Maybe this is booth, maybe it's on the paid board so people feel like it can't be discussed, but this is a public tweet and seems pretty noteworthy. Begs the question whether Plummer was hurt, and if so, why he played if we had two weeks to prepare someone else. Didn't seem to get hurt in the game, didn't look hurt at all, and had two weeks rest. In any event, this makes me even more worried about Saturday. One thing that was notably missing from our "lack of" run game last week was Plummer not running at all. If he IS healthy, that's just one more inexcusable Musgrave gaffe.

Cal OC Bill Musgrave noted that there's a chance we'll see backup QB Kai Millner play on Saturday as they continue to monitor starting QB Jack Plummer's health pic.twitter.com/xsi8f7SMJY

— Jim McGill (@BearInsider_com) October 18, 2022

I found it extremely bizarre that in what was supposed to be a low stakes game, behind a recovering Plummer, we did not give Milner any reps. Especially with the meat of the schedule ahead of us.

oscarsBBurger said:

---

I found it extremely bizarre that in what was supposed to be a low stakes game, behind a recovering Plummer, we did not give Milner any reps. Especially with the meat of the schedule ahead of us.

---

Surprise for the Huskies. Can't show our hand. Been holding this out til now.

oscarsBBurger said:

---

I found it extremely bizarre that in what was supposed to be a low stakes game, behind a recovering Plummer, we did not give Milner any reps. Especially with the meat of the schedule ahead of us.

---

The use (non use) of back up QBs by this staff baffles me. Are they not prepared? If, so why? Do they think the starter will never sprain an ankle - or what? Back-up QBs seem to shine against us.

bipolarbear said:

---

oscarsBBurger said:

---

I found it extremely bizarre that in what was supposed to be a low stakes game, behind a recovering Plummer, we did not give Milner any reps. Especially with the meat of the schedule ahead of us.

---

The use (non use) of back up QBs by this staff baffles me. Are they not prepared? If, so why? Do they think the starter will never sprain an ankle - or what? Back-up QBs seem to shine against us.

---

It's because over the past decade or so our backups have been terrible.

We have very little depth at the QB position.

Hopefully, Millner breaks that trend.

We needed a spark against the Buffs, and there is only so much "coaching" Wilcox and friends could do. I feel like a QB change could have excited things, I mean, it literally couldn't have gone any worse, could it?

oscarsBBurger said:

---

I found it extremely bizarre that in what was supposed to be a low stakes game, behind a recovering Plummer, we did not give Milner any reps. Especially with the meat of the schedule ahead of us.

---

You mean the game Cal lost? They should have played the back up to plan for future games? Talk about bizarre.

He's hurt and been hurt.

It was a bad look, the way they left a limping Plummer in there against WSU (hopefully the med staff knew he'd be okay).

If Plummer can't go, I'd love to see Ol' Double L Millner give it a whirl!

bearsandgiants said:

---

Maybe this is booth, maybe it's on the paid board so people feel like it can't be discussed, but this is a public tweet and seems pretty noteworthy. Begs the question whether Plummer was hurt, and if so, why he played if we had two weeks to prepare someone else. Didn't seem to get hurt in the game, didn't look hurt at all, and had two weeks rest. In any event, this makes me even more worried about Saturday. One thing that was notably missing from our "lack of" run game last week was Plummer not running at all. If he IS healthy, that's just one more inexcusable Musgrave gaffe.

Cal OC Bill Musgrave noted that there's a chance we'll see backup QB Kai Millner play on Saturday as they continue to monitor starting QB Jack Plummer's health pic.twitter.com/xsi8f7SMJY

— Jim McGill (@BearInsider_com) October 18, 2022

---

IIRC, during the Colorado game, one of the announcers mentioned something about an injury to Plummer's knee and gave that as the reason why he was wearing a knee brace.

oscarsBBurger said:

---

I found it extremely bizarre that in what was supposed to be a low stakes game, behind a recovering Plummer, we did not give Milner any reps. Especially with the meat of the schedule ahead of us.

---

Colorado was a low stakes game?
It wasn't to me.

If Millner was actually going to play, Musgrave would not have said so.
I'm guessing Plummer will continue to be out there fighting it out.
But it could get ugly quick because the Cal OL vs. the UW DL is one of the worst matchups on the year. It will probably look a lot like the WSU game.

The thought has occured to me that Millner might need to play just to keep Plummer from missing the rest of the year. That does not mean that, under normal circumstance (ie.a half decent OL) Plummer would be too injured to play.

sluggo said:

---

oscarsBBurger said:

---

I found it extremely bizarre that in what was supposed to be a low stakes game, behind a recovering Plummer, we did not give Milner any reps. Especially with the meat of the schedule ahead of us.

---

You mean the game Cal lost? They should have played the back up to plan for future games? Talk about bizarre.

---

Not only that but lost in OT, probably on a bad call.

The coaches absolutely needed to do whatever they needed to do to win. However, only running Ott up the middle against a stacked box and passing twice as much as running while making only limited use of play action was not the way to do it and switching QBs and running the same game plan is not the obvious answer.

The handling of the QB situation is one of the many things that this coaching staff does not do well.

heartofthebear said:

---

oscarsBBurger said:

---

I found it extremely bizarre that in what was supposed to be a low stakes game, behind a recovering Plummer, we did not give Milner any reps. Especially with the meat of the schedule ahead of us.

---

Colorado was a low stakes game?
It wasn't to me.

---

Seriously. Low stakes? It was a MUST WIN game. Problem is, we lost it.

The time to play Milner was:
- Against WSU once the game was out of reach.
- If Plummer is injured enough that he is worse than Milner (not sure if this was the case against CU).

OneKeg said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

oscarsBBurger said:

---

I found it extremely bizarre that in what was supposed to be a low stakes game, behind a recovering Plummer, we did not give Milner any reps. Especially with the meat of the schedule ahead of us.

---

Colorado was a low stakes game?
It wasn't to me.

---

Seriously. Low stakes? It was a MUST WIN game. Problem is, we lost it.

The time to play Milner was:
- Against WSU once the game was out of reach.
- If Plummer is injured enough that he is worse than Milner (not sure if this was the case against CU).

---

Folks want to see Millner.
Be careful what you wish for.

heartofthebear said:

---

OneKeg said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

oscarsBBurger said:

---

I found it extremely bizarre that in what was supposed to be a low stakes game, behind a recovering Plummer, we did not give Milner any reps. Especially with the meat of the schedule ahead of us.

---

Colorado was a low stakes game?
It wasn't to me.

---

Seriously. Low stakes? It was a MUST WIN game. Problem is, we lost it.

The time to play Milner was:
- Against WSU once the game was out of reach.
- If Plummer is injured enough that he is worse than Milner (not sure if this was the case against CU).

---

Folks want to see Millner.
Be careful what you wish for.

---

If he can't play very well (yet, or ever), at least we would know that.

Big C said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

OneKeg said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

oscarsBBurger said:

---

I found it extremely bizarre that in what was supposed to be a low stakes game, behind a recovering Plummer, we did not give Milner any reps. Especially with the meat of the schedule ahead of us.

---

Colorado was a low stakes game?
It wasn't to me.

---

Seriously. Low stakes? It was a MUST WIN game. Problem is, we lost it.

The time to play Milner was:
- Against WSU once the game was out of reach.
- If Plummer is injured enough that he is worse than Milner (not sure if this was the case against CU).

---

Folks want to see Millner.
Be careful what you wish for.

---

If he can't play (yet, or ever), well, at least we know that.

---

If knowledge is what you are after, let me tell you that an injured Plummer playing at the level he played against Colorado is better than Millner. To be specific, Millner would have been great to see against UC Davis or maybe Furd, if we get a big lead. Otherwise you don't really want to see him because he is not yet ready for prime time. He is less accurate than Plummer, even on short passes. He has less zip on the ball, is more indecisive with the ball and has more trouble finding receivers. He gets sacked more and throws more INTs.

So now you know.
No need to have him play.

But, if he must play, I'm sure it will help him and the team long term.
But, be careful what you wish for, because, if you're hoping for some kind of short term miracle off the bench, it won't happen. And the season will become even more bleak than it is now.

I'll admit that Plummer has been somewhat disappointing to me, even when he was healthy. His mechanics are off causing overthrows consistently.

I actually think he was better in spring and fall camps. I'm sure the constant pressure has thrown off his timing so much that it is now messing with his mechanics. And I don't think the coaches are helping him much. He is probably riding on the momentum of whatever coaching he got in Indiana.

But I would much rather have Plummer than Millner unless it is a serious risk to Plummer to play. I'm guessing from what I've heard from Plummer in interviews that Plummer wants to play if the doctors clear him, no matter how sore or limited he is. And I'm also guessing that the coaches will honor that unless he gets further injuries or his existing knee issue significantly worsens.

It is very concerning to me what might happen to any of our QBs this Saturday evening if Greatwood/McClure/Musgrave can't rediscover the OL we had our last home game because the Washington DL vs. Cal OL matchup is a horror show waiting to happen somewhat like the WSU game.

Just to be clear. I'm not saying Millner won't ever be ready. I expect him to compete next year, especially if Plummer doesn't return. But Mendoza is also someone to consider. I'd just as soon see him get a shot. Mendoza would be more likely to provide that miracle off the bench. He has much better QB instincts than Millner and tends to be more accurate too with better zip.

heartofthebear said:

---

Big C said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

OneKeg said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

oscarsBBurger said:

---

I found it extremely bizarre that in what was supposed to be a low stakes game, behind a recovering Plummer, we did not give Milner any reps. Especially with the meat of the schedule ahead of us.

---

Colorado was a low stakes game?
It wasn't to me.

---

Seriously. Low stakes? It was a MUST WIN game. Problem is, we lost it.

The time to play Milner was:
- Against WSU once the game was out of reach.
- If Plummer is injured enough that he is worse than Milner (not sure if this was the case against CU).

---

Folks want to see Millner.
Be careful what you wish for.

---

If he can't play (yet, or ever), well, at least we know that.

---

If knowledge is what you are after, let me tell you that an injured Plummer playing at the level he played against Colorado is better than Millner. To be specific, Millner would have been great to see against UC Davis or maybe Furd, if we get a big lead. Otherwise you don't really want to see him because he is not yet ready for prime time. He is less accurate than Plummer, even on short passes. He has less zip on the ball, is more indecisive with the ball and has more trouble finding receivers. He gets sacked more and throws more INTs.

So now you know.
No need to have him play.

But, if he must play, I'm sure it will help him and the team long term.
But, be careful what you wish for, because, if you're hoping for some kind of short term miracle off the bench, it won't happen. And the season will become even more bleak than it is now.

I'll admit that Plummer has been somewhat disappointing to me, even when he was healthy. His mechanics are off causing overthrows consistently.

I actually think he was better in spring and fall camps. I'm sure the constant pressure has thrown off his timing so much that it is now messing with his mechanics. And I don't think the coaches are helping him much. He is probably riding on the momentum of whatever coaching he got in Indiana.

But I would much rather have Plummer than Millner unless it is a serious risk to Plummer to play. I'm guessing from what I've heard from Plummer in interviews that Plummer wants to play if the doctors clear him, no matter how sore or limited he is. And I'm also guessing that the coaches will honor that unless he gets further injuries or his existing knee issue significantly worsens.

It is very concerning to me what might happen to any of our QBs this Saturday evening if Greatwood/McClure/Musgrave can't rediscover the OL we had our last home game because the Washington DL vs. Cal OL matchup is a horror show waiting to happen somewhat like the WSU game.

Just to be clear. I'm not saying Millner won't ever be ready. I expect him to compete next year, especially if Plummer doesn't return. But Mendoza is also someone to consider. I'd just as soon see him get a shot. Mendoza would be more likely to provide that miracle off the bench. He has much better QB instincts than Millner and tends to be more accurate too with better zip.

---

Plummer has been better under pressure, which we knew was coming, than I expected. His accuracy has been worse, but Musgrave has him making difficult throws.

We need to be throwing off play-action on first down, or other believable running situations. Play action on third and long fools no one.

Plummer, throwing slants off play action, pitch and catch to the TE over the middle off play action, shuttle passes back to the RB off play action (after the DL runs past), deep throws to the middle off of play action, wheel routes to the RB off play action…

Or if Plummer is hurt, Mendoza if you think Milner is not capable. Though I thought Milner is a good runner? If so, bootlegs off of play action with an option to take off running if the first down is open.

Re; quarterbacks - so disappointing that it's been a good 10 years since we recruited an excellent high school passing quarterback. (Goff by Tedford) Dykes never got one and Wilcox, now in his 6th year, hasn't either. Recruiting for such has failed miserably under Wilcox - and the handling of the position has also failed under Wilcox. A back up qb should always get playing time in first 3 games of the season, no matter how unready he might be. I don't think an example's needed here but here's one anyway; last year's Arizona game.

heartofthebear said:

---

If Millner was actually going to play, Musgrave would not have said so.
I'm guessing Plummer will continue to be out there fighting it out.
But it could get ugly quick because the Cal OL vs. the UW DL is one of the worst matchups on the year. It will probably look a lot like the WSU game.

The thought has occured to me that Millner might need to play just to keep Plummer from missing the rest of the year. That does not mean that, under normal circumstance (ie.a half decent OL) Plummer would be too injured to play.

---

Agree. Depends on how the game shapes up. Big lead? (not probable) or losing big? (more probable). I think Plummer plays if it's competitive. Why go with inexperience if it's close?? The notion that Millner might excite or "stir things up" seems silly in the passing/timing game that we may need?

HeartoftheBear brings up some interesting points. I have to take them at face value, since I don't see practices but his points raise the following questions:

Why can other schools take a 4* QB recruit, have him redshirt his first year to learn, and then have a competent starter, while at Cal, the coaches are afraid to even put the guy in the game?

Like Millner, Bowers and Garbers were 4* QBs and yet neither developed into more than a average-to-good P5 college QB. Is that the fault of coaching, talent, or does it underscore the uselessness of HS player ratings?

If Millner has lousy QB instincts, why did Cal recruit him? Did Musgrave recognize this and figure he could coach him up?

What kind of coaching do the backup QBs get during the season? Since Musgrave is both OC and QB coach, does he spend any focused time with the backup QBs once the season begins? Should the jobs be split?

In a practice, if the starting QB is running the first-string offense and the scout-team QB is running the scout-team offense, what do the other QBs do?

Dgoldnbaer said:

---

Re; quarterbacks - so disappointing that it's been a good 10 years since we recruited an excellent high school passing quarterback. (Goff by Tedford) Dykes never got one and Wilcox, now in his 6th year, hasn't either. Recruiting for such has failed miserably under Wilcox - and the handling of the position has also failed under Wilcox. A back up qb should always get playing time in first 3 games of the season, no matter how unready he might be. I don't think an example's needed here but here's one anyway; last year's Arizona game.

---

Though prior to Goff, in 11 years of Tedford it was what, Longshore and Riley? Nobody even on an NFL practice squad. At least Garbers achieved that. And Tedford never coached Goff, who was a legacy and was going to Cal no matter who was the coach.

Who would be the last Cal QB recruited out of HS and developed by the coach who recruited him who then went on to play in the NFL? How far back do we have to go?

calumnus said:

---

Dgoldnbaer said:

---

Re; quarterbacks - so disappointing that it's been a good 10 years since we recruited an excellent high school passing quarterback. (Goff by Tedford) Dykes never got one and Wilcox, now in his 6th year, hasn't either. Recruiting for such has failed miserably under Wilcox - and the handling of the position has also failed under Wilcox. A back up qb should always get playing time in first 3 games of the season, no matter how unready he might be. I don't think an example's needed here but here's one anyway; last year's Arizona game.

---

Who would be the last Cal QB recruited out of HS and developed by the coach who recruited him who then went on to play in the NFL? How far back do we have to go?

---

Bartkowski.

There haven't been that many Cal QBs who got meaningful snaps in the NFL. After Bart, it's Boller - and he was recruited by Holmoe/developed by Tedford.

JSC 76 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Dgoldnbaer said:

---

Re; quarterbacks - so disappointing that it's been a good 10 years since we recruited an excellent high school passing quarterback. (Goff by Tedford) Dykes never got one and Wilcox, now in his 6th year, hasn't either. Recruiting for such has failed miserably under Wilcox - and the handling of the position has also failed under Wilcox. A back up qb should always get playing time in first 3 games of the season, no matter how unready he might be. I don't think an example's needed here but here's one anyway; last year's Arizona game.

---

Who would be the last Cal QB recruited out of HS and developed by the coach who recruited him who then went on to play in the NFL? How far back do we have to go?

---

Bartkowski.

There haven't been that many Cal QBs who got meaningful snaps in the NFL. After Bart, it's Boller - and he was recruited by Holmoe/developed by Tedford.

---

Interestingly enough, not so. I'm almost positive Bartkowski was recruited by Willsey because he was a sophomore during Mike White's first year. However Ferragamo does fit your criteria. And Rich Campbell preceded Boller, although I think Theder was his coach during his last two years.

I watching a game during Campbell's senior year and a guy sat next to me and we were chatting. He talked about how Cal was really becoming the premier QB school on the west coast and then said he had to leave. I shook his hand and introduced myself and he replied, "I'm Leigh Steinberg".

Gale Gilbert came after Campbell - am pretty sure he was recruited by Kapp. He played behind Jim Kelly for so long it seems like he's still there! I used to think Dave Barr had excellent NFL potential - was accurate & could throw deep - footwork a bit slow.

HearstMining said:

---

JSC 76 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Dgoldnbaer said:

---

Re; quarterbacks - so disappointing that it's been a good 10 years since we recruited an excellent high school passing quarterback. (Goff by Tedford) Dykes never got one and Wilcox, now in his 6th year, hasn't either. Recruiting for such has failed miserably under Wilcox - and the handling of the position has also failed under Wilcox. A back up qb should always get playing time in first 3 games of the season, no matter how unready he might be. I don't think an example's needed here but here's one anyway; last year's Arizona game.

---

Who would be the last Cal QB recruited out of HS and developed by the coach who recruited him who then went on to play in the NFL? How far back do we have to go?

---

Bartkowski.

There haven't been that many Cal QBs who got meaningful snaps in the NFL. After Bart, it's Boller - and he was recruited by Holmoe/developed by Tedford.

---

Interestingly enough, not so. I'm almost positive Bartkowski was recruited by Willsey because he was a sophomore during Mike White's first year. However Ferragamo does fit your criteria. And Rich Campbell preceded Boller, although I think Theder was his coach during his last two years.

I watching a game during Campbell's senior year and a guy sat next to me and we were chatting. He talked about how Cal was really becoming the premier QB school on the west coast and then said he had to leave. I shook his hand and introduced myself and he replied, "I'm Leigh Steinberg".

---

Rich Campbell was recruited by Mike White. I believe he came the same year as Art West, who was highly recruited but never played.

Dgoldnbaer said:

---

Gale Gilbert came after Campbell - am pretty sure he was recruited by Kapp. He played behind Jim Kelly for so long it seems like he's still there! I used to think Dave Barr had excellent NFL potential - was accurate & could throw deep - footwork a bit slow.

---

Gilbert was a freshman in 1981, so he was recruited by and was initially coached by Theder.

HearstMining said:

---

JSC 76 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Dgoldnbaer said:

---

Re; quarterbacks - so disappointing that it's been a good 10 years since we recruited an excellent high school passing quarterback. (Goff by Tedford) Dykes never got one and Wilcox, now in his 6th year, hasn't either. Recruiting for such has failed miserably under Wilcox - and the handling of the position has also failed under Wilcox. A back up qb should always get playing time in first 3 games of the season, no matter how unready he might be. I don't think an example's needed here but here's one anyway; last year's Arizona game.

---

Who would be the last Cal QB recruited out of HS and developed by the coach who recruited him who then went on to play in the NFL? How far back do we have to go?

---

Bartkowski.

There haven't been that many Cal QBs who got meaningful snaps in the NFL. After Bart, it's Boller - and he was recruited by Holmoe/developed by Tedford.

---

Interestingly enough, not so. I'm almost positive Bartkowski was recruited by Willsey because he was a sophomore during Mike White's first year. However Ferragamo does fit your criteria. And Rich Campbell preceded Boller, although I think Theder was his coach during his last two years.

I watching a game during Campbell's senior year and a guy sat next to me and we were chatting. He talked about how Cal was really becoming the premier QB school on the west coast and then said he had to leave. I shook his hand and introduced myself and he replied, "I'm Leigh Steinberg".

---

Ferragamo went to the NFL from Nebraska, so no way he counts.

Did some research - you are 100% correct. I will hold myself accountable!

I disagree here - since the dentist to be was recruited by White, he definitely counts as a freshman qb we recruited & made it in the NFL.

Dgoldnbaer said:

---

I disagree here - since the dentist to be was recruited by White, he definitely counts as a freshman qb we recruited & made it in the NFL.

---

Then so does Goff and Garbers.

Of course they do!

If we're down by 28 by middle of 3rd qtr then Millner should get some playing time. Shame on Wilcox if this scenario is there & he stays w/Plummer. If chance of winning is gone, go w/backup.

calumnus said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Big C said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

OneKeg said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

oscarsBBurger said:

---

I found it extremely bizarre that in what was supposed to be a low stakes game, behind a recovering Plummer, we did not give Milner any reps. Especially with the meat of the schedule ahead of us.

---

Colorado was a low stakes game?
It wasn't to me.

---

Seriously. Low stakes? It was a MUST WIN game. Problem is, we lost it.

The time to play Milner was:
- Against WSU once the game was out of reach.
- If Plummer is injured enough that he is worse than Milner (not sure if this was the case against CU).

---

Folks want to see Millner.
Be careful what you wish for.

---

If he can't play (yet, or ever), well, at least we know that.

---

If knowledge is what you are after, let me tell you that an injured Plummer playing at the level he played against Colorado is better than Millner. To be specific, Millner would have been great to see against UC Davis or maybe Furd, if we get a big lead. Otherwise you don't really want to see him because he is not yet ready for prime time. He is less accurate than Plummer, even on short passes. He has less zip on the ball, is more indecisive with the ball and has more trouble finding receivers. He gets sacked more and throws more INTs.

So now you know.
No need to have him play.

But, if he must play, I'm sure it will help him and the team long term.
But, be careful what you wish for, because, if you're hoping for some kind of short term miracle off the bench, it won't happen. And the season will become even more bleak than it is now.

I'll admit that Plummer has been somewhat disappointing to me, even when he was healthy. His mechanics are off causing overthrows consistently.

I actually think he was better in spring and fall camps. I'm sure the constant pressure has thrown off his timing so much that it is now messing with his mechanics. And I don't think the coaches are helping him much. He is probably riding on the momentum of whatever coaching he got in Indiana.

But I would much rather have Plummer than Millner unless it is a serious risk to Plummer to play. I'm guessing from what I've heard from Plummer in interviews that Plummer wants to play if the doctors clear him, no matter how sore or limited he is. And I'm also guessing that the coaches will honor that unless he gets further injuries or his existing knee issue significantly worsens.

It is very concerning to me what might happen to any of our QBs this Saturday evening if Greatwood/McClure/Musgrave can't rediscover the OL we had our last home game because the Washington DL vs. Cal OL matchup is a horror show waiting to happen somewhat like the WSU game.

Just to be clear. I'm not saying Millner won't ever be ready. I expect him to compete next year, especially if Plummer doesn't return. But Mendoza is also someone to consider. I'd just as soon see him get a shot. Mendoza would be more likely to provide that miracle off the bench. He has much better QB instincts than Millner and tends to be more accurate too with better zip.

---

Plummer has been better under pressure, which we knew was coming, than I expected. His accuracy has been worse, but Musgrave has him making difficult throws.

We need to be throwing off play-action on first down, or other believable running situations. Play action on third and long fools no one.

Plummer, throwing slants off play action, pitch and catch to the TE over the middle off play action, shuttle passes back to the RB off play action (after the DL runs past), deep throws to the middle off of play action, wheel routes to the RB off play action…

Or if Plummer is hurt, Mendoza if you think Milner is not capable. Though I thought Milner is a good runner? If so, bootlegs off of play action with an option to take off running if the first down is open.

---

It took me a while and I'm coming around to your way of thinking. Play calling is the issue. See my latest thread.