Collegiate football is well into a new era of previously uncharted territory with the advent in recent years of the transfer portal, making it far easier for players to transfer and make an early impact with new programs.
In 2021, the Bears dipped their toe in the transfer portal market, bringing in Texas OLB Marqez Bimage, DE Luc Bequette, who returned after a one year stint at BC for a record 7th season, Florida State safety Raymond Woodie and former Penn and Western Carolina QB Ryan Glover.
Bimage was a revelation, going from a 4-year backup at UT to starting several games for the Bears, adding 40 tackles, 7.5 tackles for loss, one forced fumble, one fumble recovery and two sacks, while bringing a physical presence to the field that helped set the tone for the defense.
Bequette returned as a starter, also adding 40 tackles, along with 3.5 sacks, 4.5 tackles for loss and four passes broken up. Glover struggled mightily in his one start in Cal's loss to Arizona when filling in for starter Chase Garbers while out on covid protocol but at least provided a veteran presence in the locker room and on the practice field. And Woodie provided quality depth at safety and special teams, adding 7 tackles on the season and will look to compete to start this spring.
However after a frustrating and disappointing 5-7 2021season likely not indicative of their overall talent level, the Bears recognize the need to not stand pat in 2022 and do what they need to do to get the program on track and in a bowl game, not to mention compete for a conference championship.
The Bears got off to a strong start in the portal so far this season, adding potential starters Jack Plummer, DE Xavier Carlton and MLB Jackson Sirmon. Plummer, who was a part-time starter for Purdue, will compete with redshirt frosh QB Kai Millner this spring to earn a starting role. Carlton, a former 4 star Bear recruit transfers over from Utah and could slot into departed portal transfer JH Tevis’s slot. Sirmon, the fifth leading tackler in the Pac-12 in 2021 for Washington looks to start for the Bears, potentially causing a shift for one of the Bears’ young inside backers to the outside.
As solid as the spring arrivals are, the Bears’ work with the portal is far from done, with several needs still to be addressed. Look for the Bears to add as many as four additional portal transfers for the summer/fall after the inevitable roster shuffling throughout the country as a new wave of players will look to find new homes and better opportunities after seeing how things shake out in their respective spring practices, and the Bears are no exception.
Four of the biggest needs the Bears will look to cover are adding an offensive tackle to compete to start, a “juice” player to add dynamic big play potential at running back or receiver, a pass rush specialist at DE, OLB or a hybrid of the two to add much-needed sack and pass pressure production and an experienced corner to add to the Bears exceedingly young CB corps.
What do the Bears have to offer these potential transfers? An opportunity to be a difference-maker on an offense playing for a 20-year veteran offensive coordinator in third year Cal OC Bill Musgrave that’s looking to break out. And on defense, the Bears potentially have the ingredients to be one of the best defenses in the Pac-12 and potentially the country. Having the opportunity to play for a head coach with significant DC success along with a DC with significant NFL playing experience and collegiate defensive coordinator success and earn a prestigious Cal degree in just one to three years of study could create tempting opportunites for several players the Bears will look to add.
With spring ball slated to start in a little over a week at Cal and some others underway throughout the country, look for the process to get rolling in the coming weeks.
Other stories:
Spring Football Preview - The Quarterbacks
Cal Football Introduces Four New Staff Additions
Yesfat_slice said:
In all the articles I've read there is no mention of Zach Johnson as being part of the QB competition despite him appearing to be the #2 after last spring (if my memory serves me right).
Is Kai really that much better than Zach now?
Or to the portal. This mildly concerns me in terms of chemistry and development, particularly after what happened last season. I just can't wrap my head around messing with something so critical that you just got fixed with young guys stepping up. Slotting in the coach's kid automatically is dangerous, regardless of past performance. Hopefully he performs immediately to the point that there are no questions he's a clear upgrade and whoever gets moved is truly down for it or we may have problems. Add to it that he's got 2 years left and it really has the potential to become an issue imho. Losing even 1 of our "Core 4" over this wouldn't be a good trade given the "years of service" remaining unless he's truly a game changer. Hopefully my concerns will be proven out to be silly. Go Bears!Quote:
Sirmon, the fifth leading tackler in the Pac-12 in 2021 for Washington looks to start for the Bears, potentially causing a shift for one of the Bears' young inside backers to the outside.
Sirmon's the 2nd leading returning tackler in the Pac-12, coach's son or not. When you have the opportunity to add that kind of talent, you take it. Several of Cal's ILB's are well-suited to play outside, too, and a lot of players welcome the opportunity to prove themselves at two positions to increase their draft stock.WalterSobchak said:Or to the portal. This mildly concerns me in terms of chemistry and development, particularly after what happened last season. I just can't wrap my head around messing with something so critical that you just got fixed with young guys stepping up. Slotting in the coach's kid automatically is dangerous, regardless of past performance. Hopefully he performs immediately to the point that there are no questions he's a clear upgrade and whoever gets moved is truly down for it or we may have problems. Add to it that he's got 2 years left and it really has the potential to become an issue imho. Losing even 1 of our "Core 4" over this wouldn't be a good trade given the "years of service" remaining unless he's truly a game changer. Hopefully my concerns will be proven out to be silly. Go Bears!Quote:
Sirmon, the fifth leading tackler in the Pac-12 in 2021 for Washington looks to start for the Bears, potentially causing a shift for one of the Bears' young inside backers to the outside.
I hope that's true (not saying it isn't, just don't know). I think Oladejo has shown tools that would make him a very intriguing edge rusher. If he wants that opportunity then that would be ideal. I understand the concept of bringing in the best talent you can get. I also have been on teams with coaches' kids. Sometimes it's no problem. Sometimes it is. But nobody ever goes to the coach to complain about their own kid so you can get a whole new dynamic trust wise that can be bad for the team. I think pretending that isn't possible is silly. They're not going to say anything to you if they're upset either. 91 tackles last season is great, I get that. But Oladejo and Ruchena each had 35 or more as true frosh who didn't even begin the season in the rotation or get many starts. Sirmon didn't get to 35 tackles until he was in his third season. So who knows what the upside is for our young guys as they develop and mature. I think best case is Oladejo wants to move outside and excels there, with Sirmon stepping in to elevate the core 4 man ILB rotation seamlessly. I just worry that they'll tinker too much and we'll see a repeat of early 2021 again in 2022.MoragaBear said:Sirmon's the 2nd leading returning tackler in the Pac-12, coach's son or not. When you have the opportunity to add that kind of talent, you take it. Several of Cal's ILB's are well-suited to play outside, too, and a lot of players welcome the opportunity to prove themselves at two positions to increase their draft stock.WalterSobchak said:Or to the portal. This mildly concerns me in terms of chemistry and development, particularly after what happened last season. I just can't wrap my head around messing with something so critical that you just got fixed with young guys stepping up. Slotting in the coach's kid automatically is dangerous, regardless of past performance. Hopefully he performs immediately to the point that there are no questions he's a clear upgrade and whoever gets moved is truly down for it or we may have problems. Add to it that he's got 2 years left and it really has the potential to become an issue imho. Losing even 1 of our "Core 4" over this wouldn't be a good trade given the "years of service" remaining unless he's truly a game changer. Hopefully my concerns will be proven out to be silly. Go Bears!Quote:
Sirmon, the fifth leading tackler in the Pac-12 in 2021 for Washington looks to start for the Bears, potentially causing a shift for one of the Bears' young inside backers to the outside.
WalterSobchak said:I hope that's true (not saying it isn't, just don't know). I think Oladejo has shown tools that would make him a very intriguing edge rusher. If he wants that opportunity then that would be ideal. I understand the concept of bringing in the best talent you can get. I also have been on teams with coaches' kids. Sometimes it's no problem. Sometimes it is. But nobody ever goes to the coach to complain about their own kid so you can get a whole new dynamic trust wise that can be bad for the team. I think pretending that isn't possible is silly. They're not going to say anything to you if they're upset either. 91 tackles last season is great, I get that. But Oladejo and Ruchena each had 35 or more as true frosh who didn't even begin the season in the rotation or get many starts. Sirmon didn't get to 35 tackles until he was in his third season. So who knows what the upside is for our young guys as they develop and mature. I think best case is Oladejo wants to move outside and excels there, with Sirmon stepping in to elevate the core 4 man ILB rotation seamlessly. I just worry that they'll tinker too much and we'll see a repeat of early 2021 again in 2022.MoragaBear said:Sirmon's the 2nd leading returning tackler in the Pac-12, coach's son or not. When you have the opportunity to add that kind of talent, you take it. Several of Cal's ILB's are well-suited to play outside, too, and a lot of players welcome the opportunity to prove themselves at two positions to increase their draft stock.WalterSobchak said:Or to the portal. This mildly concerns me in terms of chemistry and development, particularly after what happened last season. I just can't wrap my head around messing with something so critical that you just got fixed with young guys stepping up. Slotting in the coach's kid automatically is dangerous, regardless of past performance. Hopefully he performs immediately to the point that there are no questions he's a clear upgrade and whoever gets moved is truly down for it or we may have problems. Add to it that he's got 2 years left and it really has the potential to become an issue imho. Losing even 1 of our "Core 4" over this wouldn't be a good trade given the "years of service" remaining unless he's truly a game changer. Hopefully my concerns will be proven out to be silly. Go Bears!Quote:
Sirmon, the fifth leading tackler in the Pac-12 in 2021 for Washington looks to start for the Bears, potentially causing a shift for one of the Bears' young inside backers to the outside.
If the kid can play, the kid can play. Why should it matter if there's a familial relationship? Why should a qualified kid be DISqualified because of a familial relationship?fat_slice said:WalterSobchak said:I hope that's true (not saying it isn't, just don't know). I think Oladejo has shown tools that would make him a very intriguing edge rusher. If he wants that opportunity then that would be ideal. I understand the concept of bringing in the best talent you can get. I also have been on teams with coaches' kids. Sometimes it's no problem. Sometimes it is. But nobody ever goes to the coach to complain about their own kid so you can get a whole new dynamic trust wise that can be bad for the team. I think pretending that isn't possible is silly. They're not going to say anything to you if they're upset either. 91 tackles last season is great, I get that. But Oladejo and Ruchena each had 35 or more as true frosh who didn't even begin the season in the rotation or get many starts. Sirmon didn't get to 35 tackles until he was in his third season. So who knows what the upside is for our young guys as they develop and mature. I think best case is Oladejo wants to move outside and excels there, with Sirmon stepping in to elevate the core 4 man ILB rotation seamlessly. I just worry that they'll tinker too much and we'll see a repeat of early 2021 again in 2022.MoragaBear said:Sirmon's the 2nd leading returning tackler in the Pac-12, coach's son or not. When you have the opportunity to add that kind of talent, you take it. Several of Cal's ILB's are well-suited to play outside, too, and a lot of players welcome the opportunity to prove themselves at two positions to increase their draft stock.WalterSobchak said:Or to the portal. This mildly concerns me in terms of chemistry and development, particularly after what happened last season. I just can't wrap my head around messing with something so critical that you just got fixed with young guys stepping up. Slotting in the coach's kid automatically is dangerous, regardless of past performance. Hopefully he performs immediately to the point that there are no questions he's a clear upgrade and whoever gets moved is truly down for it or we may have problems. Add to it that he's got 2 years left and it really has the potential to become an issue imho. Losing even 1 of our "Core 4" over this wouldn't be a good trade given the "years of service" remaining unless he's truly a game changer. Hopefully my concerns will be proven out to be silly. Go Bears!Quote:
Sirmon, the fifth leading tackler in the Pac-12 in 2021 for Washington looks to start for the Bears, potentially causing a shift for one of the Bears' young inside backers to the outside.
I think it should be policy to not take family members in - avoid even the appearance of conflict of interest. If we want to be that ethical program, this is the route to go. Obviously not the route we are taking and I hope he is truly additive to the team though!
Cal_79 said:If the kid can play, the kid can play. Why should it matter if there's a familial relationship? Why should a qualified kid be DISqualified because of a familial relationship?fat_slice said:WalterSobchak said:I hope that's true (not saying it isn't, just don't know). I think Oladejo has shown tools that would make him a very intriguing edge rusher. If he wants that opportunity then that would be ideal. I understand the concept of bringing in the best talent you can get. I also have been on teams with coaches' kids. Sometimes it's no problem. Sometimes it is. But nobody ever goes to the coach to complain about their own kid so you can get a whole new dynamic trust wise that can be bad for the team. I think pretending that isn't possible is silly. They're not going to say anything to you if they're upset either. 91 tackles last season is great, I get that. But Oladejo and Ruchena each had 35 or more as true frosh who didn't even begin the season in the rotation or get many starts. Sirmon didn't get to 35 tackles until he was in his third season. So who knows what the upside is for our young guys as they develop and mature. I think best case is Oladejo wants to move outside and excels there, with Sirmon stepping in to elevate the core 4 man ILB rotation seamlessly. I just worry that they'll tinker too much and we'll see a repeat of early 2021 again in 2022.MoragaBear said:Sirmon's the 2nd leading returning tackler in the Pac-12, coach's son or not. When you have the opportunity to add that kind of talent, you take it. Several of Cal's ILB's are well-suited to play outside, too, and a lot of players welcome the opportunity to prove themselves at two positions to increase their draft stock.WalterSobchak said:Or to the portal. This mildly concerns me in terms of chemistry and development, particularly after what happened last season. I just can't wrap my head around messing with something so critical that you just got fixed with young guys stepping up. Slotting in the coach's kid automatically is dangerous, regardless of past performance. Hopefully he performs immediately to the point that there are no questions he's a clear upgrade and whoever gets moved is truly down for it or we may have problems. Add to it that he's got 2 years left and it really has the potential to become an issue imho. Losing even 1 of our "Core 4" over this wouldn't be a good trade given the "years of service" remaining unless he's truly a game changer. Hopefully my concerns will be proven out to be silly. Go Bears!Quote:
Sirmon, the fifth leading tackler in the Pac-12 in 2021 for Washington looks to start for the Bears, potentially causing a shift for one of the Bears' young inside backers to the outside.
I think it should be policy to not take family members in - avoid even the appearance of conflict of interest. If we want to be that ethical program, this is the route to go. Obviously not the route we are taking and I hope he is truly additive to the team though!
There's no issue of ethics here. This isn't the City Council. Every coach knows that he is judged by results and that he would be out if he didn't get them.fat_slice said:WalterSobchak said:I hope that's true (not saying it isn't, just don't know). I think Oladejo has shown tools that would make him a very intriguing edge rusher. If he wants that opportunity then that would be ideal. I understand the concept of bringing in the best talent you can get. I also have been on teams with coaches' kids. Sometimes it's no problem. Sometimes it is. But nobody ever goes to the coach to complain about their own kid so you can get a whole new dynamic trust wise that can be bad for the team. I think pretending that isn't possible is silly. They're not going to say anything to you if they're upset either. 91 tackles last season is great, I get that. But Oladejo and Ruchena each had 35 or more as true frosh who didn't even begin the season in the rotation or get many starts. Sirmon didn't get to 35 tackles until he was in his third season. So who knows what the upside is for our young guys as they develop and mature. I think best case is Oladejo wants to move outside and excels there, with Sirmon stepping in to elevate the core 4 man ILB rotation seamlessly. I just worry that they'll tinker too much and we'll see a repeat of early 2021 again in 2022.MoragaBear said:Sirmon's the 2nd leading returning tackler in the Pac-12, coach's son or not. When you have the opportunity to add that kind of talent, you take it. Several of Cal's ILB's are well-suited to play outside, too, and a lot of players welcome the opportunity to prove themselves at two positions to increase their draft stock.WalterSobchak said:Or to the portal. This mildly concerns me in terms of chemistry and development, particularly after what happened last season. I just can't wrap my head around messing with something so critical that you just got fixed with young guys stepping up. Slotting in the coach's kid automatically is dangerous, regardless of past performance. Hopefully he performs immediately to the point that there are no questions he's a clear upgrade and whoever gets moved is truly down for it or we may have problems. Add to it that he's got 2 years left and it really has the potential to become an issue imho. Losing even 1 of our "Core 4" over this wouldn't be a good trade given the "years of service" remaining unless he's truly a game changer. Hopefully my concerns will be proven out to be silly. Go Bears!Quote:
Sirmon, the fifth leading tackler in the Pac-12 in 2021 for Washington looks to start for the Bears, potentially causing a shift for one of the Bears' young inside backers to the outside.
I think it should be policy to not take family members in - avoid even the appearance of conflict of interest. If we want to be that ethical program, this is the route to go. Obviously not the route we are taking and I hope he is truly additive to the team though!
Completely disagree with this.fat_slice said:WalterSobchak said:I hope that's true (not saying it isn't, just don't know). I think Oladejo has shown tools that would make him a very intriguing edge rusher. If he wants that opportunity then that would be ideal. I understand the concept of bringing in the best talent you can get. I also have been on teams with coaches' kids. Sometimes it's no problem. Sometimes it is. But nobody ever goes to the coach to complain about their own kid so you can get a whole new dynamic trust wise that can be bad for the team. I think pretending that isn't possible is silly. They're not going to say anything to you if they're upset either. 91 tackles last season is great, I get that. But Oladejo and Ruchena each had 35 or more as true frosh who didn't even begin the season in the rotation or get many starts. Sirmon didn't get to 35 tackles until he was in his third season. So who knows what the upside is for our young guys as they develop and mature. I think best case is Oladejo wants to move outside and excels there, with Sirmon stepping in to elevate the core 4 man ILB rotation seamlessly. I just worry that they'll tinker too much and we'll see a repeat of early 2021 again in 2022.MoragaBear said:Sirmon's the 2nd leading returning tackler in the Pac-12, coach's son or not. When you have the opportunity to add that kind of talent, you take it. Several of Cal's ILB's are well-suited to play outside, too, and a lot of players welcome the opportunity to prove themselves at two positions to increase their draft stock.WalterSobchak said:Or to the portal. This mildly concerns me in terms of chemistry and development, particularly after what happened last season. I just can't wrap my head around messing with something so critical that you just got fixed with young guys stepping up. Slotting in the coach's kid automatically is dangerous, regardless of past performance. Hopefully he performs immediately to the point that there are no questions he's a clear upgrade and whoever gets moved is truly down for it or we may have problems. Add to it that he's got 2 years left and it really has the potential to become an issue imho. Losing even 1 of our "Core 4" over this wouldn't be a good trade given the "years of service" remaining unless he's truly a game changer. Hopefully my concerns will be proven out to be silly. Go Bears!Quote:
Sirmon, the fifth leading tackler in the Pac-12 in 2021 for Washington looks to start for the Bears, potentially causing a shift for one of the Bears' young inside backers to the outside.
I think it should be policy to not take family members in - avoid even the appearance of conflict of interest. If we want to be that ethical program, this is the route to go. Obviously not the route we are taking and I hope he is truly additive to the team though!
Rushinbear said:There's no issue of ethics here. This isn't the City Council. Every coach knows that he is judged by results and that he would be out if he didn't get them.fat_slice said:WalterSobchak said:I hope that's true (not saying it isn't, just don't know). I think Oladejo has shown tools that would make him a very intriguing edge rusher. If he wants that opportunity then that would be ideal. I understand the concept of bringing in the best talent you can get. I also have been on teams with coaches' kids. Sometimes it's no problem. Sometimes it is. But nobody ever goes to the coach to complain about their own kid so you can get a whole new dynamic trust wise that can be bad for the team. I think pretending that isn't possible is silly. They're not going to say anything to you if they're upset either. 91 tackles last season is great, I get that. But Oladejo and Ruchena each had 35 or more as true frosh who didn't even begin the season in the rotation or get many starts. Sirmon didn't get to 35 tackles until he was in his third season. So who knows what the upside is for our young guys as they develop and mature. I think best case is Oladejo wants to move outside and excels there, with Sirmon stepping in to elevate the core 4 man ILB rotation seamlessly. I just worry that they'll tinker too much and we'll see a repeat of early 2021 again in 2022.MoragaBear said:Sirmon's the 2nd leading returning tackler in the Pac-12, coach's son or not. When you have the opportunity to add that kind of talent, you take it. Several of Cal's ILB's are well-suited to play outside, too, and a lot of players welcome the opportunity to prove themselves at two positions to increase their draft stock.WalterSobchak said:Or to the portal. This mildly concerns me in terms of chemistry and development, particularly after what happened last season. I just can't wrap my head around messing with something so critical that you just got fixed with young guys stepping up. Slotting in the coach's kid automatically is dangerous, regardless of past performance. Hopefully he performs immediately to the point that there are no questions he's a clear upgrade and whoever gets moved is truly down for it or we may have problems. Add to it that he's got 2 years left and it really has the potential to become an issue imho. Losing even 1 of our "Core 4" over this wouldn't be a good trade given the "years of service" remaining unless he's truly a game changer. Hopefully my concerns will be proven out to be silly. Go Bears!Quote:
Sirmon, the fifth leading tackler in the Pac-12 in 2021 for Washington looks to start for the Bears, potentially causing a shift for one of the Bears' young inside backers to the outside.
I think it should be policy to not take family members in - avoid even the appearance of conflict of interest. If we want to be that ethical program, this is the route to go. Obviously not the route we are taking and I hope he is truly additive to the team though!
Your post is just pot stirring.
WalterSobchak said:I hope that's true (not saying it isn't, just don't know). I think Oladejo has shown tools that would make him a very intriguing edge rusher. If he wants that opportunity then that would be ideal. I understand the concept of bringing in the best talent you can get. I also have been on teams with coaches' kids. Sometimes it's no problem. Sometimes it is. But nobody ever goes to the coach to complain about their own kid so you can get a whole new dynamic trust wise that can be bad for the team. I think pretending that isn't possible is silly. They're not going to say anything to you if they're upset either. 91 tackles last season is great, I get that. But Oladejo and Ruchena each had 35 or more as true frosh who didn't even begin the season in the rotation or get many starts. Sirmon didn't get to 35 tackles until he was in his third season. So who knows what the upside is for our young guys as they develop and mature. I think best case is Oladejo wants to move outside and excels there, with Sirmon stepping in to elevate the core 4 man ILB rotation seamlessly. I just worry that they'll tinker too much and we'll see a repeat of early 2021 again in 2022.MoragaBear said:Sirmon's the 2nd leading returning tackler in the Pac-12, coach's son or not. When you have the opportunity to add that kind of talent, you take it. Several of Cal's ILB's are well-suited to play outside, too, and a lot of players welcome the opportunity to prove themselves at two positions to increase their draft stock.WalterSobchak said:Or to the portal. This mildly concerns me in terms of chemistry and development, particularly after what happened last season. I just can't wrap my head around messing with something so critical that you just got fixed with young guys stepping up. Slotting in the coach's kid automatically is dangerous, regardless of past performance. Hopefully he performs immediately to the point that there are no questions he's a clear upgrade and whoever gets moved is truly down for it or we may have problems. Add to it that he's got 2 years left and it really has the potential to become an issue imho. Losing even 1 of our "Core 4" over this wouldn't be a good trade given the "years of service" remaining unless he's truly a game changer. Hopefully my concerns will be proven out to be silly. Go Bears!Quote:
Sirmon, the fifth leading tackler in the Pac-12 in 2021 for Washington looks to start for the Bears, potentially causing a shift for one of the Bears' young inside backers to the outside.
Seriously, this is not simply a case of Sirmon wanting something and getting it. He doesn't have the kind of clout. The whole staff wanted it, as would most teams in the league.Big C said:WalterSobchak said:I hope that's true (not saying it isn't, just don't know). I think Oladejo has shown tools that would make him a very intriguing edge rusher. If he wants that opportunity then that would be ideal. I understand the concept of bringing in the best talent you can get. I also have been on teams with coaches' kids. Sometimes it's no problem. Sometimes it is. But nobody ever goes to the coach to complain about their own kid so you can get a whole new dynamic trust wise that can be bad for the team. I think pretending that isn't possible is silly. They're not going to say anything to you if they're upset either. 91 tackles last season is great, I get that. But Oladejo and Ruchena each had 35 or more as true frosh who didn't even begin the season in the rotation or get many starts. Sirmon didn't get to 35 tackles until he was in his third season. So who knows what the upside is for our young guys as they develop and mature. I think best case is Oladejo wants to move outside and excels there, with Sirmon stepping in to elevate the core 4 man ILB rotation seamlessly. I just worry that they'll tinker too much and we'll see a repeat of early 2021 again in 2022.MoragaBear said:Sirmon's the 2nd leading returning tackler in the Pac-12, coach's son or not. When you have the opportunity to add that kind of talent, you take it. Several of Cal's ILB's are well-suited to play outside, too, and a lot of players welcome the opportunity to prove themselves at two positions to increase their draft stock.WalterSobchak said:Or to the portal. This mildly concerns me in terms of chemistry and development, particularly after what happened last season. I just can't wrap my head around messing with something so critical that you just got fixed with young guys stepping up. Slotting in the coach's kid automatically is dangerous, regardless of past performance. Hopefully he performs immediately to the point that there are no questions he's a clear upgrade and whoever gets moved is truly down for it or we may have problems. Add to it that he's got 2 years left and it really has the potential to become an issue imho. Losing even 1 of our "Core 4" over this wouldn't be a good trade given the "years of service" remaining unless he's truly a game changer. Hopefully my concerns will be proven out to be silly. Go Bears!Quote:
Sirmon, the fifth leading tackler in the Pac-12 in 2021 for Washington looks to start for the Bears, potentially causing a shift for one of the Bears' young inside backers to the outside.
I agree with everything you wrote, but in this program, if Peter Sirmon wants something, he seems to get it... and I guess he wanted his son (who seems to be a pretty good ILB) on the team.
If they end up moving somebody to the outside, we have to trust that it is the best person, selected by our expert defensive staff who sees the players every day and thus should be able to make the informed decision.
MB, pre-camp how do you see the defensive front 7 depth chart? The last public chart I know of has some interesting entries imo. Particularly Calhoun who seems to be listed at WILL and SDE, which is odd to me.MoragaBear said:Seriously, this is not simply a case of Sirmon wanting something and getting it. He doesn't have the kind of clout. The whole staff wanted it, as would most teams in the league.Big C said:WalterSobchak said:I hope that's true (not saying it isn't, just don't know). I think Oladejo has shown tools that would make him a very intriguing edge rusher. If he wants that opportunity then that would be ideal. I understand the concept of bringing in the best talent you can get. I also have been on teams with coaches' kids. Sometimes it's no problem. Sometimes it is. But nobody ever goes to the coach to complain about their own kid so you can get a whole new dynamic trust wise that can be bad for the team. I think pretending that isn't possible is silly. They're not going to say anything to you if they're upset either. 91 tackles last season is great, I get that. But Oladejo and Ruchena each had 35 or more as true frosh who didn't even begin the season in the rotation or get many starts. Sirmon didn't get to 35 tackles until he was in his third season. So who knows what the upside is for our young guys as they develop and mature. I think best case is Oladejo wants to move outside and excels there, with Sirmon stepping in to elevate the core 4 man ILB rotation seamlessly. I just worry that they'll tinker too much and we'll see a repeat of early 2021 again in 2022.MoragaBear said:Sirmon's the 2nd leading returning tackler in the Pac-12, coach's son or not. When you have the opportunity to add that kind of talent, you take it. Several of Cal's ILB's are well-suited to play outside, too, and a lot of players welcome the opportunity to prove themselves at two positions to increase their draft stock.WalterSobchak said:Or to the portal. This mildly concerns me in terms of chemistry and development, particularly after what happened last season. I just can't wrap my head around messing with something so critical that you just got fixed with young guys stepping up. Slotting in the coach's kid automatically is dangerous, regardless of past performance. Hopefully he performs immediately to the point that there are no questions he's a clear upgrade and whoever gets moved is truly down for it or we may have problems. Add to it that he's got 2 years left and it really has the potential to become an issue imho. Losing even 1 of our "Core 4" over this wouldn't be a good trade given the "years of service" remaining unless he's truly a game changer. Hopefully my concerns will be proven out to be silly. Go Bears!Quote:
Sirmon, the fifth leading tackler in the Pac-12 in 2021 for Washington looks to start for the Bears, potentially causing a shift for one of the Bears' young inside backers to the outside.
I agree with everything you wrote, but in this program, if Peter Sirmon wants something, he seems to get it... and I guess he wanted his son (who seems to be a pretty good ILB) on the team.
If they end up moving somebody to the outside, we have to trust that it is the best person, selected by our expert defensive staff who sees the players every day and thus should be able to make the informed decision.
Standing pat is not working for them. They need to do everything they can to improve the program.
WalterSobchak said:
I'm not saying we should never take a coach's kid, just that this is a particularly unique situation we've got in this instance. I would've felt much different about it if Sirmon had come on board before last season when we were much more thin at the position and Deng wanted or at least welcomed the move outside. But in hindsight I think it's clear that was a mistake both for him but particularly for the team, except to the extent that it provided a path for the emergence of the "Core 4." Based on the early play of the ILB group it's frankly mind-boggling that they made that move and tends to erode some of the confidence I previously had in defensive personnel decision making. Still, probably the best thing Wilcox and Co. have going is team morale and cohesiveness so they get the benefit of the doubt. I have nothing personal against Sirmon (except his mutt background of course) and although it might not seem like it I am very happy to have him on the team. I just think being welcomed to the team vs. anointed starter before camp even starts when there are already 4 very capable players at the position who played a huge role in salvaging what could be salvaged of the 2021 tinkering mistake are two very different things. I'd take notice of any newcomer being talked about that way. Add to it the problems we had last year after moving our best ILB outside and him being the DC's kid and that's what throws up red flags for me. This is definitely something that's a risk and I will be curious to see how it plays out. A huge caveat is that I'm assuming his starter status is something that has been directly or indirectly communicated to MB and is not editorializing on his part. I have no insight into the inner workings of the team so this could all be needless concern. There's a big difference imo between Oladejo (or someone else) wanting to move and Sirmon coming in to fill his spot in the 4 man rotation vs. Sirmon displacing someone out of the group who doesn't really want to go and/or disrupting the rotation by playing a disproportionate amount of snaps.
By all means improve the program. That said, there are other position groups that require a lot more improvement in terms of talent and production than ILB. Perhaps Cal still has enough schollies to fill those holes. Bringing in one OT would be good, bringing in 2 would be better. And a better use of any schollies we have remaining.MoragaBear said:Seriously, this is not simply a case of Sirmon wanting something and getting it. He doesn't have the kind of clout. The whole staff wanted it, as would most teams in the league.Big C said:WalterSobchak said:I hope that's true (not saying it isn't, just don't know). I think Oladejo has shown tools that would make him a very intriguing edge rusher. If he wants that opportunity then that would be ideal. I understand the concept of bringing in the best talent you can get. I also have been on teams with coaches' kids. Sometimes it's no problem. Sometimes it is. But nobody ever goes to the coach to complain about their own kid so you can get a whole new dynamic trust wise that can be bad for the team. I think pretending that isn't possible is silly. They're not going to say anything to you if they're upset either. 91 tackles last season is great, I get that. But Oladejo and Ruchena each had 35 or more as true frosh who didn't even begin the season in the rotation or get many starts. Sirmon didn't get to 35 tackles until he was in his third season. So who knows what the upside is for our young guys as they develop and mature. I think best case is Oladejo wants to move outside and excels there, with Sirmon stepping in to elevate the core 4 man ILB rotation seamlessly. I just worry that they'll tinker too much and we'll see a repeat of early 2021 again in 2022.MoragaBear said:Sirmon's the 2nd leading returning tackler in the Pac-12, coach's son or not. When you have the opportunity to add that kind of talent, you take it. Several of Cal's ILB's are well-suited to play outside, too, and a lot of players welcome the opportunity to prove themselves at two positions to increase their draft stock.WalterSobchak said:Or to the portal. This mildly concerns me in terms of chemistry and development, particularly after what happened last season. I just can't wrap my head around messing with something so critical that you just got fixed with young guys stepping up. Slotting in the coach's kid automatically is dangerous, regardless of past performance. Hopefully he performs immediately to the point that there are no questions he's a clear upgrade and whoever gets moved is truly down for it or we may have problems. Add to it that he's got 2 years left and it really has the potential to become an issue imho. Losing even 1 of our "Core 4" over this wouldn't be a good trade given the "years of service" remaining unless he's truly a game changer. Hopefully my concerns will be proven out to be silly. Go Bears!Quote:
Sirmon, the fifth leading tackler in the Pac-12 in 2021 for Washington looks to start for the Bears, potentially causing a shift for one of the Bears' young inside backers to the outside.
I agree with everything you wrote, but in this program, if Peter Sirmon wants something, he seems to get it... and I guess he wanted his son (who seems to be a pretty good ILB) on the team.
If they end up moving somebody to the outside, we have to trust that it is the best person, selected by our expert defensive staff who sees the players every day and thus should be able to make the informed decision.
Standing pat is not working for them. They need to do everything they can to improve the program.
Agreed, Kai is better than Zach. Best case for the Bears is that it is a heated battle for the #1 QB spot during Spring and Summer camp. And unlike previous years, perhaps Cal has learned that they need to get some PT for the #2 QB early during the season and preferably throughout the season. Musgrave has been given a lot of passes and doesn't have any left. The offense will go as far as the OL takes them and for 5+ years that hasn't been very far. It does appear that we have more beef and athleticism on OL than recent years and perhaps Angus will mandate that it is open competition for all spots on the OL and that there are no presumptive starters.MoragaBear said:Yesfat_slice said:
In all the articles I've read there is no mention of Zach Johnson as being part of the QB competition despite him appearing to be the #2 after last spring (if my memory serves me right).
Is Kai really that much better than Zach now?
MoragaBear said:Seriously, this is not simply a case of Sirmon wanting something and getting it. He doesn't have the kind of clout. The whole staff wanted it, as would most teams in the league.Big C said:WalterSobchak said:I hope that's true (not saying it isn't, just don't know). I think Oladejo has shown tools that would make him a very intriguing edge rusher. If he wants that opportunity then that would be ideal. I understand the concept of bringing in the best talent you can get. I also have been on teams with coaches' kids. Sometimes it's no problem. Sometimes it is. But nobody ever goes to the coach to complain about their own kid so you can get a whole new dynamic trust wise that can be bad for the team. I think pretending that isn't possible is silly. They're not going to say anything to you if they're upset either. 91 tackles last season is great, I get that. But Oladejo and Ruchena each had 35 or more as true frosh who didn't even begin the season in the rotation or get many starts. Sirmon didn't get to 35 tackles until he was in his third season. So who knows what the upside is for our young guys as they develop and mature. I think best case is Oladejo wants to move outside and excels there, with Sirmon stepping in to elevate the core 4 man ILB rotation seamlessly. I just worry that they'll tinker too much and we'll see a repeat of early 2021 again in 2022.MoragaBear said:Sirmon's the 2nd leading returning tackler in the Pac-12, coach's son or not. When you have the opportunity to add that kind of talent, you take it. Several of Cal's ILB's are well-suited to play outside, too, and a lot of players welcome the opportunity to prove themselves at two positions to increase their draft stock.WalterSobchak said:Or to the portal. This mildly concerns me in terms of chemistry and development, particularly after what happened last season. I just can't wrap my head around messing with something so critical that you just got fixed with young guys stepping up. Slotting in the coach's kid automatically is dangerous, regardless of past performance. Hopefully he performs immediately to the point that there are no questions he's a clear upgrade and whoever gets moved is truly down for it or we may have problems. Add to it that he's got 2 years left and it really has the potential to become an issue imho. Losing even 1 of our "Core 4" over this wouldn't be a good trade given the "years of service" remaining unless he's truly a game changer. Hopefully my concerns will be proven out to be silly. Go Bears!Quote:
Sirmon, the fifth leading tackler in the Pac-12 in 2021 for Washington looks to start for the Bears, potentially causing a shift for one of the Bears' young inside backers to the outside.
I agree with everything you wrote, but in this program, if Peter Sirmon wants something, he seems to get it... and I guess he wanted his son (who seems to be a pretty good ILB) on the team.
If they end up moving somebody to the outside, we have to trust that it is the best person, selected by our expert defensive staff who sees the players every day and thus should be able to make the informed decision.
Standing pat is not working for them. They need to do everything they can to improve the program.
Have you heard whispers of any ILBs wanting to transfer? I hope not. I agree that we don't want to lose Ruchena, Pastor or Oladejo. But there is good opportunity at OLB and LBs move around all of the time, usually to their benefit. I think Cal does it every year, more or less so nobody should be surprised that it is happening this year.fat_slice said:Rushinbear said:There's no issue of ethics here. This isn't the City Council. Every coach knows that he is judged by results and that he would be out if he didn't get them.fat_slice said:WalterSobchak said:I hope that's true (not saying it isn't, just don't know). I think Oladejo has shown tools that would make him a very intriguing edge rusher. If he wants that opportunity then that would be ideal. I understand the concept of bringing in the best talent you can get. I also have been on teams with coaches' kids. Sometimes it's no problem. Sometimes it is. But nobody ever goes to the coach to complain about their own kid so you can get a whole new dynamic trust wise that can be bad for the team. I think pretending that isn't possible is silly. They're not going to say anything to you if they're upset either. 91 tackles last season is great, I get that. But Oladejo and Ruchena each had 35 or more as true frosh who didn't even begin the season in the rotation or get many starts. Sirmon didn't get to 35 tackles until he was in his third season. So who knows what the upside is for our young guys as they develop and mature. I think best case is Oladejo wants to move outside and excels there, with Sirmon stepping in to elevate the core 4 man ILB rotation seamlessly. I just worry that they'll tinker too much and we'll see a repeat of early 2021 again in 2022.MoragaBear said:Sirmon's the 2nd leading returning tackler in the Pac-12, coach's son or not. When you have the opportunity to add that kind of talent, you take it. Several of Cal's ILB's are well-suited to play outside, too, and a lot of players welcome the opportunity to prove themselves at two positions to increase their draft stock.WalterSobchak said:Or to the portal. This mildly concerns me in terms of chemistry and development, particularly after what happened last season. I just can't wrap my head around messing with something so critical that you just got fixed with young guys stepping up. Slotting in the coach's kid automatically is dangerous, regardless of past performance. Hopefully he performs immediately to the point that there are no questions he's a clear upgrade and whoever gets moved is truly down for it or we may have problems. Add to it that he's got 2 years left and it really has the potential to become an issue imho. Losing even 1 of our "Core 4" over this wouldn't be a good trade given the "years of service" remaining unless he's truly a game changer. Hopefully my concerns will be proven out to be silly. Go Bears!Quote:
Sirmon, the fifth leading tackler in the Pac-12 in 2021 for Washington looks to start for the Bears, potentially causing a shift for one of the Bears' young inside backers to the outside.
I think it should be policy to not take family members in - avoid even the appearance of conflict of interest. If we want to be that ethical program, this is the route to go. Obviously not the route we are taking and I hope he is truly additive to the team though!
Your post is just pot stirring.
Not trying to stir the pot at all. In this particular instance it might be fine and dandy. But as a general rule you want to avoid even the appearance of conflict of interest. Some asset management firms forbid employees to buy individual stocks precisely for this reason. Sure in some cases there might not be any ill intent but if something goes awry, you don't want it to come biting you back in the butt.
That said, the consequences in the financial world are much more serious than in the football world so I think the valid argument here might be, "this is football who cares." If you can navigate the potential issues that other posters mentioned above (not just in this scenario but also in future ones) I guess go for it.
Rushinbear said:There's no issue of ethics here. This isn't the City Council. Every coach knows that he is judged by results and that he would be out if he didn't get them.fat_slice said:WalterSobchak said:I hope that's true (not saying it isn't, just don't know). I think Oladejo has shown tools that would make him a very intriguing edge rusher. If he wants that opportunity then that would be ideal. I understand the concept of bringing in the best talent you can get. I also have been on teams with coaches' kids. Sometimes it's no problem. Sometimes it is. But nobody ever goes to the coach to complain about their own kid so you can get a whole new dynamic trust wise that can be bad for the team. I think pretending that isn't possible is silly. They're not going to say anything to you if they're upset either. 91 tackles last season is great, I get that. But Oladejo and Ruchena each had 35 or more as true frosh who didn't even begin the season in the rotation or get many starts. Sirmon didn't get to 35 tackles until he was in his third season. So who knows what the upside is for our young guys as they develop and mature. I think best case is Oladejo wants to move outside and excels there, with Sirmon stepping in to elevate the core 4 man ILB rotation seamlessly. I just worry that they'll tinker too much and we'll see a repeat of early 2021 again in 2022.MoragaBear said:Sirmon's the 2nd leading returning tackler in the Pac-12, coach's son or not. When you have the opportunity to add that kind of talent, you take it. Several of Cal's ILB's are well-suited to play outside, too, and a lot of players welcome the opportunity to prove themselves at two positions to increase their draft stock.WalterSobchak said:Or to the portal. This mildly concerns me in terms of chemistry and development, particularly after what happened last season. I just can't wrap my head around messing with something so critical that you just got fixed with young guys stepping up. Slotting in the coach's kid automatically is dangerous, regardless of past performance. Hopefully he performs immediately to the point that there are no questions he's a clear upgrade and whoever gets moved is truly down for it or we may have problems. Add to it that he's got 2 years left and it really has the potential to become an issue imho. Losing even 1 of our "Core 4" over this wouldn't be a good trade given the "years of service" remaining unless he's truly a game changer. Hopefully my concerns will be proven out to be silly. Go Bears!Quote:
Sirmon, the fifth leading tackler in the Pac-12 in 2021 for Washington looks to start for the Bears, potentially causing a shift for one of the Bears' young inside backers to the outside.
I think it should be policy to not take family members in - avoid even the appearance of conflict of interest. If we want to be that ethical program, this is the route to go. Obviously not the route we are taking and I hope he is truly additive to the team though!
Your post is just pot stirring.
Anthony Felder 2005: 12 games, 25 solo, 14 assisted, 39 totalducky23 said:
Who is this "core four" I keep hearing about?
Are follett, bishop, felder and Williams back on the team?
Oh, they aren't?
Oh we're talking about a bunch of unproven (albeit "possibly" talented) inside linebackers?
And we shouldn't bring in a guy who is more proven then any other ILB we have cause apparently we want to avoid any appearance of nepotism?
I honestly don't know why this keeps coming up. It's beyond stupid.
Oh hey, look who had 91 tackles this season as a true soph and is nowWalterSobchak said:I hope that's true (not saying it isn't, just don't know). I think Oladejo has shown tools that would make him a very intriguing edge rusher. If he wants that opportunity then that would be ideal. I understand the concept of bringing in the best talent you can get. I also have been on teams with coaches' kids. Sometimes it's no problem. Sometimes it is. But nobody ever goes to the coach to complain about their own kid so you can get a whole new dynamic trust wise that can be bad for the team. I think pretending that isn't possible is silly. They're not going to say anything to you if they're upset either. 91 tackles last season is great, I get that. But Oladejo and Ruchena each had 35 or more as true frosh who didn't even begin the season in the rotation or get many starts. Sirmon didn't get to 35 tackles until he was in his third season. So who knows what the upside is for our young guys as they develop and mature. I think best case is Oladejo wants to move outside and excels there, with Sirmon stepping in to elevate the core 4 man ILB rotation seamlessly. I just worry that they'll tinker too much and we'll see a repeat of early 2021 again in 2022.MoragaBear said:Sirmon's the 2nd leading returning tackler in the Pac-12, coach's son or not. When you have the opportunity to add that kind of talent, you take it. Several of Cal's ILB's are well-suited to play outside, too, and a lot of players welcome the opportunity to prove themselves at two positions to increase their draft stock.WalterSobchak said:Or to the portal. This mildly concerns me in terms of chemistry and development, particularly after what happened last season. I just can't wrap my head around messing with something so critical that you just got fixed with young guys stepping up. Slotting in the coach's kid automatically is dangerous, regardless of past performance. Hopefully he performs immediately to the point that there are no questions he's a clear upgrade and whoever gets moved is truly down for it or we may have problems. Add to it that he's got 2 years left and it really has the potential to become an issue imho. Losing even 1 of our "Core 4" over this wouldn't be a good trade given the "years of service" remaining unless he's truly a game changer. Hopefully my concerns will be proven out to be silly. Go Bears!Quote:
Sirmon, the fifth leading tackler in the Pac-12 in 2021 for Washington looks to start for the Bears, potentially causing a shift for one of the Bears' young inside backers to the outside.
— Trey Paster (@treypasterr) December 6, 2022
I'm just hoping I don't have to bump this thread again.79 Bear said:
Wow, sounds like you're happy about this.
