Cal is now 1-26 against Top 10 teams since 2004.

The @ACCFootball conference is illegitimate. Remember this when Miami has to play without @theACC officiating.

Solidarity with the #Calgorithm @HoodxBear pic.twitter.com/luivsoH5VY

— Hokie Andrew (@hokieandrew) October 6, 2024

From a Hokie fan.

82gradDLSdad said:

---

berk18.2 said:

---

I agree with the anti-Wilcox sentiment, but I want to describe the outcome of this game in another way, just to get it into the conversation as a perspective for thinking about future hires.

There is very little that our coaches could've done between 7:30pm and 11:30pm tonight, or really in the last two weeks, that would've changed the outcome of this game in a significant way. There are possible worlds where we could've won, but the least likely outcome was that we were going to win this game in a dominant fashion, regardless of what the score was at any given point in the game. If Wilcox truly had the ability to destroy a top-10 team, then he probably would've done it more than once in the eight years that he's been here.

The last two weeks were great. We had a killer gameplan for Miami. We were up by four scores. Limited to a two-week span, we did everything as well as we possibly could've been expected to do it.

When it comes to the second half collapse, there are a lot of different blue prints that a bunch of other teams could've used to win this game if they'd been teleported into our situation. Sitting back, forcing long drives, and killing clock can be effective. Pressuring, forcing mistakes, and getting off the field can be effective. The key is how good you are at either of those things. If we would've pressured more, Miami probably would've beaten our pressure in the long run, because our coaches aren't very good. If we would've been more aggressive on offense at various times, Miami probably would've gotten stops in the long run, because our coaches aren't very good. When you're not very good, you can have an incredible run by knocking your preparation and gameplan out of the park, but over a long enough period of time you will regress to the mean, because there's someone else competing against you who is getting paid millions of dollars to figure out what you're doing. Early in the game you shoot your shot as a gameplanner, but as the game goes on, the overall state of your program takes over. How many things can you stop? If it's not enough, then the other team finds your weaknesses. How many looks can you attack? If it's not enough, the other team figures that out, too. You'd be amazed how rarely an offense is able to run the same play, out of the same look, against the same defense over the course of a game. In most cases we're talking low single digits. Playcalling is a constant state of adjustment and adaptation, and as a result, it depends on dozens of decisions made very quickly, and your team's ability to handle all of those different situations.

It's easy to say "Throw downfield more," but the key is in what route combinations you call, against what specific coverages. You can throw the ball downfield against any coverage, but throwing the ball downfield isn't going to work if you don't make the right call for the coverage that they're running (which requires you to know what coverage they're going to run, or to have a passing gameplan that gives you answers against the set of things that they might be running).

Every team is maximally creative and versatile at the beginning of a game, but as the game goes on their opponents start to eliminate things that are hurting them, one-by-one. Whoever is left with the most resources at the end of a game will see a swing of "momentum" late. That's why good teams always seem to have the momentum.

Being a good football team is the result of thousands of moments and decisions, spread across several seasons of development. If you're a great coach, then you maximize those moments, and your team is equipped to handle more situations. If you're a mediocre coach, then you spin your wheels without getting any benefit out of it. Cal has mediocre coaches, at best. Some of them are smart, in theory. If you give them a bye week, they can come up with some good stuff, but they aren't good enough in comparison to their competition to get more out of those thousands of moments, and as a result, no matter how good their plan is, they'll be left without answers in the long run against opponents that they don't have a clear advantage over. It's not that they don't see what's happening and try to adjust, or that they don't see the same things that you do. It's that their program has less capability because of the hundreds of things that they haven't done or developed as efficiently as their competition.

---

Absolutely false. The part about very little our coaches could have done last night. 4th quarter we ran nothing of the misdirection plays that helped up spring running plays and passing plays to our TEs. Zero. We went back to the horrible read option that our OL cannot block. And they've shown they cannot block it all year. On defense we played soft, almost all 2nd half. Those are obvious coaching decisions that cost us this game. The good news: if you wanted Wilcox and staff gone, this will greatly help.

---

What mis-direction/passing plays to our TE's happened before the 4th Quarter? We had one screen-and-go to Endries that was successful late in the 1st quarter. Did we not run any more screen and goes? Are you confident that that claim here is true, or are you assuming that we didn't run these plays simply because we didn't replicate that one, lonesome long completion?

What running plays are you talking about that we were able to spring open? None of our Backs rushed for more than 20 yards! We had 74 total rushing yards! Where are these great plays that we stopped running late in the game because our dumb-ass coaches got too conservative?

You're letting your feelings about vibes in the 1st half cloud any objective understanding of our playcalling or capability throughout the game. Look at the receiving stats by our TE's. Look at the rushing stats by our RB's. They were absolute garbage, because the base level of our program is terrible. It's an absolute miracle that we were ever up by 25. Our coaches did a great job at generating shots in this game. Otherwise, they suck. I don't know why you're fighting me on this, other than that you feel that we should've been able to win this particular game. The odds that we were ever going to win this game were slim, not because our playcalling sucked, because our program sucks.

I'll tell you why I care about this: Because fans are overly reactionary in what they want from future coaches. Tedford was seen as having too complex of an offense, so we brought in Sonny. Sonny only had 25 plays. Way to go! But Sonny didn't have a defense. So we hired a defensive coach! Way to go! But now the offense sucks. So let's hire a great offensive coach! Or, we're too passive, so let's hire an aggressive coach!

Really, though, let's put aside all of the BS about what we think we're seeing in these games and just look for whatever coach we can hire that runs the best all-around program. What fans want is dumb, because fans are just indulging in their visceral reaction to the last game that they saw. Do away with the hot takes and hire a winner. Wilcox didn't fail because he's too defensive, or too passive, or too whatever. He failed because he doesn't have the ability to hire good assistants, and he doesn't have the ability to figure out when our coaches are performing worse than other people that he could hire. Oregon State is a better program over the last 25 years. Oregon. State. We need to make better decisions as a fan base and as an athletic department. We're Cal, we need to be smarter than this, because we're not going to get the inherent institutional support that lots of other programs get.

Actual stats, not vibes: https://www.foxsports.com/college-football/miami-fl-hurricanes-vs-california-golden-bears-oct-05-2024-game-boxscore-40122

berk18.2 said:

---

82gradDLSdad said:

---

berk18.2 said:

---

I agree with the anti-Wilcox sentiment, but I want to describe the outcome of this game in another way, just to get it into the conversation as a perspective for thinking about future hires.

There is very little that our coaches could've done between 7:30pm and 11:30pm tonight, or really in the last two weeks, that would've changed the outcome of this game in a significant way. There are possible worlds where we could've won, but the least likely outcome was that we were going to win this game in a dominant fashion, regardless of what the score was at any given point in the game. If Wilcox truly had the ability to destroy a top-10 team, then he probably would've done it more than once in the eight years that he's been here.

The last two weeks were great. We had a killer gameplan for Miami. We were up by four scores. Limited to a two-week span, we did everything as well as we possibly could've been expected to do it.

When it comes to the second half collapse, there are a lot of different blue prints that a bunch of other teams could've used to win this game if they'd been teleported into our situation. Sitting back, forcing long drives, and killing clock can be effective. Pressuring, forcing mistakes, and getting off the field can be effective. The key is how good you are at either of those things. If we would've pressured more, Miami probably would've beaten our pressure in the long run, because our coaches aren't very good. If we would've been more aggressive on offense at various times, Miami probably would've gotten stops in the long run, because our coaches aren't very good. When you're not very good, you can have an incredible run by knocking your preparation and gameplan out of the park, but over a long enough period of time you will regress to the mean, because there's someone else competing against you who is getting paid millions of dollars to figure out what you're doing. Early in the game you shoot your shot as a gameplanner, but as the game goes on, the overall state of your program takes over. How many things can you stop? If it's not enough, then the other team finds your weaknesses. How many looks can you attack? If it's not enough, the other team figures that out, too. You'd be amazed how rarely an offense is able to run the same play, out of the same look, against the same defense over the course of a game. In most cases we're talking low single digits. Playcalling is a constant state of adjustment and adaptation, and as a result, it depends on dozens of decisions made very quickly, and your team's ability to handle all of those different situations.

It's easy to say "Throw downfield more," but the key is in what route combinations you call, against what specific coverages. You can throw the ball downfield against any coverage, but throwing the ball downfield isn't going to work if you don't make the right call for the coverage that they're running (which requires you to know what coverage they're going to run, or to have a passing gameplan that gives you answers against the set of things that they might be running).

Every team is maximally creative and versatile at the beginning of a game, but as the game goes on their opponents start to eliminate things that are hurting them, one-by-one. Whoever is left with the most resources at the end of a game will see a swing of "momentum" late. That's why good teams always seem to have the momentum.

Being a good football team is the result of thousands of moments and decisions, spread across several seasons of development. If you're a great coach, then you maximize those moments, and your team is equipped to handle more situations. If you're a mediocre coach, then you spin your wheels without getting any benefit out of it. Cal has mediocre coaches, at best. Some of them are smart, in theory. If you give them a bye week, they can come up with some good stuff, but they aren't good enough in comparison to their competition to get more out of those thousands of moments, and as a result, no matter how good their plan is, they'll be left without answers in the long run against opponents that they don't have a clear advantage over. It's not that they don't see what's happening and try to adjust, or that they don't see the same things that you do. It's that their program has less capability because of the hundreds of things that they haven't done or developed as efficiently as their competition.

---

Absolutely false. The part about very little our coaches could have done last night. 4th quarter we ran nothing of the misdirection plays that helped up spring running plays and passing plays to our TEs. Zero. We went back to the horrible read option that our OL cannot block. And they've shown they cannot block it all year. On defense we played soft, almost all 2nd half. Those are obvious coaching decisions that cost us this game. The good news: if you wanted Wilcox and staff gone, this will greatly help.

---

What mis-direction/passing plays to our TE's happened before the 4th Quarter? We had one screen-and-go to Endries that was successful late in the 1st quarter. Did we not run any more screen and goes? Are you confident that that claim here is true, or are you assuming that we didn't run these plays simply because we didn't replicate that one, lonesome long completion?

What running plays are you talking about that we were able to spring open? None of our Backs rushed for more than 20 yards! We had 74 total rushing yards! Where are these great plays that we stopped running late in the game?

You're letting your feelings about vibes in the 1st half cloud any objective understanding of our playcalling or capability throughout the game. Look at the receiving stats by our TE's. Look at the rushing stats by our RB's. They were absolute garbage, because the base level of our program is terrible. It's an absolute miracle that we were ever up by 25. Our coaches did a great job at generating shots in this game. Otherwise, they suck. I don't know why you're fighting me on this.

Stats: https://www.foxsports.com/college-football/miami-fl-hurricanes-vs-california-golden-bears-oct-05-2024-game-boxscore-40122

---

Our TD drive in the 1st quarter, featured a 15 yard completion to Dyches off play action, then the 57 yard TD to Endries.

The first drive in the 2nd quarter, we went play action on 1st down and Mendoza hit Grizzell for a play that went 51 yards to the Miami 5. Ott then ran it in outside for the TD.

In the third quarter, after the Jet went 56 yards on 3rd and 15 swing pass, we lined up 1st and 10 on the Miami 29, faked the run and threw to Endries for 20. Rogers came in and ran it in for the TD.

calumnus said:

---

berk18.2 said:

---

82gradDLSdad said:

---

berk18.2 said:

---

I agree with the anti-Wilcox sentiment, but I want to describe the outcome of this game in another way, just to get it into the conversation as a perspective for thinking about future hires.

There is very little that our coaches could've done between 7:30pm and 11:30pm tonight, or really in the last two weeks, that would've changed the outcome of this game in a significant way. There are possible worlds where we could've won, but the least likely outcome was that we were going to win this game in a dominant fashion, regardless of what the score was at any given point in the game. If Wilcox truly had the ability to destroy a top-10 team, then he probably would've done it more than once in the eight years that he's been here.

The last two weeks were great. We had a killer gameplan for Miami. We were up by four scores. Limited to a two-week span, we did everything as well as we possibly could've been expected to do it.

When it comes to the second half collapse, there are a lot of different blue prints that a bunch of other teams could've used to win this game if they'd been teleported into our situation. Sitting back, forcing long drives, and killing clock can be effective. Pressuring, forcing mistakes, and getting off the field can be effective. The key is how good you are at either of those things. If we would've pressured more, Miami probably would've beaten our pressure in the long run, because our coaches aren't very good. If we would've been more aggressive on offense at various times, Miami probably would've gotten stops in the long run, because our coaches aren't very good. When you're not very good, you can have an incredible run by knocking your preparation and gameplan out of the park, but over a long enough period of time you will regress to the mean, because there's someone else competing against you who is getting paid millions of dollars to figure out what you're doing. Early in the game you shoot your shot as a gameplanner, but as the game goes on, the overall state of your program takes over. How many things can you stop? If it's not enough, then the other team finds your weaknesses. How many looks can you attack? If it's not enough, the other team figures that out, too. You'd be amazed how rarely an offense is able to run the same play, out of the same look, against the same defense over the course of a game. In most cases we're talking low single digits. Playcalling is a constant state of adjustment and adaptation, and as a result, it depends on dozens of decisions made very quickly, and your team's ability to handle all of those different situations.

It's easy to say "Throw downfield more," but the key is in what route combinations you call, against what specific coverages. You can throw the ball downfield against any coverage, but throwing the ball downfield isn't going to work if you don't make the right call for the coverage that they're running (which requires you to know what coverage they're going to run, or to have a passing gameplan that gives you answers against the set of things that they might be running).

Every team is maximally creative and versatile at the beginning of a game, but as the game goes on their opponents start to eliminate things that are hurting them, one-by-one. Whoever is left with the most resources at the end of a game will see a swing of "momentum" late. That's why good teams always seem to have the momentum.

Being a good football team is the result of thousands of moments and decisions, spread across several seasons of development. If you're a great coach, then you maximize those moments, and your team is equipped to handle more situations. If you're a mediocre coach, then you spin your wheels without getting any benefit out of it. Cal has mediocre coaches, at best. Some of them are smart, in theory. If you give them a bye week, they can come up with some good stuff, but they aren't good enough in comparison to their competition to get more out of those thousands of moments, and as a result, no matter how good their plan is, they'll be left without answers in the long run against opponents that they don't have a clear advantage over. It's not that they don't see what's happening and try to adjust, or that they don't see the same things that you do. It's that their program has less capability because of the hundreds of things that they haven't done or developed as efficiently as their competition.

---

Absolutely false. The part about very little our coaches could have done last night. 4th quarter we ran nothing of the misdirection plays that helped up spring running plays and passing plays to our TEs. Zero. We went back to the horrible read option that our OL cannot block. And they've shown they cannot block it all year. On defense we played soft, almost all 2nd half. Those are obvious coaching decisions that cost us this game. The good news: if you wanted Wilcox and staff gone, this will greatly help.

---

What mis-direction/passing plays to our TE's happened before the 4th Quarter? We had one screen-and-go to Endries that was successful late in the 1st quarter. Did we not run any more screen and goes? Are you confident that that claim here is true, or are you assuming that we didn't run these plays simply because we didn't replicate that one, lonesome long completion?

What running plays are you talking about that we were able to spring open? None of our Backs rushed for more than 20 yards! We had 74 total rushing yards! Where are these great plays that we stopped running late in the game?

You're letting your feelings about vibes in the 1st half cloud any objective understanding of our playcalling or capability throughout the game. Look at the receiving stats by our TE's. Look at the rushing stats by our RB's. They were absolute garbage, because the base level of our program is terrible. It's an absolute miracle that we were ever up by 25. Our coaches did a great job at generating shots in this game. Otherwise, they suck. I don't know why you're fighting me on this.

Stats: https://www.foxsports.com/college-football/miami-fl-hurricanes-vs-california-golden-bears-oct-05-2024-game-boxscore-40122

---

Our TD drive in the 1st quarter, featured a 15 yard completion to Dyches off play action, then the 57 yard TD to Endries.

Not play-action, but sure, mild mis-direction on a 15-yard completion that was Dyches' only completion in this game. I've already acknowledged the long completion to Endries was a good shot call.

The first drive in the 2nd quarter, we went play action on 1st down and Mendoza hit Grizzell for a play that went 51 yards to the Miami 5. Ott then ran it in outside for the TD.

Literally no play-action fake. Miami's SS did a trash job by letting Grizzell cross his face. Poor technique, in no way dependent on any kind of mis-direction or aggressive playcall. We threw other generic downfield concepts in this game, and they weren't this successful. No scheme on our part contributed to this win in comparison to the many other plays that were unsuccessful.

In the third quarter, after the Jet went 56 yards on 3rd and 15 swing pass, we lined up 1st and 10 on the Miami 29, faked the run and threw to Endries for 20. Rogers came in and ran it in for the TD.

3rd Quarter delayed release to Endries: Sure, I'll give it to you. Add it to the low single-digit list of successful playcalls. Now we've got 2 or 3, spread across three quarters. How many were we expecting to get in the 4th quarter to save the game?

---

berk18.2 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

berk18.2 said:

---

82gradDLSdad said:

---

berk18.2 said:

---

I agree with the anti-Wilcox sentiment, but I want to describe the outcome of this game in another way, just to get it into the conversation as a perspective for thinking about future hires.

There is very little that our coaches could've done between 7:30pm and 11:30pm tonight, or really in the last two weeks, that would've changed the outcome of this game in a significant way. There are possible worlds where we could've won, but the least likely outcome was that we were going to win this game in a dominant fashion, regardless of what the score was at any given point in the game. If Wilcox truly had the ability to destroy a top-10 team, then he probably would've done it more than once in the eight years that he's been here.

The last two weeks were great. We had a killer gameplan for Miami. We were up by four scores. Limited to a two-week span, we did everything as well as we possibly could've been expected to do it.

When it comes to the second half collapse, there are a lot of different blue prints that a bunch of other teams could've used to win this game if they'd been teleported into our situation. Sitting back, forcing long drives, and killing clock can be effective. Pressuring, forcing mistakes, and getting off the field can be effective. The key is how good you are at either of those things. If we would've pressured more, Miami probably would've beaten our pressure in the long run, because our coaches aren't very good. If we would've been more aggressive on offense at various times, Miami probably would've gotten stops in the long run, because our coaches aren't very good. When you're not very good, you can have an incredible run by knocking your preparation and gameplan out of the park, but over a long enough period of time you will regress to the mean, because there's someone else competing against you who is getting paid millions of dollars to figure out what you're doing. Early in the game you shoot your shot as a gameplanner, but as the game goes on, the overall state of your program takes over. How many things can you stop? If it's not enough, then the other team finds your weaknesses. How many looks can you attack? If it's not enough, the other team figures that out, too. You'd be amazed how rarely an offense is able to run the same play, out of the same look, against the same defense over the course of a game. In most cases we're talking low single digits. Playcalling is a constant state of adjustment and adaptation, and as a result, it depends on dozens of decisions made very quickly, and your team's ability to handle all of those different situations.

It's easy to say "Throw downfield more," but the key is in what route combinations you call, against what specific coverages. You can throw the ball downfield against any coverage, but throwing the ball downfield isn't going to work if you don't make the right call for the coverage that they're running (which requires you to know what coverage they're going to run, or to have a passing gameplan that gives you answers against the set of things that they might be running).

Every team is maximally creative and versatile at the beginning of a game, but as the game goes on their opponents start to eliminate things that are hurting them, one-by-one. Whoever is left with the most resources at the end of a game will see a swing of "momentum" late. That's why good teams always seem to have the momentum.

Being a good football team is the result of thousands of moments and decisions, spread across several seasons of development. If you're a great coach, then you maximize those moments, and your team is equipped to handle more situations. If you're a mediocre coach, then you spin your wheels without getting any benefit out of it. Cal has mediocre coaches, at best. Some of them are smart, in theory. If you give them a bye week, they can come up with some good stuff, but they aren't good enough in comparison to their competition to get more out of those thousands of moments, and as a result, no matter how good their plan is, they'll be left without answers in the long run against opponents that they don't have a clear advantage over. It's not that they don't see what's happening and try to adjust, or that they don't see the same things that you do. It's that their program has less capability because of the hundreds of things that they haven't done or developed as efficiently as their competition.

---

Absolutely false. The part about very little our coaches could have done last night. 4th quarter we ran nothing of the misdirection plays that helped up spring running plays and passing plays to our TEs. Zero. We went back to the horrible read option that our OL cannot block. And they've shown they cannot block it all year. On defense we played soft, almost all 2nd half. Those are obvious coaching decisions that cost us this game. The good news: if you wanted Wilcox and staff gone, this will greatly help.

---

What mis-direction/passing plays to our TE's happened before the 4th Quarter? We had one screen-and-go to Endries that was successful late in the 1st quarter. Did we not run any more screen and goes? Are you confident that that claim here is true, or are you assuming that we didn't run these plays simply because we didn't replicate that one, lonesome long completion?

What running plays are you talking about that we were able to spring open? None of our Backs rushed for more than 20 yards! We had 74 total rushing yards! Where are these great plays that we stopped running late in the game?

You're letting your feelings about vibes in the 1st half cloud any objective understanding of our playcalling or capability throughout the game. Look at the receiving stats by our TE's. Look at the rushing stats by our RB's. They were absolute garbage, because the base level of our program is terrible. It's an absolute miracle that we were ever up by 25. Our coaches did a great job at generating shots in this game. Otherwise, they suck. I don't know why you're fighting me on this.

Stats: https://www.foxsports.com/college-football/miami-fl-hurricanes-vs-california-golden-bears-oct-05-2024-game-boxscore-40122

---

Our TD drive in the 1st quarter, featured a 15 yard completion to Dyches off play action, then the 57 yard TD to Endries.

Not play-action, but sure, mild mis-direction on a 15-yard completion that was Dyches' only completion in this game. I've already acknowledged the long completion to Endries was a good shot call.

The first drive in the 2nd quarter, we went play action on 1st down and Mendoza hit Grizzell for a play that went 51 yards to the Miami 5. Ott then ran it in outside for the TD.

Literally no play-action fake. Miami's SS did a trash job by letting Grizzell cross his face. Poor technique, in no way dependent on any kind of mis-direction or aggressive playcall. We threw other generic downfield concepts in this game, and they weren't this successful. No scheme on our part contributed to this win in comparison to the many other plays that were unsuccessful.

In the third quarter, after the Jet went 56 yards on 3rd and 15 swing pass, we lined up 1st and 10 on the Miami 29, faked the run and threw to Endries for 20. Rogers came in and ran it in for the TD.

3rd Quarter delayed release to Endries: Sure, I'll give it to you. Add it to the low single-digit list of successful playcalls. Now we've got 2 or 3, spread across three quarters. How many were we expecting to get in the 4th quarter to save the game?

---

---

I'm letting 8 years of a losing record cloud my judgement. I have no idea what you are using to judge. Go back and find the misdirection yourself if you want more convincing. I suspect you don't and you are in the camp of 'there go those idiot fans again thinking Cal can ever be good at football'. I have a lot of friends like that. They just never followed Cal football....ever. And don't know that we are good with good coaches and ADs. Gladstone was my favorite example. Temp AD who was a great coach. He hired Tedford simply by knowing what the characteristics of great head coach are. I suspect Knowlton knows more about wine than coaching.

berk18.2 said:

---

calumnus said:

---

berk18.2 said:

---

82gradDLSdad said:

---

berk18.2 said:

---

I agree with the anti-Wilcox sentiment, but I want to describe the outcome of this game in another way, just to get it into the conversation as a perspective for thinking about future hires.

There is very little that our coaches could've done between 7:30pm and 11:30pm tonight, or really in the last two weeks, that would've changed the outcome of this game in a significant way. There are possible worlds where we could've won, but the least likely outcome was that we were going to win this game in a dominant fashion, regardless of what the score was at any given point in the game. If Wilcox truly had the ability to destroy a top-10 team, then he probably would've done it more than once in the eight years that he's been here.

The last two weeks were great. We had a killer gameplan for Miami. We were up by four scores. Limited to a two-week span, we did everything as well as we possibly could've been expected to do it.

When it comes to the second half collapse, there are a lot of different blue prints that a bunch of other teams could've used to win this game if they'd been teleported into our situation. Sitting back, forcing long drives, and killing clock can be effective. Pressuring, forcing mistakes, and getting off the field can be effective. The key is how good you are at either of those things. If we would've pressured more, Miami probably would've beaten our pressure in the long run, because our coaches aren't very good. If we would've been more aggressive on offense at various times, Miami probably would've gotten stops in the long run, because our coaches aren't very good. When you're not very good, you can have an incredible run by knocking your preparation and gameplan out of the park, but over a long enough period of time you will regress to the mean, because there's someone else competing against you who is getting paid millions of dollars to figure out what you're doing. Early in the game you shoot your shot as a gameplanner, but as the game goes on, the overall state of your program takes over. How many things can you stop? If it's not enough, then the other team finds your weaknesses. How many looks can you attack? If it's not enough, the other team figures that out, too. You'd be amazed how rarely an offense is able to run the same play, out of the same look, against the same defense over the course of a game. In most cases we're talking low single digits. Playcalling is a constant state of adjustment and adaptation, and as a result, it depends on dozens of decisions made very quickly, and your team's ability to handle all of those different situations.

It's easy to say "Throw downfield more," but the key is in what route combinations you call, against what specific coverages. You can throw the ball downfield against any coverage, but throwing the ball downfield isn't going to work if you don't make the right call for the coverage that they're running (which requires you to know what coverage they're going to run, or to have a passing gameplan that gives you answers against the set of things that they might be running).

Every team is maximally creative and versatile at the beginning of a game, but as the game goes on their opponents start to eliminate things that are hurting them, one-by-one. Whoever is left with the most resources at the end of a game will see a swing of "momentum" late. That's why good teams always seem to have the momentum.

Being a good football team is the result of thousands of moments and decisions, spread across several seasons of development. If you're a great coach, then you maximize those moments, and your team is equipped to handle more situations. If you're a mediocre coach, then you spin your wheels without getting any benefit out of it. Cal has mediocre coaches, at best. Some of them are smart, in theory. If you give them a bye week, they can come up with some good stuff, but they aren't good enough in comparison to their competition to get more out of those thousands of moments, and as a result, no matter how good their plan is, they'll be left without answers in the long run against opponents that they don't have a clear advantage over. It's not that they don't see what's happening and try to adjust, or that they don't see the same things that you do. It's that their program has less capability because of the hundreds of things that they haven't done or developed as efficiently as their competition.

---

Absolutely false. The part about very little our coaches could have done last night. 4th quarter we ran nothing of the misdirection plays that helped up spring running plays and passing plays to our TEs. Zero. We went back to the horrible read option that our OL cannot block. And they've shown they cannot block it all year. On defense we played soft, almost all 2nd half. Those are obvious coaching decisions that cost us this game. The good news: if you wanted Wilcox and staff gone, this will greatly help.

---

What mis-direction/passing plays to our TE's happened before the 4th Quarter? We had one screen-and-go to Endries that was successful late in the 1st quarter. Did we not run any more screen and goes? Are you confident that that claim here is true, or are you assuming that we didn't run these plays simply because we didn't replicate that one, lonesome long completion?

What running plays are you talking about that we were able to spring open? None of our Backs rushed for more than 20 yards! We had 74 total rushing yards! Where are these great plays that we stopped running late in the game?

You're letting your feelings about vibes in the 1st half cloud any objective understanding of our playcalling or capability throughout the game. Look at the receiving stats by our TE's. Look at the rushing stats by our RB's. They were absolute garbage, because the base level of our program is terrible. It's an absolute miracle that we were ever up by 25. Our coaches did a great job at generating shots in this game. Otherwise, they suck. I don't know why you're fighting me on this.

Stats: https://www.foxsports.com/college-football/miami-fl-hurricanes-vs-california-golden-bears-oct-05-2024-game-boxscore-40122

---

Our TD drive in the 1st quarter, featured a 15 yard completion to Dyches off play action, then the 57 yard TD to Endries.

Not play-action, but sure, mild mis-direction on a 15-yard completion that was Dyches' only completion in this game. I've already acknowledged the long completion to Endries was a good shot call.

The first drive in the 2nd quarter, we went play action on 1st down and Mendoza hit Grizzell for a play that went 51 yards to the Miami 5. Ott then ran it in outside for the TD.

Literally no play-action fake. Miami's SS did a trash job by letting Grizzell cross his face. Poor technique, in no way dependent on any kind of mis-direction or aggressive playcall. We threw other generic downfield concepts in this game, and they weren't this successful. No scheme on our part contributed to this win in comparison to the many other plays that were unsuccessful.

In the third quarter, after the Jet went 56 yards on 3rd and 15 swing pass, we lined up 1st and 10 on the Miami 29, faked the run and threw to Endries for 20. Rogers came in and ran it in for the TD.

3rd Quarter delayed release to Endries: Sure, I'll give it to you. Add it to the low single-digit list of successful playcalls. Now we've got 2 or 3, spread across three quarters. How many were we expecting to get in the 4th quarter to save the game?

---

---

Ok, it is not like I am a Bloesch fan. I've been the most vocal skeptic/critic on this board since he was made permanent OC before the bowl game. My point about this game is that just an ounce of going counter tendency and misdirection or even just throwing on first down paid huge dividends and we should be doing it all the time but there was absolutely none of that in the 4th quarter, leading to our collapse. There was a point in the game where I was happy with the playcalling, something I can't say happened at any time in the previous 5 games he called, so don't ask me to defend him. It was Wilcox's laziest OC search yet.
However, we absolutely need Bloesch to figure out he can't just run over P4 defenses straight up or we will lose more games we could have won.

I am jealous of UNLV hiring Brennan Marion who we talked about last time we had an opening. Now they have the #9 offense while we are in the 90s. He's only making $300k so maybe….

If we need a mid season hire at OC are you available?

Is Bloesch ever interviewed?

movielover said:

---

Is Bloesch ever interviewed?

---

do u evah go to games at memorial stadium?

Shocky1 said:

---

movielover said:

---

Is Bloesch ever interviewed?

---

do u evah go to games at memorial stadium?

---

Yes.

movielover said:

---

Shocky1 said:

---

movielover said:

---

Is Bloesch ever interviewed?

---

do u evah go to games at memorial stadium?

---

Yes.

---

You can find Bloesch press conferences on YouTube

He'll never see them unless they pop up in his far right twitter bubble.

The Bears should have chatted with Chris Peterson about becoming an OC. Less pressure and limelight.

gnight cal fans pic.twitter.com/JhBsA3zdiC

— PUT YOUR HAT ON (@JustinWilcocks) October 6, 2024

The ref wasn't even looking in the direction of the play.

bear2034 said:

---

gnight cal fans pic.twitter.com/JhBsA3zdiC

— PUT YOUR HAT ON (@JustinWilcocks) October 6, 2024

The ref wasn't even looking in the direction of the play.

---

What else is there to see? Watching the Cal OL behind the play so he can call holding if Fernando made it another 9 yards?

Did Wilcox challenge the non-call?

movielover said:

---

Did Wilcox challenge the non-call?

---

If you know Wilcox, you know the answer to that question.

if u know golden one, u know he is clinically depressed

Shocky1 said:

---

if u know golden one, u know he is clinically depressed

---

Wilcox can make anyone depressed. Very depressed.

understood, maybe u should get some azz and/or go to yoga today??

Shocky1 said:

---

understood, maybe u should get some azz and/or go to yoga today??

---

To hell with yoga. I'll take the azz!

leidy agrees with u!!

fyi, all roads at yoga lead to azz

movielover said:

---

Did Wilcox challenge the non-call?

---

Watch the presser and the fact that Nando shared that he could not comment.

Of course, it's ACC town, Jake, so, let's not hold our breath.