heartofthebear said:

---

kal kommie said:

---

Skeedabear said:

---

westcoast101 said:

---

It's over. Senior quarterback, 5th year head coach, and we're the worst program in the Pac 12.

---

We have achieved the status of the indisputable door mat in the PAC-12…

---

Not until we lose to Arizona. That game will be the Toilet Bowl.

---

I wonder how many will still defend the status quo after we lose to Colorado? You know that Colorado has virtually no QB.

---

They have other problems as well:

https://www.espn.com/college-football/story/_/id/32328278/colorado-ad-apologizes-buffaloes-football-coach-karl-dorrell-shoves-tv-camera

heartofthebear said:

---

kal kommie said:

---

Skeedabear said:

---

westcoast101 said:

---

It's over. Senior quarterback, 5th year head coach, and we're the worst program in the Pac 12.

---

We have achieved the status of the indisputable door mat in the PAC-12…

---

Not until we lose to Arizona. That game will be the Toilet Bowl.

---

I wonder how many will still defend the status quo after we lose to Colorado? You know that Colorado has virtually no QB.

---

Oh I forgot about those guys. God the Pac-12 is bad this season.

fat_slice said:

---

SoFlaBear said:

---

fat_slice said:

---

SoFlaBear said:

---

I'm still on the fence with regard to JW. However, I'd be fine if Musgrave were let go RFN.

---

What in god's world is keeping Wilcox on the fence for you?

---

Pretty much what Strykur said - until this year, he seemed like the right guy. Until this year, the worry was that he'd have a 9+ win season and depart for greener pastures. I don't read anything into the "2020 season." That whole thing was a cluster. This year is a different story. This should have been a 7 - 9 win season based on reasonable assessments of recruiting and progress to-date. This isn't a stumble in that progression, it's a huge step backward.

Midseason replacements rarely serve a purpose. If TDR were still here -- well, we might not be having these problems -- but if he were still here, maybe you fire JW and see if TDR can get things headed in the right direction. I don't see anyone on the staff that fits that mold right now. I want to wait and see. Maybe the team perks up and JW can build on that for 2022. Maybe WFT lets Ron Rivera go and we bring him home.

---

The purpose it serves is that it gives a signal that the administration isn't going to tolerate poor football and that it is serious about it.

Who do you make HC to start the job immediately? We don't have any outstanding assistants. Musgrave seems to be part of the problem, not the solution. I'm not trying to dump on your viewpoint - but seriously, who do you get? We could do what we did when we let Kapp go and announce JW's done at EOS. My guess is all of the highly touted commits de-commit (which may happen anyway). We could hire a retread who is unemployed or stuck in an assistant job (Clay Helton, Bo Pelini, Mike Stoops - don't see that as an improvement or a long term solution).

The coach isn't doing anything to correct what is going on (e.g. Ragle, defense) so at this point you need to force a change.

We don't disagree. That was Tom Holmoe era level of bad.

Going to the bottom was totally unexpected this year.

Again - we don't disagree. 3rd or better in the P12N was the common prediction. A bowl was a reasonable expectation.

I don't think last year can be chalked up to covid anymore. That was a sign of things to come.

I think what others have said is true - JW had excellent assistants that left. Now we have an OC that looked good on paper and is a major dud.

---

Multiple reasons why Wilcox & Staff not successful but first & foremost; their inability to recruit Pac 12 level talent. 3 - star's will not do it!

SoFlaBear said:

---

I'm still on the fence with regard to JW. However, I'd be fine if Musgrave were let go RFN.

---

Angus should be on very thin ice with the way the OL is playing.

Dgoldnbaer said:

---

Multiple reasons why Wilcox & Staff not successful but first & foremost; their inability to recruit Pac 12 level talent. 3 - star's will not do it!

---

I disagree. This last class has very good talent and the one before was decent too. We have very good WRs and the RBs look good too, especially Moore and Street. On D I especially like Oladejo.

SoFlaBear said:

---

fat_slice said:

---

SoFlaBear said:

---

fat_slice said:

---

SoFlaBear said:

---

I'm still on the fence with regard to JW. However, I'd be fine if Musgrave were let go RFN.

---

What in god's world is keeping Wilcox on the fence for you?

---

Pretty much what Strykur said - until this year, he seemed like the right guy. Until this year, the worry was that he'd have a 9+ win season and depart for greener pastures. I don't read anything into the "2020 season." That whole thing was a cluster. This year is a different story. This should have been a 7 - 9 win season based on reasonable assessments of recruiting and progress to-date. This isn't a stumble in that progression, it's a huge step backward.

Midseason replacements rarely serve a purpose. If TDR were still here -- well, we might not be having these problems -- but if he were still here, maybe you fire JW and see if TDR can get things headed in the right direction. I don't see anyone on the staff that fits that mold right now. I want to wait and see. Maybe the team perks up and JW can build on that for 2022. Maybe WFT lets Ron Rivera go and we bring him home.

---

The purpose it serves is that it gives a signal that the administration isn't going to tolerate poor football and that it is serious about it.

Who do you make HC to start the job immediately? We don't have any outstanding assistants. Musgrave seems to be part of the problem, not the solution. I'm not trying to dump on your viewpoint - but seriously, who do you get? We could do what we did when we let Kapp go and announce JW's done at EOS. My guess is all of the highly touted commits de-commit (which may happen anyway). We could hire a retread who is unemployed or stuck in an assistant job (Clay Helton, Bo Pelini, Mike Stoops - don't see that as an improvement or a long term solution).

The coach isn't doing anything to correct what is going on (e.g. Ragle, defense) so at this point you need to force a change.

We don't disagree. That was Tom Holmoe era level of bad.

Going to the bottom was totally unexpected this year.

Again - we don't disagree. 3rd or better in the P12N was the common prediction. A bowl was a reasonable expectation.

I don't think last year can be chalked up to covid anymore. That was a sign of things to come.

I think what others have said is true - JW had excellent assistants that left. Now we have an OC that looked good on paper and is a major dud.

---

---

All good points. I am not close enough to say who should be coach if JW is let go now. I would actually say Musgrave given that we have seen some improvement on that side of the ball but if players are not happy with him and the performance yesterday makes me very uncomfortable with that decision. I would hope someone in the administration is close enough to the remaining coaches to pick someone to close out the year.

The bottom line is that we make it clear to the world we have a job opening asap so people can start planning and we deal with all the unhappiness (loyal players wanting to leave, etc) now rather than have that clog up preparations for the new staff.

I like your idea of letting people now JW is done after this year. I would not have a problem with that and did not consider that as an option. I just want some indication that the admin/AD actually gives a d*mn about building a top notch football team.

At this point.

1) I'd axe Musgrave & Ragle
2) Given that we are most likely building for next year, I'd let every starter know that competition has re-opened and will be reconsidered on a weekly basis.
3) If I'm coach, I let Garbers that he'd better light it up early against the Ducks. Otherwise, he gets to sit and watch his backup.

fat_slice said:

---

SoFlaBear said:

---

fat_slice said:

---

SoFlaBear said:

---

fat_slice said:

---

SoFlaBear said:

---

I'm still on the fence with regard to JW. However, I'd be fine if Musgrave were let go RFN.

---

What in god's world is keeping Wilcox on the fence for you?

---

Pretty much what Strykur said - until this year, he seemed like the right guy. Until this year, the worry was that he'd have a 9+ win season and depart for greener pastures. I don't read anything into the "2020 season." That whole thing was a cluster. This year is a different story. This should have been a 7 - 9 win season based on reasonable assessments of recruiting and progress to-date. This isn't a stumble in that progression, it's a huge step backward.

Midseason replacements rarely serve a purpose. If TDR were still here -- well, we might not be having these problems -- but if he were still here, maybe you fire JW and see if TDR can get things headed in the right direction. I don't see anyone on the staff that fits that mold right now. I want to wait and see. Maybe the team perks up and JW can build on that for 2022. Maybe WFT lets Ron Rivera go and we bring him home.

---

The purpose it serves is that it gives a signal that the administration isn't going to tolerate poor football and that it is serious about it.

Who do you make HC to start the job immediately? We don't have any outstanding assistants. Musgrave seems to be part of the problem, not the solution. I'm not trying to dump on your viewpoint - but seriously, who do you get? We could do what we did when we let Kapp go and announce JW's done at EOS. My guess is all of the highly touted commits de-commit (which may happen anyway). We could hire a retread who is unemployed or stuck in an assistant job (Clay Helton, Bo Pelini, Mike Stoops - don't see that as an improvement or a long term solution).

The coach isn't doing anything to correct what is going on (e.g. Ragle, defense) so at this point you need to force a change.

We don't disagree. That was Tom Holmoe era level of bad.

Going to the bottom was totally unexpected this year.

Again - we don't disagree. 3rd or better in the P12N was the common prediction. A bowl was a reasonable expectation.

I don't think last year can be chalked up to covid anymore. That was a sign of things to come.

I think what others have said is true - JW had excellent assistants that left. Now we have an OC that looked good on paper and is a major dud.

---

---

All good points. I am not close enough to say who should be coach if JW is let go now. I would actually say Musgrave given that we have seen some improvement on that side of the ball but if players are not happy with him and the performance yesterday makes me very uncomfortable with that decision. I would hope someone in the administration is close enough to the remaining coaches to pick someone to close out the year.

The bottom line is that we make it clear to the world we have a job opening asap so people can start planning and we deal with all the unhappiness (loyal players wanting to leave, etc) now rather than have that clog up preparations for the new staff.

I like your idea of letting people now JW is done after this year. I would not have a problem with that and did not consider that as an option. I just want some indication that the admin/AD actually gives a d*mn about building a top notch football team.

---

Unfortunately, the administration does not give a damn about building a top notch football team. Knowlton thinks Wilcox is the second coming of JC, and there is no way he will fire Wilcox this year, next year, or probably thereafter. Sadly we are stuck with a nice, but incompetent head coach.

SoFlaBear said:

---

At this point.

1) I'd axe Musgrave & Ragle
2) Given that we are most likely building for next year, I'd let every starter know that competition has re-opened and will be reconsidered on a weekly basis.
3) If I'm coach, I let Garbers that he'd better light it up early against the Ducks. Otherwise, he gets to sit and watch his backup.

---

Can't fire Musgrave because that will hurt recruiting even more.

Fire Ragle immediately to let everyone else know I'm serious.

Tell Garbers his job is on the line.

Let incoming recruits know they may play a lot as freshmen.

dimitrig said:

---

SoFlaBear said:

---

At this point.

1) I'd axe Musgrave & Ragle
2) Given that we are most likely building for next year, I'd let every starter know that competition has re-opened and will be reconsidered on a weekly basis.
3) If I'm coach, I let Garbers that he'd better light it up early against the Ducks. Otherwise, he gets to sit and watch his backup.

---

Can't fire Musgrave because that will hurt recruiting even more.

Fire Ragle immediately to let everyone else know I'm serious.

Tell Garbers his job is on the line.

Let incoming recruits know they may play a lot as freshmen.

---

Agreed! I would be happy if they just fired Ragle. That would be enough to show me that someone/anyone in the program cares about what we are putting out there on the field and that we are trying to address it immediately. Keeping incompetent people on because they are good friends is borderline corrupt. Special teams is by far the worst. They blew the big game last year for crying out loud.

From the first down off a blocked punt, the missed PAT, the botched flea flicker - we looked like clowns out there.

A good fit.

Musgrave's offense has been successful EVERYWHERE he's been. This type of offense starts and ends with the QB. The only thing that is forced is the running game, after that it takes what the defense gives. When Garbers goes through his receiver progression, we move the ball really well. When Garbers panics and doesn't hit open receivers or runs for no apparent reason, the offense sputters. When you rarely throw the ball further than 15 yards, the defense plays to stop the run, and doesn't stop until they're burned for a long pass. So how is that Musgrave's fault? Maybe because there isn't a trustworthy backup? Maybe because he's sticking with Garbers? The offensive system isn't the issue, the lack of a competent Pac-12 QB causes MANY of their problems! I wouldn't know which plays to call when your QB lacks confidence and the ability to orchestrate the offense properly.

79 Bear said:

---

Dgoldnbaer said:

---

Multiple reasons why Wilcox & Staff not successful but first & foremost; their inability to recruit Pac 12 level talent. 3 - star's will not do it!

---

I disagree. This last class has very good talent and the one before was decent too. We have very good WRs and the RBs look good too, especially Moore and Street. On D I especially like Oladejo.

---

The first class was mostly players recruited by Dykes that stayed committed to Wilcox. The last class were recruits that were recruited by, and excited about, the new offensive staff. In other words, Baldwin was a disaster. He ran off more 4 star talent than he brought in. And our OL recruiting was MIA. The mystery is why Wilcox has not recruited better on the defensive side.

bledblue said:

---

Musgrave's offense has been successful EVERYWHERE he's been. This type of offense starts and ends with the QB. The only thing that is forced is the running game, after that it takes what the defense gives. When Garbers goes through his receiver progression, we move the ball really well. When Garbers panics and doesn't hit open receivers or runs for no apparent reason, the offense sputters. When you rarely throw the ball further than 15 yards, the defense plays to stop the run, and doesn't stop until they're burned for a long pass. So how is that Musgrave's fault? Maybe because there isn't a trustworthy backup? Maybe because he's sticking with Garbers? The offensive system isn't the issue, the lack of a competent Pac-12 QB causes MANY of their problems! I wouldn't know which plays to call when your QB lacks confidence and the ability to orchestrate the offense properly.

---

A large part of our QB problem is the extremely poor play of our offensive line. On most passing plays, Garbers has no more than 1-2 seconds to get a pass off. That severely limits his ability to see the whole field and go through his reads. Hard to understand that year after year we have one of the worst (if not the worst) OL in the conference. Either we can't recruit linemen or our OL coach is horrible, or both.

Golden One said:

---

bledblue said:

---

Musgrave's offense has been successful EVERYWHERE he's been. This type of offense starts and ends with the QB. The only thing that is forced is the running game, after that it takes what the defense gives. When Garbers goes through his receiver progression, we move the ball really well. When Garbers panics and doesn't hit open receivers or runs for no apparent reason, the offense sputters. When you rarely throw the ball further than 15 yards, the defense plays to stop the run, and doesn't stop until they're burned for a long pass. So how is that Musgrave's fault? Maybe because there isn't a trustworthy backup? Maybe because he's sticking with Garbers? The offensive system isn't the issue, the lack of a competent Pac-12 QB causes MANY of their problems! I wouldn't know which plays to call when your QB lacks confidence and the ability to orchestrate the offense properly.

---

A large part of our QB problem is the extremely poor play of our offensive line. On most passing plays, Garbers has no more than 1-2 seconds to get a pass off. That severely limits his ability to see the whole field and go through his reads. Hard to understand that year after year we have one of the worst (if not the worst) OL in the conference. Either we can't recruit linemen or our OL coach is horrible, or both.

---

That was true when Goff was QB as well. He had very little time and spent a lot of time running for his life.

However, he managed to overcome that.

dimitrig said:

---

Golden One said:

---

bledblue said:

---

Musgrave's offense has been successful EVERYWHERE he's been. This type of offense starts and ends with the QB. The only thing that is forced is the running game, after that it takes what the defense gives. When Garbers goes through his receiver progression, we move the ball really well. When Garbers panics and doesn't hit open receivers or runs for no apparent reason, the offense sputters. When you rarely throw the ball further than 15 yards, the defense plays to stop the run, and doesn't stop until they're burned for a long pass. So how is that Musgrave's fault? Maybe because there isn't a trustworthy backup? Maybe because he's sticking with Garbers? The offensive system isn't the issue, the lack of a competent Pac-12 QB causes MANY of their problems! I wouldn't know which plays to call when your QB lacks confidence and the ability to orchestrate the offense properly.

---

A large part of our QB problem is the extremely poor play of our offensive line. On most passing plays, Garbers has no more than 1-2 seconds to get a pass off. That severely limits his ability to see the whole field and go through his reads. Hard to understand that year after year we have one of the worst (if not the worst) OL in the conference. Either we can't recruit linemen or our OL coach is horrible, or both.

---

That was true when Goff was QB as well. He had very little time and spent a lot of time running for his life.

However, he managed to overcome that.

---

True, but Garbers is not Goff. Goff was the overall #1 pick in the NFL draft for a reason. I doubt that Garbers will even be selected in the draft. At best, he will be an undrafted free agent.

A friend who donates a lot of money wrote to Jim Knowlton abut his concerns about Cal football. This was the response. "everything is looking up for Cal football. " I-am glad to hear that.

oskidunker said:

---

A friend who donates a lot of money wrote to Jim Knowlton abut his concerns about Cal football. This was the response. "everything is looking up for Cal football. " I-am glad to hear that.

---

.

LOL. Yes, Cal football is looking up at the 11 other teams ahead of them!

HKBear97! said:

---

oskidunker said:

---

A friend who donates a lot of money wrote to Jim Knowlton abut his concerns about Cal football. This was the response. "everything is looking up for Cal football. " I-am glad to hear that.

---

.





















LOL. Yes, Cal football is looking up at the 11 other teams ahead of them!

---

HKBear97! said:

---

oskidunker said:

---

A friend who donates a lot of money wrote to Jim Knowlton abut his concerns about Cal football. This was the response. "everything is looking up for Cal football. " I-am glad to hear that.

---

.



LOL. Yes, Cal football is looking up at the 11 other teams ahead of them!

---

I got the same response from Knowlton

Golden One said:

---

HKBear97! said:

---

oskidunker said:

---

A friend who donates a lot of money wrote to Jim Knowlton abut his concerns about Cal football. This was the response. "everything is looking up for Cal football. " I-am glad to hear that.

---

.



LOL. Yes, Cal football is looking up at the 11 other teams ahead of them!

---

I got the same response from Knowlton

---

If you repeat something to yourself enough, you start to believe it.

"This year is the Cal is going to pull it together and reach the next level."

How long have I been hearing that here on both boards? The entire time!

There is no offense because the O Line is so awful. Been that way since Tedford. Stop blaming Garbers, He has never had a decent O Line to work with to do a necessary receiver check down. Greatwood and McClure have not done anything. I have concerns the Bears get their player evaluations from the cousins of the folks who do our Coaching Talent searches. No one has demonstrated an ability to choose decent Pac 12 quality linemen. Name A lineman who would play on another Pac 12 team? It didn't used to be this way. Why now??

dimitrig said:

---

Golden One said:

---

bledblue said:

---

Musgrave's offense has been successful EVERYWHERE he's been. This type of offense starts and ends with the QB. The only thing that is forced is the running game, after that it takes what the defense gives. When Garbers goes through his receiver progression, we move the ball really well. When Garbers panics and doesn't hit open receivers or runs for no apparent reason, the offense sputters. When you rarely throw the ball further than 15 yards, the defense plays to stop the run, and doesn't stop until they're burned for a long pass. So how is that Musgrave's fault? Maybe because there isn't a trustworthy backup? Maybe because he's sticking with Garbers? The offensive system isn't the issue, the lack of a competent Pac-12 QB causes MANY of their problems! I wouldn't know which plays to call when your QB lacks confidence and the ability to orchestrate the offense properly.

---

A large part of our QB problem is the extremely poor play of our offensive line. On most passing plays, Garbers has no more than 1-2 seconds to get a pass off. That severely limits his ability to see the whole field and go through his reads. Hard to understand that year after year we have one of the worst (if not the worst) OL in the conference. Either we can't recruit linemen or our OL coach is horrible, or both.

---

That was true when Goff was QB as well. He had very little time and spent a lot of time running for his life.

However, he managed to overcome that.

---

We also ran the Bear Raid which gave Goff lots of options in the little time he had, despite having a supposedly inferior OL we managed to score lots of points during that time regardless.

The Bear Raid will never work in the Pac12.

Smash mouth football is the road to success.

I read that here thousands of times.

You'll see.

Strykur said:

---

dimitrig said:

---

Golden One said:

---

bledblue said:

---

Musgrave's offense has been successful EVERYWHERE he's been. This type of offense starts and ends with the QB. The only thing that is forced is the running game, after that it takes what the defense gives. When Garbers goes through his receiver progression, we move the ball really well. When Garbers panics and doesn't hit open receivers or runs for no apparent reason, the offense sputters. When you rarely throw the ball further than 15 yards, the defense plays to stop the run, and doesn't stop until they're burned for a long pass. So how is that Musgrave's fault? Maybe because there isn't a trustworthy backup? Maybe because he's sticking with Garbers? The offensive system isn't the issue, the lack of a competent Pac-12 QB causes MANY of their problems! I wouldn't know which plays to call when your QB lacks confidence and the ability to orchestrate the offense properly.

---

A large part of our QB problem is the extremely poor play of our offensive line. On most passing plays, Garbers has no more than 1-2 seconds to get a pass off. That severely limits his ability to see the whole field and go through his reads. Hard to understand that year after year we have one of the worst (if not the worst) OL in the conference. Either we can't recruit linemen or our OL coach is horrible, or both.

---

That was true when Goff was QB as well. He had very little time and spent a lot of time running for his life.

However, he managed to overcome that.

---

We also ran the Bear Raid which gave Goff lots of options in the little time he had, despite having a supposedly inferior OL we managed to score lots of points during that time regardless.

---

Goff was also good at making reads and getting rid of the ball quickly. Not at first he wasn't, but he adapted.

Garbers just isn't that kind of quarterback.

He is slow with his progressions and he has happy feet. In addition to that he has a noodle for an arm.

He's a Cal Bear and he's led us to some good wins, but we need a lot better play at that position regardless of the OL.

The OL isn't very good, especially the right side. But blaming them for Garbers ineptitude at QB is idiotic. He is incapable of running this kind of offense, and on most occasions, he has adequate time to throw. At best he's a lower 1/4 Pac-12 QB. When your strength as a QB is running the ball, we have issues.
Stanford looked just as bad against K-State, then they made a QB change, now they compete. In these pro style offenses, the QB position makes everything work.

Bobodeluxe said:

---

Experienced players are a good thing, unless they aren't very good. A very good coach would be hard pressed to approach .500 with this group. Very, VERY, HARD PRESSED.

---

My problem is that I don't know what to make of this team. The first 3 losses were all close hard-fought games. The second half of the UW game was probably the best half that the team played all year. But the missed FG then the fumble in OT was devastating to team morale.

Both my adult son and Pawlawski made similar comments after the loss on Saturday.
Pawlawski said that the Cal team seem d to lose heart after the missed extra point.
My son said that the team seems "snake-bit".

Cal has played its first 3 losses very close. There were so many mistakes that stopped drives or blew scoring opportunities. If just one of those mistakes in each of the games had not occurred, Cal would probably have been 4-0 not 1-3 in the first four games.

The mistakes were made by different players on both offense and defense. So there was plenty of blame to spread around . (Although Special teams had more than its share of mistakes).
For example in the final drive by Cal in regulation against UW, a dumb offensive face mask penalty moved Cal back 10 (15?) yards. Without that penalty, Cal would have been in reasonable FG range for a last second winning FG.

Therefore in the WSU game after Cal had quickly scored a TD and was about to tie the game with an easy PAT. The fumbled snap sent a message loud and clear. "here we go again". That message was reinforced when the Cal defense blocked the WSU punt but WSU recovered and managed to get a first down.
Instead of Cal recovering the blocked punt in scoring position deep in WSU territory, WSU keeps its drive alive and takes it in for another touchdown.

From then on out to me it appeared that Cal was just going through the motions. "Mailing it in".

Bruce Snyder once said that to build a winning team. The players had to believe that they could overcome whatever adversity occurred. They had to come back and win in the last seconds of a game. Until that happens, they don't really believe they can do
it. And therefore the don't.

Cal's first 3 losses could have been wins and should have been wins with one fewer mistake. When those mistakes cropped up again in the WSU game, it became a self fulfilling prophecy.

Maybe I am being too psychological. But nothing else can explain to me the attitude of the Cal team in the second half of the WSU game.

Either that or I must put a heck of a lot of blame on Musgrave.

oskidunker said:

---

A friend who donates a lot of money wrote to Jim Knowlton abut his concerns about Cal football. This was the response. "everything is looking up for Cal football. " I-am glad to hear that.

---

Is that a surprise?

This is the guy who hired Fox and thought he was doing Cal a favor. He has no understanding whatsoever regarding how to run an athletic department.

My suggestion…….

Take a nap and set the alarm for 2029. He should be gone by then…..

GivemTheAxe said:

---

Bobodeluxe said:

---

Experienced players are a good thing, unless they aren't very good. A very good coach would be hard pressed to approach .500 with this group. Very, VERY, HARD PRESSED.

---

My problem is that I don't know what to make of this team. The first 3 losses were all close hard-fought games. The second half of the UW game was probably the best half that the team played all year. But the missed FG then the fumble in OT was devastating to team morale.

Both my adult son and Pawlawski made similar comments after the loss on Saturday.
Pawlawski said that the Cal team seem d to lose heart after the missed extra point.
My son said that the team seems "snake-bit".

Cal has played its first 3 losses very close. There were so many mistakes that stopped drives or blew scoring opportunities. If just one of those mistakes in each of the games had not occurred, Cal would probably have been 4-0 not 1-3 in the first four games.

The mistakes were made by different players on both offense and defense. So there was plenty of blame to spread around . (Although Special teams had more than its share of mistakes)

Therefore in the WSU game after Cal had quickly scored a TD and was about to tie the game with an easy PAT. The fumbled snap sent a message loud and clear. "here we go again". That message was reinforced when the Cal defense blocked the punt but WSU recovered and managed to get a first down.
Instead of Cal recovering the blocked punt in scoring position deep in WSU territory, WSU keeps its drive alive and takes it in for another touchdown.

From then on out to me it appeared that Cal was just going through the motions. "Mailing it in".

Bruce Snyder once said that to build a winning team. The players had to believe that they could overcome whatever adversity occurred. They had to come back and win in the last seconds of a game. Until that happens, they don't really believe they can do
it. And therefore the don't.

Cal's first 3 losses could have been wins and should have been wins with one fewer mistake. When those mistakes cropped up again in the WSU game, it became a self fulfilling prophecy.

Maybe I am being too psychological. But nothing else can explain to me the attitude of the Cal team in the second half of the WSU game.

Either that or I must put a heck of a lot of blame on Musgrave.

---

One mistake?

Please elucidate…

The only singular error I can think of was showing for the game.

Cal isn't losing because they are snake-bit. They are losing because they are not as talented as the opposition and are poorly coached.

71Bear said:

---

Cal isn't losing because they are snake-bit. They are losing because they are not as talented as the opposition and are poorly coached.

---

You got that right!

oskidunker said:

---

A friend who donates a lot of money wrote to Jim Knowlton abut his concerns about Cal football. This was the response. "everything is looking up for Cal football. " I-am glad to hear that.

---

When you find yourself in a hole that you have dug for yourself, everything is looking up.

71Bear said:

---

oskidunker said:

---

A friend who donates a lot of money wrote to Jim Knowlton abut his concerns about Cal football. This was the response. "everything is looking up for Cal football. " I-am glad to hear that.

---

Is that a surprise?

This is the guy who hired Fox and thought he was doing Cal a favor. He has no understanding whatsoever regarding how to run an athletic department.

My suggestion…….

Take a nap and set the alarm for 2029. He should be gone by then…..

---

It wasnt just that he hired Mark Fox. Here is a reminder:
https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/03/29/cal-hires-mark-fox-well-that-was-fast-perhaps-a-little-too-fast/