Tedford said, "[Not] as of right now. But each game's different. We'll see. Kind of goes with every position."

Not a glowing endorsement, though. More later, waiting for an interview with Sebastian, who will start the rest of the way.

Thanks for the update, did anyone think there was a chance (serious question)?

alarsuel;841964948 said:

---

Thanks for the update, did anyone think there was a chance (serious question)?

---

I dunno. It was worth asking, at least (credit to Gorcey here).

alarsuel;841964948 said:

---

Thanks for the update, did anyone think there was a chance (serious question)?

---

Of course not. I really don't care too much at this point until JT is done. The energy to try and hope he would be rational and effective is wasted and futile.

Other stuff:
-Fortt has not begun practicing. The team will decide whether or not to RS him soon
-Scarlett will play w/ his broken hand.
-Wark is day to day.
-Sebastian will start, if you didn't get that up top.

Rumor was that this being considered.

Of course given history I doubt it will happen.

Oh please RS Fortt. Save him for a competitive season.

Admittedly the oline is a dumpster fire, but I'd love to know what Maynard would have to do to play out of his starting spot. Does Tedford have any daughters?

Tedford won't play Bridgford or Hinder until it things are much worst than they are now and then put them in game situations to make them look worst than they truly are to justify playing Maynard...
:headbang

Holy smokes! Tedford won't bench an entirely anemic QB?

Certainly bigelow will get more carries against ASU and USC, after that breakout game against OSU.

BlueAndGold;841964943 said:

---

Tedford said, "[Not] as of right now. But each game's different. We'll see. Kind of goes with every position."

Not a glowing endorsement, though. More later, waiting for an interview with Sebastian, who will start the rest of the way.

---

JT's reason for Sebastian not starting from the get-go was allegedly because of "match-ups"? Seems like a lame excuse.... That seniority-trumps-talent hang-up of his is more like the reason....

manus;841965086 said:

---

JT's reason for Sebastian not starting from the get-go was allegedly because of "match-ups"? Seems like a lame excuse.... That seniority-trumps-talent hang-up of his is more like the reason....

---

Yes of course, our safties can't tackle and Sebastian tackles like a madman. Perfect bench candidate for Tedford.

goodrich;841964959 said:

---

Tedford won't play Bridgford or Hinder until it things are much worst than they are now and then put them in game situations to make them look worst than they truly are to justify playing Maynard...
:headbang

---

Agree on all points. However, it is possible that a major fan protest/boycott/no-show could be persuasive. But this won't happen until things get much worse as you have stated.

manus;841965086 said:

---

JT's reason for Sebastian not starting from the get-go was allegedly because of "match-ups"? Seems like a lame excuse.... That seniority-trumps-talent hang-up of his is more like the reason....

---

Probably Pendy's call. At least Avery is starting now.

MoragaBear;841965120 said:

---

I asked last Tuesday at the press conference, too. Based on the response -basically that Maynard's poor play would've had to have been virtually all his fault for a change- it leaves me little hope that we'll see a change for the forseeable future.

---

So basically, never. A QB is never 100% at fault, but then again, neither is anyone else. You can still see when they're not good.

MoragaBear;841965120 said:

---

I asked last Tuesday at the press conference, too. Based on the response -basically that Maynard's poor play would've had to have been virtually all his fault for a change- it leaves me little hope that we'll see a change for the forseeable future.

To me, that's the height of insanity. I don't care how the other QB's do, just give them a legit chance and see how it works out. The ceiling with Maynard is so low that it's a week after week blown opportunity to move this program forward.

---

That's depressing.

In practice they should have no oline so that they can simulate actual games. Lets see who the best QB is then.

JT has gotta know that his seat is really hot... Why the heck is he doubling down on ZM? Personal complaints aside, wouldn't you even be curious to see how your other QBs perform in actual games?

JT's gonna stick with ZM as the titanic sinks. It's just a matter of time. I wish the guy all the best and won't pretend to know what goes on behind closed doors but the program is all out of excuses.

Barring a miracle it's time to write off 2012 as a lame duck season.

MoragaBear;841965120 said:

---

I asked last Tuesday at the press conference, too. Based on the response -basically that Maynard's poor play would've had to have been virtually all his fault for a change- it leaves me little hope that we'll see a change for the forseeable future.

To me, that's the height of insanity. I don't care how the other QB's do, just give them a legit chance and see how it works out. The ceiling with Maynard is so low that it's a week after week blown opportunity to move this program forward.

---

When a level-headed, fair, intelligent Moraga refers to the coaches' decision-making as "insanity" you know you have reached the hopeless stage...

Gosh, the rest of the season should be so fun:headbang

sycasey;841965123 said:

---

So basically, never. A QB is never 100% at fault, but then again, neither is anyone else. You can still see when they're not good.

---

What is JT afraid of by giving someone else a chance. a loss?? haha. Same result, but at least we could see what's up. Now we just have losses with no new info. Pathetic

Serious question, does anyone feel more apathetic about JT's decision to not bench ZM this time around as opposed to last year following the USC/UCLA face palms?

Personally, I get why we all think he should, but I'm no where near as dumbfounded as I was last year.

Like I've made my peace with it all.

You know it's bad when fans are calling for the third string QB and hailing the fourth stringer as the savior.

89bear;841965145 said:

---

when a level-headed, fair, intelligent moraga refers to the coaches' decision-making as "insanity" you know you have reached the hopeless stage...

Gosh, the rest of the season should be so fun:headbang

---

+100000

socaliganbear;841965152 said:

---

Serious question, does anyone feel more apathetic about JT's decision to not bench ZM this time around as opposed to last year following the USC/UCLA face palms?

---

Of course. Maynard is nearing the end of his career at Cal (thankfully) so there isn't the prospect of his starting another season hanging over the program. No matter what happens, he's gone so it probably doesn't make a huge difference. Especially since Tedford would probably bring in Bridgford who probably won't start next year anyway. The main difference though, is that the season is effectively over for Cal this year.

That is thing I don't understand. Okay, I get it: you think Maynard is best chance to win. But we're not winning. So why not try someone else? Why haven't you mixed QBs in and out EVERY game to see who is hot or game ready or a better game player than practice player? You are acting like you are set at that position when you are not.

Maynard is trying and can make some plays (I don't mean to dog the guy), but seriously, is that the face of Cal football? Does he seem like a leader and a guy that can elevate a team? Will we watch old video of this team in 10 years and feel tremendous connection to him and feel like he was a real Cal guy? Is he another Roth, Morton, Rodgers, Gilbert, Kapp, Barr, Pawlawski, Rodgers, Bartkowski, Longshore, Barnes, Robertson, Taylor, or Boller? Obviously not. There is no great destruction of the team psyche of you switch QBs and try and find your guy. Or if you situationally switch as a strategic move. This all or nothing stubbornness--when you don't develop your bench at all (often not even in mop up duty)--is simply stupid.

Again, I appreciate every player who puts on the Blue and Gold--and do not mean to unfairly criticize Zach, I just have to be honest about the fact that while he can make a few great plays, he is not seeing open receivers, not improvising, not setting a tone, not always being smart, and far too often just hucking the ball up (his long passes this week were just lobs drifting while he looked in a different direction--they were going in approximate directions of targets). We can win some games with him sure--but could we better team with someone else? Let's find out.

freshfunk;841965141 said:

---

JT has gotta know that his seat is really hot... Why the heck is he doubling down on ZM? Personal complaints aside, wouldn't you even be curious to see how your other QBs perform in actual games

---

I see this type of thing from JT and sometimes I wonder if those uncomfortable rumors about the NC recruits hold some water.

MoragaBear;841965120 said:

---

I asked last Tuesday at the press conference, too. Based on the response -basically that Maynard's poor play would've had to have been virtually all his fault for a change- it leaves me little hope that we'll see a change for the forseeable future.

To me, that's the height of insanity. I don't care how the other QB's do, just give them a legit chance and see how it works out. The ceiling with Maynard is so low that it's a week after week blown opportunity to move this program forward.

---

Exactly. This season is lost, and there is absolutely no justification for not giving the other QB's a shot. The worst that can happen is that we will lose, but that's going to happen anyway.

MoragaBear;841965120 said:

---

I asked last Tuesday at the press conference, too. Based on the response -basically that Maynard's poor play would've had to have been virtually all his fault for a change- it leaves me little hope that we'll see a change for the forseeable future.

To me, that's the height of insanity. I don't care how the other QB's do, just give them a legit chance and see how it works out. The ceiling with Maynard is so low that it's a week after week blown opportunity to move this program forward.

---

Very true.

I hate to say it, but the more he doubles down on Maynard going forward- there's really only two possibilities that I can logically find for it.

1) Tedford is so arrogant and stubborn, that he's going to stick with his guy no matter what. The more people suggest someone else should get a try, the more he wants to not try them out just to to never let those people the fact they might be right.

2) There really was some deal that for KA to come to Cal, Maynard would get to start his two eligible years.

I used to have 3) in there. And 3 was he didn't want one of his good younger QB's to get sacrificed to a lack of Oline. But the more time that passes- the more I think that's just stupid. A better QB could have won us 2, maybe 3 of the games we lost. Gotta go with your best regardless.

What other explanation could there be?

Maynard wouldn't even be 3rd string for any other Pac-12 school.

I don't remember too many schools lining up to get his services when he was thinking of transferring.

Yet he's still our starter.

blungld;841965171 said:

---

That is thing I don't understand. Okay, I get it: you think Maynard is best chance to win. But we're not winning. So why not try someone else? Why haven't you mixed QBs in and out EVERY game to see who is hot or game ready or a better game player than practice player? You are acting like you are set at that position when you are not.

Maynard is trying and can make some plays (I don't mean to dog the guy), but seriously, is that the face of Cal football? Does he seem like a leader and a guy that can elevate a team? Will we watch old video of this team in 10 years and feel tremendous connection to him and feel like he was a real Cal guy? Is he another Roth, Morton, Rodgers, Gilbert, Kapp, Barr, Pawlawski, Rodgers, Bartkowski, Longshore, Barnes, Robertson, Taylor, or Boller? Obviously not. There is no great destruction of the team psyche of you switch QBs and try and find your guy. Or if you situationally switch as a strategic move. This all or nothing stubbornness--when you don't develop your bench at all (often not even in mop up duty)--is simply stupid.

Again, I appreciate every player who puts on the Blue and Gold--and do not mean to unfairly criticize Zach, I just have to be honest about the fact that while he can make a few great plays, he is not seeing open receivers, not improvising, not setting a tone, not always being smart, and far too often just hucking the ball up (his long passes this week were just lobs drifting while he looked in a different direction--they were going in approximate directions of targets). We can win some games with him sure--but could we better team with someone else? Let's find out.

---

Good questions BluenGold.

I too am totally fed up with the argument that "ZM is the best QB we have; so we have to play him."
For the present i will not challenge the claim that ZM is the best QB we have RIGHT NOW. [I question that conclusion but I will not push that point right now.]
But after thinking about Cal's present predicament, a thought occurred to me.
It was clear to me by the end of the USC game and certainly the UO game last year that ZM was not a satisfactory PAC 12 starting QB.

So why didn't JT make sure to get some playing time ("live fire" playing time and not just "had the ball to Isi" playing time). He could have scheduled in 2 series for the back-up (AB or Hinder or Boehm) during the 2nd or 3d quarters every other game or every third game. The back up would then run the normal plays especially passing plays.

These breaks would help ZM since it would give him time to watch what the opposing D was doing during the game and would give him a breather. If the 2 series were penciled in prior to the game, it would not be taken as a criticism of ZM when the back up came in.

In addition to giving ZM a chance to view the opposing D, it would help the Cal O since a different QB sometimes provides a change of pace.

[Note: JT did this a few times in his first few years at Cal.]

The obvious BIG advantage would be that by now the back up would have had 8-16 series of "live fire" game time. Maybe just maybe Cal would be in a better position right now than being "stuck" with ZM as Cal's only alternative.

cal98;841965198 said:

---

Maynard wouldn't even be 3rd string for any other Pac-12 school.

I don't remember too many schools lining up to get his services when he was thinking of transferring.

Yet he's still our starter.

---

3 schools offered him...

1. Buffalo
2. Middle Tennessee
3. Temple

A real plethora of powerhouse football schools...yet he starts over guys rated from somewhere around #11 to #23 in the nation and offered by Notre Dame, Alabama etc....People hate conspiracy theories and get really pi$$ed off when you mention it, but what the HELL is wrong with this picture?... Every time I see this it makes my brain hurt like crazy....seriously...JT really must have messed up these other guys so bad they can't play, because they all played great for their high schools.

Blue&Gould;841965182 said:

---

Very true.

I hate to say it, but the more he doubles down on Maynard going forward- there's really only two possibilities that I can logically find for it.

1) Tedford is so arrogant and stubborn, that he's going to stick with his guy no matter what. The more people suggest someone else should get a try, the more he wants to not try them out just to to never let those people the fact they might be right.

2) There really was some deal that for KA to come to Cal, Maynard would get to start his two eligible years.

I used to have 3) in there. And 3 was he didn't want one of his good younger QB's to get sacrificed to a lack of Oline. But the more time that passes- the more I think that's just stupid. A better QB could have won us 2, maybe 3 of the games we lost. Gotta go with your best regardless.

What other explanation could there be?

---

It's really probably 1. The reason? We saw the same crap in 2007, and it was the cause of another great meltdown.

JT stuck with Longshore even though nearly everyone wanted him to try someone else. All we kept hearing was that you can't blame Nate for all the problems, there are linemen who miss blocks and receivers who run the wrong routes, etc. And yes, that is all true. It was also true that Nate was playing on a broken leg and it was painfully obvious that he couldn't play well enough on it to lead the team to wins. Yet JT kept throwing him out there despite the fact that we had a backup (Riley) who had actually looked pretty good in game action save for one terrible mental mistake. He kept throwing him out there even after our hopes of winning the conference were long dead. The result was essentially that both quarterbacks were ruined. Nate was never the same and Riley was a jittery mess (though I don't want to crap on Riley too much -- I'd take his level of play in 2009-2010 right now).

And you could argue even further that we saw it again in 2005 with Ayoob, though there I felt the decision was more defensible, given that we were already on our 2nd string QB and the next guy in line was a converted fullback. Even so, JT waited awfully long to finally replace him.

It's also true that Maynard isn't getting great blocking from his line this year, and that sometimes receivers have dropped his passes or missed routes . . . but even given all of that he's playing like crap. Why wouldn't you try someone else now that you're 1-4 and going nowhere unless something changes?

That's exactly how I would have handled it. Given AB or Hinder three series every game in second quarter--unfailingly. I would have thought he would have learned the lesson of unprepared back up and stubborn sticking to shaky first guy years ago.

I've run out of all reasnable excuses to explain any of Tedford's "logic". I'm resigned to watching the train wreck unfold at this point and see what we can sort out later.

I would start only two seniors from here on. Schwnke and Anthony. Let's build or '13.