HungryCalBear said:
Mendoza played well, showing a lot more poise than the two QBs ahead of him. What's worrisome is our coaches ranked them higher than Mendoza earlier on.
We would have won the auburn game with Mendozacalumnus said:HungryCalBear said:
Mendoza played well, showing a lot more poise than the two QBs ahead of him. What's worrisome is our coaches ranked them higher than Mendoza earlier on.
We have been hearing good things about Mendoza for two years. Mendoza could have easily had meaningful reps in relief sooner. I especially don't understand the time Finley has gotten since he does not have a strong arm, mobility or even good decision making.
It will now be a question if Mendoza would have beat Auburn or UW, but good that he showed starting capability on his first start in college against a ranked OSU team.
The play calling was good today, probably the best in 7 years, but could be better. I still want to get the ball in to our speed backs outside. However, play action gave Mendoza easy throws to the tight end over the middle that coukd have been a staple for the last 6.5 years.
ST and defense is the issue today.
But back to the topic, Mendoza could be really good 3 years from now.
TedfordTheGreat said:We would have won the auburn game with Mendozacalumnus said:HungryCalBear said:
Mendoza played well, showing a lot more poise than the two QBs ahead of him. What's worrisome is our coaches ranked them higher than Mendoza earlier on.
We have been hearing good things about Mendoza for two years. Mendoza could have easily had meaningful reps in relief sooner. I especially don't understand the time Finley has gotten since he does not have a strong arm, mobility or even good decision making.
It will now be a question if Mendoza would have beat Auburn or UW, but good that he showed starting capability on his first start in college against a ranked OSU team.
The play calling was good today, probably the best in 7 years, but could be better. I still want to get the ball in to our speed backs outside. However, play action gave Mendoza easy throws to the tight end over the middle that coukd have been a staple for the last 6.5 years.
ST and defense is the issue today.
But back to the topic, Mendoza could be really good 3 years from now.
I think we still lose against UW. The pac 12 is tough this year and we don't have the lines on both sides.
I am the founding member of the Mendoza fan club and I approve this message.bearister said:
First start vs Oregon State
21/32 207yds 6.5 yds avg. 2 TD 1 INT
Nofado said:
He reminds me of Pat Barnes
in what sense exactly?Nofado said:
He reminds me of Pat Barnes
I was actually humming this tune this AM!CALiforniALUM said:
Can you hear the Tuba Fernando?
I remember long ago another starry night like this
In the Strawberry night Fernando
You were humming to yourself and softly strumming your playbook
I could hear the distant mic man
And sounds of bugle calls were coming from afar
They were closer now Fernando
Every hour every minute seemed to last eternally
I was so afraid Fernando
We were young and full of life and none of us prepared to win
And I'm not ashamed to say
The roar of guns and cannons off tightwad hill almost made me cry
There was something in the Pac-12 Late night
The stars were bright, Fernando
They were shining there for you and me
For Oski, Fernando
Though I never thought that we could lose
There's no regret
If I had to do the same again
I would, my friend, Fernando
If I had to do the same again
I would, my friend, Fernando
Now we're old and grey [bear] Fernando
And since many years I haven't seen a Rose Bowl in hand
Can you hear the drums Fernando?
Do you still recall the frightful night we crossed the San Mateo Bridge?
I can see it in your eyes
How proud you were to fight for Oski on their field
There was something in the air that night
The stars were bright, Fernando
They were shining there for you and me
For Oski, Fernando
Though I never thought that we could win
There's no regret
If I had to do the same again
I would, my friend, Fernando
Yes, if I had to do the same again
I would, my friend, Fernando...
Fernandito!bearister said:
First start vs Oregon State
21/32 207yds 6.5 yds avg. 2 TD 1 INT
Things like this makes me feel that Wilcox is a really poor evaluator of talent. Maybe he's been at Cal for too long, but i feel that our offense and defense makes each other look better in practice than they actually are. Like maybe SJV is doing great and making passes in practice, but its because our DB cant cover worth a damn. Our WRs look great and gets separation, again maybe its because our DB are slow.Goof Ball Bear said:
This. Mendoza has much more poise than either of the other two. This was his first game. Period. 40 points. I have said SJV needs to be developed but he is not the QB that Mendoza presented today.
That he was behind four other QBs is beyond me except for Plummer. I agree with everyone that we win the Auburn game with him. We should have won with SJV too.
I believe you should develop your most talented player in the absence of an established one. Mendoza looked like an established QB by the 2nd quarter. He has better touch on his passes and is more accurate than the other two. This says more about the coaches than anything.
The posters cheering for Mondoza were right. He's the one we need to work with. This wasn't North Texas or Idaho. However I am deeply bothered by our coaching decisions. I know this is just one game, but this seems clear cut.
They paid the other two qb's nil money to come here and did not want to look foolish.Gary Grauman, Steve Levy,Goof Ball Bear said:
Exactly. I am not really a Wilcox fan, but I wanted to give him more credit for whatever skills he has than this. I can't even believe the difference between Mendoza and the other two. Makes you wonder where else we are making such decisions amongst the roster. This was dude's FIRST game. He puts up 40 on a very credible defense. Yes, he had help from the running game but so did the other two. How far off can they be? That's disturbing.
calumnus said:HungryCalBear said:
Mendoza played well, showing a lot more poise than the two QBs ahead of him. What's worrisome is our coaches ranked them higher than Mendoza earlier on.
We have been hearing good things about Mendoza for two years. Mendoza could have easily had meaningful reps in relief sooner. I especially don't understand the time Finley has gotten since he does not have a strong arm, mobility or even good decision making.
It will now be a question if Mendoza would have beat Auburn or UW, but good that he showed starting capability on his first start in college against a ranked OSU team.
The play calling was good today, probably the best in 7 years, but could be better. I still want to get the ball in to our speed backs outside. However, play action gave Mendoza easy throws to the tight end over the middle that coukd have been a staple for the last 6.5 years.
ST and defense is the issue today.
But back to the topic, Mendoza could be really good 3 years from now.
The 49ers had Brock Purdy behind two other guys for most of last year, and they certainly are not a dumb coaching staff. Sometimes you don't know what a guy has until he gets on the field.TedfordTheGreat said:
TBH on everything to harp on, lets not harp on why they didn't give Mendoza a chance earlier. This is game 6. They saw what they see on the field and they made the needed adjustment (maybe a bit slow).
Mendoza is also a redshirt freshman so making him the guy just took a bit given his lack of seniority.sycasey said:The 49ers had Brock Purdy behind two other guys for most of last year, and they certainly are not a dumb coaching staff. Sometimes you don't know what a guy has until he gets on the field.TedfordTheGreat said:
TBH on everything to harp on, lets not harp on why they didn't give Mendoza a chance earlier. This is game 6. They saw what they see on the field and they made the needed adjustment (maybe a bit slow).
Thanks for the reminder.bearister said:
