Allan Bridgford

19,657 Views | 155 Replies | Last: 14 yr ago by heartofthebear
BerlinerBaer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Haashole;616710 said:

this game did nothing to change that perception, imo. the boys ran all over wsu tonight; none of it maynard's doing. he literally is unable to throw the ball more than 10 yards to a receiver.


Now you're just making things up. 10 yards? Get real. Take a look at the highlights. All of those passes are over 10 yards and were thrown pretty accurately too.

Does Zach have problems? Sure, especially inside the pocket. He flat out sucked against SC and UCLA. But why can't some posters on this site give him at least a little credit when he plays well?
XXXBEAR
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Agureghian;616590 said:

He played terribly against Oregon. ZM is and should be our #1 option. Bridge's poor performance today should shut up the people calling for him.


I saw that Bridge had a much slower release than Maynard and a long windup to throw, neither of which bodes well. The fumbles didn't help but conditions were terrible. However this was strictly mop-up, and I bet he thinks it's cool he got in and got to play as much as he did. He will be better next time.

Maynard looked good out there, as he will when the running game is going good. He was very slick in running the team, and despite missing badly on three open receivers, this was his best overall game. I was surrounded by Cougar fans, and they were mystified that we were upset with our QB.
Haashole
How long do you want to ignore this user?
march, was tongue-in-cheek. re-read the post i was referring to.

berliner, exaggeration? sure a little, but not much. most completions he picks up past 10yds (or so), the excess yardage is after the catch. that's all well and good, but that wasn't my point. he simply cannot throw a long ball accurately -- in my opinion. that's my point. you disagree? i didn't see anything today that changes my opinion that maynard is horribly inaccurate, particularly on long throws. not in the highlight reel, obviously, are the 5 or 6 passes that sailed many yards over the head of the receiver.
Haashole
How long do you want to ignore this user?
look, i'm not trying to attack maynard. i am just not convinced he is a competent D1 QB. and i think it's ridiculous that a previous post extrapolated AB's monsoon garbage time football to the season ending up like last year, post-Riley.

i'd like to see a larger sample size from AB. i'd like JT to get him in more games when it's lost or won. I'd like him to actually let him run some plays and air it out a little. the obvious underlying assumption is that he's in the same ballpark as ZM, but from practice reports and from the few passes he's attempted (although not always the correct decision, similar to ZM), his accuracy looks strong. In a year where our OL provides 0 protection (last few), i could see ZM holding a distinct advantage. That's just not really the case this year and we'd give a typical JT pocket-passer a pretty good situation to be successful, imo.

ZM managed the game well yesterday, showed heart and the ability to make the 10yd pass particularly on the run, but the run game won this one. He had what 120 yards and a mediocre completion % again?

if the run game was weaker last night and ZM were forced to throw more and into more difficult situations, i'm pretty convinced the tone of this thread and the discussion board would be somewhat different.
dajo9
How long do you want to ignore this user?
What I learned from last night's game is that AB needs more reps with the 1's in practice and in the game so that his coordination and rhythm with them can be worked out. His passing and pocket presence look very good, imo.
southseasbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BerlinerBaer;616701 said:

I realize AB didn't have much to work with, but I'm going to agree with the others who say we are better right now with ZM. If ZM is hurt and AB is forced to take over, then the result is going to look much like the end of last year, I'm afraid.


Haashole;616725 said:

... i think it's ridiculous that a previous post extrapolated AB's monsoon garbage time football to the season ending up like last year, post-Riley.

i'd like to see a larger sample size from AB. i'd like JT to get him in more games when it's lost or won. I'd like him to actually let him run some plays and air it out a little....


Haas, I think you and Berliner are in agreement: that Bridgford like Mansion (or any QB2) is not put in a position to take over the offense in case of injury without real reps because game conditions cannot be replicated fully in practice.
Rushinbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Aur - nonsense. Coming in cold? In the rain? Few, if any, plays since UO? Little practice time with the 1s?

We pretty much know what we have in ZM. We don't know with AB. Only way to find out is to play him. Trouble is, ZM is a scrambler type and needs plays designed for that. AB is a pocket passer and needs plays designed for that. You can't practice scrambler plays all week and expect the team to suddenly execute pocket passer plays just like that.
oskihasahearton
How long do you want to ignore this user?
QB Bridgford's sudden insertion into the game cold and less than good field conditions. But that's the way it is sometimes, and during the week he said he was ready if/when needed. He was surrounded by an offense that was having a pretty good game.

I'm surprised Coach Wulf didn't crank it up a notch to try to shake him. It occurred to me that a 30-point lead might not be enough. Thanks to DC Tendergrasp's D it was...in spite of some shabby play by the CB's.

Wazzu's version of the no-huddle seemed pointless. They didn't really exploit anything. Though they have a pair of excellent WR's who can beat any DB any day.

A good day for Bridgford, RB Manuel and Cal. An off day for Wazzu.

:beer::beer::beer:
rjgoode
How long do you want to ignore this user?
IMO the 2011 Cal offense was designed around Maynard's more athletic skill set (read option, pistol, etc.) As such, I don't think it plays to Allan's strengths. is anyone really expecting Allan to hold on to the ball in a read option or pistol formation and take off running ? If Allan was named the starter last Spring we would be running a very different offense, schematically speaking, than what we run right now. Maynard is our best bet for these final 3 games unless we want to blow up what we've been trying to do offensively this year and try something new.
tommie317
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yea wtf was calling read option with bridgford in. Just JT really that obtuse?
GBMARIN
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Put a number 8 on him.
Pawlawski said the fumbles which drop to the ground are on the center.
He also said that KA alligator armed the incompletion on the AB fastball. That crossing route really calls for timing which comes with reps.
Same thing happened last week in the Raiders' game when Palmer zipped one to Ford which went right through his hands, hit him in the chest, and bounced away for an INT. S**T happens.

Too bad AB didn't have a chance to see if he can connect with a wide open receiver 30 yds down field.
Jeff82
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Bridgford didn't show me anything to indicate that he, based on his passing ability, would be to rally this team from behind or in a close game, anymore than Maynard could. The reality is that the only way to show that is to move Bridgford to starter, give him most of the practice reps, and accept the possibility that he'll play bad and we'll lose as a result. That would be OK by me, because I'm not all that enthused about going to a bowl game with a 6-6 record.

It looks to me like all our QBs have flaws, albeit different ones. Nor do I necessarily think Kline will be any better. The one thing I've gleaned from the last few years is that the step up to Pac 10 QB play, from any other level (high school, mid-major, etc.) is a big one, and most players don't make it. I'm actually now of the belief that the key going forward is recruiting better offensive linemen. From what I saw last night in Alabama vs. LSU, their QBs aren't any better than Maynard or Bridgford, but both teams are so good up front, the QB just doesn't have that much to worry about.
southseasbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
drunkoski;616929 said:

Why he might throw 4 pick 6s? Failing to see the downside


Even one pick 6 could be a momentum changer.

The gameplan worked and continued to do so later in the game.
TheSouseFamily
How long do you want to ignore this user?
FingeroftheBear;616928 said:

My god, even after a win the hand wringing around here is always turned to 11.

Didn't see enough of Bridgford. It was raining like hell and there were some misques that didn't look good but very minor in the big picture (he needs reps, like duh). Mostly however Cal was winning and you don't change the game plan no matter who the talent. Seriously, you're up by 30 and it's raining, you simply don't throw the ball.


Don't think we learned anything about either QB yesterday. When we are ahead and the run game is efficient, Tedford puts ZM into a low risk gameplan. We ran the ball 48 out of 68 snaps. It's when we are trying to come back or otherwise forced to pass that the interception danger zone comes into play. On the few occasions ZM threw the ball more than 10 yards, it looked shaky but he otherwise did ok and played error-free football.

I still put him around the 9th or 10th best QB in the conference. Given that he's the 2nd oldest QB (younger than Foles but older than Luck, Barkley, Osweiler and the rest) and one of the most experienced in terms of D1 game snaps, it's hard to imagine that this will improve.
southseasbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TheSouseFamily;616935 said:

...Given that he's the 2nd oldest QB (younger than Foles but older than Luck, Barkley, Osweiler and the rest) and one of the most experienced in terms of D1 game snaps, it's hard to imagine that this will improve.


Most experienced? He had only one year at Buffalo, which isn't close to Pac-12 caliber, then had to sit out and get rusty for a year (not even able to work with coaches or future teammates).
pappysghost
How long do you want to ignore this user?
If you want to move up, you can't blow up the plays that are called. He did not play well at all. He choked a little. He had a bad day, but that doesn't mean he won't be really good. He needs more experience and playing time. It's really hard making the transition form high school to Pac 12. There should be no doubt in anyone's mind that Maynard gives us the best chance to win. Of course, if Maynard is going pick city on us like against UCLA and USC pull his butt.
Nasal Mucus Goldenbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Unit2Sucks;616632 said:

This stint told us that AB was ill-prepared to get in the game this week and that's 100% on Tedford.


90%
GoBears58
How long do you want to ignore this user?
grandmastapoop;616620 said:

It takes a true stubborn idiot to make this post after watching our backup QB today.

Bravo, sir. Bravo.


and watching the starter throw, miss wide open wr's in teh endzone against UW, 3 picks against SC, 4 f'n picks against a mediocre ucla D. 10-17 yesterday too. He is a crappy qb that can only beat the likes of Utah, Presby, and the cougs. Against good competition he chokes like Riley did against the top teams.
AZGoldenBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
pappysghost;616953 said:

If you want to move up, you can't blow up the plays that are called. He did not play well at all. He choked a little. He had a bad day, but that doesn't mean he won't be really good. He needs more experience and playing time. It's really hard making the transition form high school to Pac 12. There should be no doubt in anyone's mind that Maynard gives us the best chance to win. Of course, if Maynard is going pick city on us like against UCLA and USC pull his butt.


Im still shocked people on this board without question still think ZM gives Cal the best chance to win. With the sample size we've seen from AB that claim is unfair. ZM single handily lost us the $c and fucla games. I have realized that zm is adequate at best against BAD teams (utah, WSU, fresno) and HORRIBLE against good teams (ucla: they are getting better, sc, oregon he was mediocre)... just wait till we get FURD and zm telegraphs all his passes to KA...we wont say he gives us the best chance to win anymore.

I know I'm being a NEGA-BEAR but i've seen enough of ZM to know what were getting.
GoBears58
How long do you want to ignore this user?
There should be no doubt in anyone's mind that Maynard gives us the best chance to

beat the crummy teams yet lose every meaningful game with a flurry of picks.
Nasal Mucus Goldenbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
FingeroftheBear;616969 said:

HTF do you blame Tedford for Bridgford's shakiness?


Not putting the whole blame on him, just 90%. HTF do you not realize by now it is mainly his responsibility to develop his well-decorated, record-breaking, elite-11 passer known for his high accuracy at the prep level in the 3rd year in his program to not play like a clueless 1st year rookie?
BerlinerBaer
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I thought Galas left with an injury.
GBMARIN
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Came back in after one snap.
Cal84
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearEatsTacos;616697 said:

The Oregon game was against a defense dropping back 7 to take away the pass, and this game he made a total of three passes.


Not that myth again. Bridgford had five incomplete passes from a line of scrimmage inside the Oregon 10. The reality is he was 4/13 for 65 yards before Cal got the ball back with 1:39 left in the 4th quarter and he completed 4 for 6 passes for short yardage against a prevent defense.
CrimsonBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
FingeroftheBear;616969 said:

HTF do you blame Tedford for Bridgford's shakiness?

I think AB's shakiness was understandable (rain, little playing time), that it was the perfect time to put him in (and a good thing) but seriously how do you blame Tedford?


HTF do you not blame JT? Maynard got hurt on a gutsy recovery. Your QB1 is always at risk of getting injured/knocked out. That's why a good HC makes certain the backup can at least handle the snap, knows the plays and can adequately fill in. The weather is a factor, but no way a valid excuse for not being able to handle a snap (backup or no backup).

JT has recruited and developed all 5 schollie QBs on the roster. No way he doesn't know there is a chance that Maynard could be terrible (after UCLA performance) or gets injured. AB needed to be ready (he even had more snaps w/ the first team).

The fact that AB couldn't even handle all the snaps (some of it might be on Galas, but whose fault is that, Coach M). JT is responsible for the product on the field, all of it. No more excuses.
Nasal Mucus Goldenbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
FingeroftheBear;617018 said:

90% blame? I think Tedford and the staff bare some blame but hardly 90%. I'm not going to blame the kid because it was raining, garbage time and he does need reps but he failed to execute basics that he should know by now, like taking snaps...however as it's been pointed out that could be the center.


Given that premise, some choose to blame either the kid or random outside forces of nature. The rain didn't cause AB to turn to the wrong side on handoffs; a lack of development (reps and snaps and coaching) did. I place most of the blame on the professional adult in charge whose responsibility it is to prepare the talented kid in his 3rd year in the program "to execute the basics that he should know by now." If we keep excusing the coaches, we'll keep getting QBs like KR & BM & BS who repeatedly failed to execute the basics in their 4th & 5th years they should have known by then. Blame the adult in charge.
bear1027
How long do you want to ignore this user?
CrimsonBear;617048 said:


The fact that AB couldn't even handle all the snaps (some of it might be on Galas, but whose fault is that, Coach M). JT is responsible for the product on the field, all of it. No more excuses.



Looks like you're right, some of it was on Galas. JT in the post game presser:

Quote:

It's a tough situation as rainy and sloppy as it got. It wasn't so much him as I think the ball slipped out of the center's hand a couple times. It was unfortunate that the weather was like what it was.

TheSouseFamily
How long do you want to ignore this user?
He ranks 5th among Pac-10 starting QBs in terms of number of attempts. Hansen, Luck, Foles and Barkley have more. But Prince, Price, Mannion, Lobbestael, Hays, Osweiler and Thomas ALL have fewer.
BearEatsTacos
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cal84;617043 said:

Not that myth again. Bridgford had five incomplete passes from a line of scrimmage inside the Oregon 10. The reality is he was 4/13 for 65 yards before Cal got the ball back with 1:39 left in the 4th quarter and he completed 4 for 6 passes for short yardage against a prevent defense.


Myth? The reality is you are playing with statistics to favor your cause. 3 of the incomplete passes were placed perfectly and dropped. Including the completions you conveniently left out and accounting for dropped passes, his completion would have been 11/19, a respectable 58%. (See, I can do the same thing.) This is of course not accounting for the fact that Oregon runs a pretty damned good defense and Bridgford came in cold with 9 minutes left in the 4th quarter.
EBBear2009
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Unless someone improves dramatically before next season... we all know that Maynard will be the starter. I'm just hoping for continued improvement from all over the offensive front. With the amount of talent that we have on the defensive side, I just want an offense that doesn't turn the ball over and can be strong enough to score 24-35 points a game. Our mistakes and bad plays have led to Maynard trying way too hard to make big plays which leads to major mistakes and our losses. Our defense needs an offense that controls the ball with the run first and safe passes, but we currently don't have the OL, RBs, or QB to do that.
heartofthebear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
[CENTER][LEFT][FONT="Tahoma"][/FONT][/LEFT][/CENTER][FONT="Arial Narrow"][/FONT][SIZE="2"][/SIZE]
Jeff82;616770 said:

Bridgford didn't show me anything to indicate that he, based on his passing ability, would be to rally this team from behind or in a close game, anymore than Maynard could. The reality is that the only way to show that is to move Bridgford to starter, give him most of the practice reps, and accept the possibility that he'll play bad and we'll lose as a result. That would be OK by me, because I'm not all that enthused about going to a bowl game with a 6-6 record.

It looks to me like all our QBs have flaws, albeit different ones. Nor do I necessarily think Kline will be any better. The one thing I've gleaned from the last few years is that the step up to Pac 10 QB play, from any other level (high school, mid-major, etc.) is a big one, and most players don't make it. I'm actually now of the belief that the key going forward is recruiting better offensive linemen. From what I saw last night in Alabama vs. LSU, their QBs aren't any better than Maynard or Bridgford, but both teams are so good up front, the QB just doesn't have that much to worry about.


[SIZE="2"][SIZE="3"][SIZE="4"][FONT="Georgia"]+1
[SIZE="2"]
[FONT="Arial Narrow"][SIZE="2"]Our back-up linemen are being underdeveloped as well as the QB back-ups. A great deal of talent sits on the bench while the starters blow assignments, make unnecessary and critical penalties or play injured. Last night was not the first time I saw OL starters limping to the line and back to the huddle. Much like with the QB's you hear great things being said before the season about Croswaithe, Williams, Brazinski, Gibson, Rigsbee and yet we have to tolerate the Cheadle's and Galases who are rated below their respective bench sitters. Also, I feel that Summers Gavin has played below his talent level and qualifies as the most disappointing Cal football guy along with Pendergast, Cattouse, Anthony and Miller. OTOH- Last night was the first time all season that I saw those guys perform to their talent level and beyond and I hope that continues when we play on the road. It was the first time I saw Cal dominate both lines of scrimmage for most of the game. Also, this is my first post and will flesh these comments out later. So I am not trying to single any player out. I am disappointed only because I am big fans of all of them and have such high expectations.

We definitely need to land some of the top OL recruits if we are going to be successful in continuing to play quality offense in the future, regardless of Kline and Treggs and hopefully Shaq. During the glory days under Tedford our OL got a good 5 yard push off the line per play. Alex Mack was a big part of that. When we lost Mack we never were the same offense again, regardless of who we had at QB or WR. That was partially offset because we had NFL caliber RB's. I think getting a new strength and conditioning coach and coach M back was a step in the right direction because our OL looked terribly out of shape in '09 and '10. But if we can't recruit the OL we need to start moving some of Lupoi's boys to the other side. It is too bad Armstead doesn't want to play offense. That would be a huge step in the right direction and could make Cal a serious contender again.

On Bridgford, I thought before the season started that we should be using a two quarterback system with Maynard playing against teams with poor rushing defenses and Bridgford playing against poor passing defeses. But I was pleasantly suprised by Maynard's big play passing performances during the early season (first 3 games). And I knew that a two quarterback system was the kind of cutting edge, out-of-the-box, counter cultural idea that just doesn't fly with Tedford. It is too much work for the overworked JT to develop more than one QB at once.

I was excited to see Bridgford and anticipated a break out performance. I too was disappointed. But I want to see more because Bridgford's posture, balance and demeanor indicate that he is more physically capable of taking hits and sacks. While Maynard throws interceptions to avoid being hit. I like Maynard as a player and person but I feel he is not muscular enough to handle the physical punishment of the position and that is why he plays poorly against good teams who have physically punishing defenses. I hope he does not get seriously hurt at some point. I have already seen enough to know that Bridgford is a much stronger person than Maynard and that is why he stands tall in the pocket.

I also have seen enough to know that JT will play Maynard until he is seriously hurt rather than have to spend any more time developing his back-ups, because JT is over worked and over burdened. He is already making that mistake with the OL. I have been following Cal football intensely and passionately since my childhood days growing up in the Claremont district and walking to the stadium with my father who is now passed on. I am 47.
I will be posting a thread sometime soon to discuss the real reason why Tedford is failing as a coach, which I believe has nothing to do with his coaching ability or the level of competion but has to do with changes at the University and within the culture of athletics at Cal. All of which will change for the better for the Cal football programs as the shared revenue from the Pac 12 network and the increased revenue from the new facilities bolster the football program financially and allow Tedford to hire more support staff for the players and the department. UC and Tedford have been under scrutiny because of the spending for his contract and the new facilities. And he has not had the funding to make staff hirings. All he can do is replace or switch staff. But he cannot add staff.
So, I believe the worst is nearly over and by 2013 we will see Cal football begin to meet the expectations we all have based on the talent level on the field of play.
Sorry for the rambling lengthy post, but I have been reading all the brilliant postings for months and finally had to chime in. I will get more refined over time.:p[/FONT][/SIZE][/SIZE][/SIZE][/SIZE][/SIZE][/FONT]
heartofthebear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
MrGPAC;616688 said:

I kinda noticed that too...the ball was right at KA in stride but KA wasn't expecting it to have that much zip on it. The one completion to KA was a floater with touch over the line...but he does seem to throw it harder than he has to, though that may have something to do with being over amped.

~MrGPAC


[FONT="Arial Black"][COLOR="Red"][/COLOR][/FONT]KA dropped it because he wasn't used to the ball hitting him between the numbers. He's used to having to reach for it.:rant
FiatSlug
How long do you want to ignore this user?
82gradDLSdad;616540 said:

but my god, can we ever have a backup QB come in and just play? I watched Oregon do it. WSU is doing it. OSU is doing it. UCLA is doing it. Our backup QBs look worse than if we just picked them up from high school and threw them in the game. Maybe Bridgford is horrible. But Mansion was too, last year, Sweeney the year before. And Hinder is 4th string. Boehm showed so little that they are redshirting him. Jesus Tedford, prepare a backup QB, get him some meaningful playing time, treat him like you expect him to come in and play without missing a beat. It is GD embarrassing. He is one play from being your starter, as tonight showed. Get him ready, already!!!!!


This is a huge failing, IMO.

Losing a starter is a contingency that one has to plan for, even if it never happens.

It seems reasonable that the backup should be able to run the offense so that the offense can continue to move the ball and score. The drop-off in talent shouldn't be so great that the offense suddenly becomes a series of 3-and-outs, even if it can't score with the same efficiency with the starter in at QB.
OskiMD
How long do you want to ignore this user?
FingeroftheBear;617086 said:

I post it. It's up to you interpret it how you wish. Like art or lit, doesn't matter what the artist paints or the writers writes but rather how you feel about it. Thus...you decide but I of course reserve the right to disagree.




Grow up dude. You're not amusing anyone.
freshfunk
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Heartifthebear, definitely agree with your sentiments about the OL. I look forward to reading your thoughts about our program and why things will change. Is Cal's staff very different than anyone else in the PAC?
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.