers is unable to deliver with all the superior blocking by the OL and catching by the WRs and TEs, then either Musgrave or Wilcox have forgotten all they learned over many years of coaching. I don't expect our coaches to miss a beat. Our players merely need to do what they know best - their positions.

If the above occurs we should efficiently and easily amass at least eight victories.

---

"superior blocking by the OL and catching by the WRs and TEs"

Wait, WHAT?

Bobodeluxe said:

---

Bear8 said:

---

I believe these commentators like Steele and Connolly are not impressed with our QB and this affects their interpretation of our chances in the season. Garbers is now a veteran QB who has experienced up and down seasons. I don't place much faith in the statistics gathered for the 2020 season. It was a plain crazy season and didn't allow the offense to show its stuff. However, this is a veteran team in 2021 with a vsteran QB. If Garbers is unable to deliver with all the superior blocking by the OL and catching by the WRs and TEs, then either Musgrave or Wilcox have forgotten all they learned over many years of coaching. I don't expect our coaches to miss a beat. Our players merely need to do what they know best - their positions.

If the above occurs we should efficiently and easily amass at least eight victories.

---

"superior blocking by the OL and catching by the WRs and TEs"

Wait, WHAT?

---

Our running game has been one of the least productive in the conference and in the country as well. Garbers' stats have been very good in that context. Garbers has been our most productive skill position player at his position relative to the rest of the conference over the last 3 years.

calumnus said:

---

Bobodeluxe said:

---

Bear8 said:

---

I believe these commentators like Steele and Connolly are not impressed with our QB and this affects their interpretation of our chances in the season. Garbers is now a veteran QB who has experienced up and down seasons. I don't place much faith in the statistics gathered for the 2020 season. It was a plain crazy season and didn't allow the offense to show its stuff. However, this is a veteran team in 2021 with a vsteran QB. If Garbers is unable to deliver with all the superior blocking by the OL and catching by the WRs and TEs, then either Musgrave or Wilcox have forgotten all they learned over many years of coaching. I don't expect our coaches to miss a beat. Our players merely need to do what they know best - their positions.

If the above occurs we should efficiently and easily amass at least eight victories.

---

"superior blocking by the OL and catching by the WRs and TEs"

Wait, WHAT?

---

Our running game has been one of the least productive in the conference and in the country as well. Garbers' stats have been very good in that context. Garbers has been our most productive skill position player at his position relative to the rest of the conference over the last 3 years.

---

Fair to say that our OL play has been underwhelming for all five years of JW's tenure. Losing all real practice to C-19 protocols before the debacle in LA last fall was just the icing on the cake.

This is THE unit I'll be watching from their first snap (aside from always nervously watching STs) as a sign of whether this year will be the year.

OL needs to show up this season, for sure. Guys that have been identified as having potential need to realize it (and either not get injured or the depth covers the injuries). Looking for "conference average" as a floor, hopefully better than that.

wifeisafurd said:

---

Until Wilcox can deliver a functioning offense, don't look for anything much different. The guy based most stuff on 2020, which is dumb, and the comment on the defense is getting softer is interesting until you actually look at personnel. This is a very experienced team facing a lot of teams that lost star players, and I also agree with '71 you gotta have guys that can put the team on their back and win close games with big plays. You have a senior running back and QB, and WRs, and you finally have two home run threat WRs. You have 2 linebackers who should be low round draft picks. It is time to make plays.

---

For the experience on offense to have a breakout year the OL will have to perform at a level that it hasn't done for many years. The Musgrave offense requires good OL play.

The reality is that the talent hasn't been there at the skill positions on offense.

Garbers is not a star QB. There hasn't been a lot of talent at WR or RB either compared to what I'm used to seeing at Cal let alone at Oregon or USC.

It's not that Wilcox can't coach offense. It's that he hasn't been able to recruit the players he needs.

dimitrig said:

---

The reality is that the talent hasn't been there at the skill positions on offense.

Garbers is not a star QB. There hasn't been a lot of talent at WR or RB either compared to what I'm used to seeing at Cal let alone at Oregon or USC.

It's not that Wilcox can't coach offense. It's that he hasn't been able to recruit the players he needs.

---

But it IS true that Wilcox cannot coach offense. He is dependent on his OC to coach offense and identify the players he wants. Wilcox can help close, but he is a defensive coach.

It is interesting, Baldwin had a great outgoing, upbeat "sales" personality, but top recruits (with NFL aspirations) just did not want to play in his offense. Musgrave is much more introverted, but his recruiting has been far better, most likely due to his NFL cred.

dimitrig said:

---

The reality is that the talent hasn't been there at the skill positions on offense.

Garbers is not a star QB. There hasn't been a lot of talent at WR or RB either compared to what I'm used to seeing at Cal let alone at Oregon or USC.

It's not that Wilcox can't coach offense. It's that he hasn't been able to recruit the players he needs.

---

I thought Garbers was a 4* recruit.
Maybe I am wrong.

We may not win it, but we will play in the Pac12 Championship game this year.

bearsandgiants said:

---

We may not win it, but we will play in the Pac12 Championship game this year.

---

If we make it to the game with the home stretch of USC at home before traveling to the farm and to Pasadena, then we will win. Winning the north through that finishing gauntlet means we have the depth to get quality wins at the end.

If ifs and buts were candy and nuts