He did have his team ready to play.
He did put together a nice offensive game plan.
He didn't blow the coverage that gave up the winning touchdown.
He didn't throw the interception that ended the game.
He did for the most part call a good game.
Although the 3rd and 2 guts run should only have been called if you're going to go on 4th and 1, we still had a chance to pick up the 2 yards and failed.
He didn't miss the 3 field goals.
He didn't drop the passes on 4th down that would have kept 2 other drives alive.
Gould is directly responsible for which RB is playing.

has always been how he handles these small and large failures. It seems to take weeks (eg. extra point blocking last year) or months or years (eg. center snaps, pistol defense) to get problems fixed. Good coaches need to get these problems addressed more quickly. It's never enough to say the players failed and so the head coach is off the hook. It's not an accident that good coaches have less player failures.

And I know you know this.

I agree with you. You would think the offensive coordinator would decide which backs are in the game. I know if I were the OC, I would want to make that call.

TarzanaBear;841951673 said:

---

Why does Gould have authority over the head coach when it comes to who plays? Is this usual? I've never heard of this before.

---

Gould knows which RBs are ready as far as pass protetoin and other duties. Bigelow is clearly a talented runner and great with the ball in space, but Tedford demands a lot more from his RBs.

One of the things Sofele was praised for last season was his talents at picking up blitzes and blocking to give the QB time to throw. I'm sure that a huge part of the reason Bigelow isn't starting is that he isn't the pass blocker that Sofele is, so unless Cal is using him to run routes, he's a bit of a handicap to the rest of the team.

He'll keep improving and I"m sure his playing time will increase.

That logic doesn't really hold up very well when the talent gap is that large. Not to mention when a guy is averaging 40 yards a carry and scoring every other time he touches the ball you don't need to pass. Bigelow made our coaching staff look stupid.

...is whether he wins. The guy has one tie for first and a second place finish in the conference, has never been to a Rose Bowl or a BCS game and the program has stunk the last 4 years and unless you are watching a different team than I am, even an optimist or sunshine pumper will be hard pressed to find 4-5 more wins and we could just as easily lose 8-9 more games.

If that is your expectations for Cal football than you just keep telling us what a great game he called and how good a coach he is. Me I think I would start thinking about replacing him with Stanford's offensive coordinator, the Utah State Coach or someone else next year or just accept mediocrity.

No you wouldn't. On most teams, the rb coach sends in the backs, the line coaches handle line personnel, etc. they can pay attention to who's tired, who needs a blow, etc. Obviously, this is coordinated w/ the OC, since certain plays dictate certain players. If JT were determining who is in the game on a play-to-play basis, you'd see a tenfold increase in delay of game penalties.

pappysghost;841951703 said:

---

That logic doesn't really hold up very well when the talent gap is that large. Not to mention when a guy is averaging 40 yards a carry and scoring every other time he touches the ball you don't need to pass. Bigelow made our coaching staff look stupid.

---

+1
Indeed he did do that as well.

UrsaMajor;841951726 said:

---

No you wouldn't. On most teams, the rb coach sends in the backs, the line coaches handle line personnel, etc. they can pay attention to who's tired, who needs a blow, etc. Obviously, this is coordinated w/ the OC, since certain plays dictate certain players. If JT were determining who is in the game on a play-to-play basis, you'd see a tenfold increase in delay of game penalties.

---

But this is the aspect of the game that Tedford was supposedly going to improve on by being more of a CEO type: keeping tabs on the tenor of the game and the team. In that case, he could certainly go over to Gould, after Bigs' second long TD run, and say get him in the game as much as possible. I'll bet dollars to donuts he didn't do this and just kept with the game plan.

I can tell you if I were the OC, my message to Gould would have been I want Bigelow in the game until further notice.

SonOfCalVa;841951731 said:

---

+1
Indeed he did do that as well.

---

wait a minute. BTW this is the board that called out that one of the more predictable things about Tedford play calling is that the few times Bigs goes into the game we know for sure he gets the ball. The only way around that is to make him the 1b or 1a starter to offset that predictability, but what does that do for our pass pro? And all the best and emering playmakers there, Allen, Treggs, Harper, Powe, Wark/Rodgers. Isi diving across the backfield to stick the bandit coming on the opposite side made that TD pass to Harper possible (i think it was that TD,announcers complimented Isi's block). Can Brendan do stuff like that well enough yet? Not to mention 1 or 2 fumbles from a RB or QB blindsided due to blown pro can flip the upside even worse as well. I trust Gould and Tedford know better than us.

Ya Tedford called a great game vs. OSU and had the team playing real well. If we continue to play like that we will have a great season.

"Wait what?! A great season?!!"

Yes, a great season.

I do agree that winning is all that matters as long as you're running a clean program with high standards. We've come this far and he did help build the new facilities. If the Kline era next year doen'st look very promising, then our decision is easy after next year. I really like the idea of giving a successful coach at a smaller school like Utah St. a shot. My plan would be to give a guy like that a shot every 3 to 5 years until we strike gold.

BobbyGBear;841951757 said:

---

Ya Tedford called a great game vs. OSU and had the team playing real well. If we continue to play like that we will have a great season.

"Wait what?! A great season?!!"

Yes, a great season.

---

We already have two losses. If you consider a two loss season before a bowl game a great season, we have very different expectations for the program.

slider643;841951768 said:

---

We already have two losses. If you consider a two loss season before a bowl game a great season, we have very different expectations for the program.

---

Thank god for interweb warriors like you upholding the 'expectations' of the program.

If we won every conference game and made the rose bowl, we'd ALL be thrilled. Not saying that will come to pass, but its absurd to write off the season already.

mvargus;841951694 said:

---

Gould knows which RBs are ready as far as pass protetoin and other duties. Bigelow is clearly a talented runner and great with the ball in space, but Tedford demands a lot more from his RBs.

One of the things Sofele was praised for last season was his talents at picking up blitzes and blocking to give the QB time to throw. I'm sure that a huge part of the reason Bigelow isn't starting is that he isn't the pass blocker that Sofele is, so unless Cal is using him to run routes, he's a bit of a handicap to the rest of the team.

He'll keep improving and I"m sure his playing time will increase.

---

I agree overall, but not in the specifics. It reminds me of 2007 when Forsett got 80-90% of our carries and some of us argued for Best to get more (or 2004 when Lynch was the best weapon we had but didn't use nearly as much as we could have--especially with WR injuries). After Best torched a team for a long TD. Why not give him a few more touches, or fake to him and let Longshore throw long to one of our 4 great receivers and tight ends. No one was arguing for Best to be the starter. Forsett was solid, but teams feared Best.

Similarly, after scoring long TDs on 2 touches (one the longest by a visitng RB in Ohio State history!), we had Ohio State SCARED of him. It was a no brainer to line him up in the back field--forget his pass blocking, use him as a decoy! fake the pitch to him right and have Maynard go left! or give him a few toss pitches and see what happens!

Sofele/CJ could still start the next week, that is not the issue.

Really, I think this just speaks to our ongoing issues with in game management and adjustments (keeping track of what is working and what is not working) and some of the concerns I had with Tedford being the play caller from the sidelines. He has a lot of things to think about in that role (relative to Chip Kelly say, whose offense is much simpler and where many of the decisions are made by the QB in the course of the play and are drilled with much repetition in practice).

Nevada
Ohio St.
USC
Oregon
Stanford

Not many teams could win 2 games out of those 5. I don't even think Alabama could win all of those games.

pappysghost;841951785 said:

---

Nevada
Ohio St.
USC
Oregon
Stanford

Not many teams could win 2 games out of those 5. I don't even think Alabama could win all of those games.

---

Yes, they could.

BeggarEd;841951779 said:

---

Thank god for interweb warriors like you upholding the 'expectations' of the program.

If we won every conference game and made the rose bowl, we'd ALL be thrilled. Not saying that will come to pass, but its absurd to write off the season already.

---

I'm not writing off the season, though I have written off the coaching staff. All I'm saying is 2 losses before a bowl game is not a great season. And if you think it is, you are part of the problem.

Nevada is still undefeated.

pappysghost;841951785 said:

---

Nevada
Ohio St.
USC
Oregon
Stanford

Not many teams could win 2 games out of those 5. I don't even think Alabama could win all of those games.

---

You're high. Bama would kill all of those teams.

I would consider 10-2 (11-2 if we won the PAC-12 championship) a great season, especially if it means a BCS bowl. So yes, by your definition I am part of the problem.

At this stage, I also would like to see what a new coaching staff could do, but its been pretty well established that the buyout cost makes that conversation pointless at this stage.

I still will root for the Bears in every game despite my current lack of enthusiasm for Tedford. I will not stop buying season tickets.

HaasBear04;841951800 said:

---

You're high. Bama would kill all of those teams.

---

Nevada lost to South Florida...who lost to Rutgers.

82gradDLSdad;841951681 said:

---

has always been how he handles these small and large failures. It seems to take weeks (eg. extra point blocking last year) or months or years (eg. center snaps, pistol defense) to get problems fixed. Good coaches need to get these problems addressed more quickly. It's never enough to say the players failed and so the head coach is off the hook. It's not an accident that good coaches have less player failures.

And I know you know this.

---

The issue Tedford has had in this "slump" if you can call it that, is that he stopped taking care of the little things.

As an example: A QB, even Rodgers, cannot do well if he is picking up 50% of shotgun snaps from the ground. That is a simple small thing to fix.



OTOH, there were a lot of Small Things that did not happen this week... Like consistently not knowing how to tackle, or how to block.

That makes me think that this team, IMHO BECAUSE of Tedford, has zero focus or discipline going into games week in and out. The problem is not preparation, from what I would guess, it is mindset.

Even this week you have players busy ready internet forums and tweeting about it; worrying about what KIND of fans they have? That is a terrible mind set.



There are two parts to the game, and Tedford consistently blows the mental aspect, and has claimed to have given up on that part in so many words. That is why I think he should be fired, and have been saying so for a long time.

Quote:

---

"I have no idea before the game if they are ready or not," Tedford said. "I've given up on that because sometimes you think they are really ready and they're not. And other times they're quiet and you think, 'These guys got to get ready!' And they play great."

---

6bear6;841951796 said:

---

Nevada is still undefeated.

---

They are? I could have sworn they lost a game based Nevada's official website but that might just be liberal media bias:

http://www.nevadawolfpack.com/sports/m-footbl/sched/unv-m-footbl-sched.html

BeggarEd;841951808 said:

---

I would consider 10-2 (11-2 if we won the PAC-12 championship) a great season, especially if it means a BCS bowl. So yes, by your definition I am part of the problem.

At this stage, I also would like to see what a new coaching staff could do, but its been pretty well established that the buyout cost makes that conversation pointless at this stage.

I still will root for the Bears in every game despite my current lack of enthusiasm for Tedford. I will not stop buying season tickets.

---

At least we can agree that we've never had a great season under Tedford.

Like you, I'll still pull for the boys, but I'm done with this staff.