We know you are here. You just beat the living hell out of us so maybe we should listen to your advice. Tell us if you think we should fire our coach.

Personally, I think we shouldn't even discuss it till the season is over. I like Jeff Tedford as a coach. But what does our sworn enemy from that South Bay Suburban College Near the Shopping Malls think?

Meh, don't feed them and stop starting threads about them for one

You're seriously asking Furdies for <i>advice?</i>

If we're asking the weakest fan base in the Pac-12 for advice, we truly have hit rock bottom.

that wanted to ask Tedford what he was going to do to fix the problems.

You guys need to NOT become managers.




On second thought you'd fit right in at AT&T and IBM. Don't ask me how I know this.

I did not mean to **** off Cal fans by posting this thread. If the mods wants to delete this thread I am ok with that. But I am still curious of Furd's opinion.

an elderly Stanford fan seated directly behind me, who hadn't said a word all game, shook my hand and said in a soft voice, "Stay the course." He winked, and I couldn't stop laughing. He smiled and shuffled off.

:tedford

If anything they would advise us to stay with JT so that they continue winning BGs.

I imagine that they would recommend recruiting like they do. Tall, rangy, big guys. The way they were using Ertz and Toilolo is what we should be doing with Rodgers and (insert TE here). Wasn't that the point of JT going to the Pats to learn about TE play?

Based on the guys we have, I actually think we're better off going away from pro style and moving more towards spread. We've built depth at WR and have studs at speed (Bigelow).

:cheer:Monty:cheer:cheer

Stanford wants us to do exactly what we wanted them to do with Buddy Teeven and Walt Harris: more chances! Give 'em more chances! There is a non-zero probability that he will turn it around!

The world is full of closed societies. Why create one more?

What does it really cost you? Based on the posts here this weekend and today, you've got bigger problems than a few Stanford fans posting on an open board. Fix those problems (or most of them) and all of a sudden these minor irritations about who is posting where just...disappear.

BeteRouge;841984146 said:

---

Based on the posts here this weekend and today, you've got bigger problems than a few Stanford fans posting on an open board.

---

If you read any of the threads leading up to the Big Game, you'd realize that what many Cal fans really want is a real college rivalry. The apathetic Stanford fan base is more disheartening during Big Game week than the prospect of Tedford, Maynard, and Isi leading the Golden Bears.

OskiMD;841984166 said:

---

If you read any of the threads leading up to the Big Game, you'd realize that what many Cal fans really want is a real college rivalry. The apathetic Stanford fan base is more disheartening during Big Game week than the prospect of Tedford, Maynard, and Isi leading the Golden Bears.

---

If our program continues to go down the tubes, it'll be a rivalry that neither side cares about. The Big Game might as well stay in October.

I hope the reverse happens....our next coaching hire revives Cal football and turns the Big Game into a marquee event again, one in which Cal is playing for something more than just embarrassing a furd program that falls off the map after 2012.

Have there even been any Furd trolls on this board of late? I suspect more cal fans annoy more cal fans than any other school.

CardinalTPS;841984048 said:

---

You really can't fault your coach for being lazy. Your AD made a monumental mistake and signed him to that long contract so it is only natural for him to not have the incentive to work hard. Without your coach working hard, what incentive do your players have? The consensus over here on the west side of the bay is that the College near a BART station's players were more talented but just not trying hard out there. You got beat on the line of scrimmage because less-talented guys played better as a unit and used better technique. While getting rid of your coach will likely help somewhat, your #1 priority should be to address the Sandy issue. The timing will be best in a few months when the new Chancellor comes into office.

---

Well, somebody asked for a Stanfurdite's opinion and that's what we got: A bunch of sh!t.

Furd Trolls: What do you think we should do?

Kick a$$ and take names.

Okay, howsabout a list that everyone can read and individual users can apply to the ignore list if they so desire.

I am a Stanford fan and I post from time to time on these forums. I am not sure if that makes me a "Furd Troll". I like discussing Pac 12 college football and this is a more lively forum than anything Stanford fans have going.

I have a great deal of respect for Tedford. He is a class act and is impossible to hate, even when his teams were thrasing Stanford in the middle part of the last decade. I think he has peaked and it is time for Cal to move on.

Instead of focusing on big-name candidates or coaches with NFL ties, I would focus on up-and-coming and hungry coaches from smaller programs looking to make a name for themselves. Stanford did that with Harbaugh. Sure, we lost him after a few years but not before he was able to fundamentally change our program for the better.

To be honest, if I was a Cal fan I would be looking hard at the San Jose State football coach. He is turning that program around. They played Stanford very tough this year. To be honest, that SJS team may be able to beat Cal if they were to play next week. And he is doing that with players who for the most part would be lucky to play backup for Cal.

^Yes you are Furd Troll but you proved that your life is worth sparing and perhaps there is an ounce of intellect at Furd. That is a respectable post.

BobbyGBear;841984615 said:

---

^Yes you are Furd Troll but you proved that your life is worth sparing and perhaps there is an ounce of intellect at Furd. That is a respectable post.

---

I think you need to look up the definition of "internet troll"... it is not an adversary who posts nice things or is constructive without purpose of causing trouble...the above poster clearly is not a troll. Anyone who joins a the discussion in good faith is ok with me even if he is a Furd.

Quote:

---

An "Internet troll" or "Forum Troll" or "Message Board Troll" is a person who posts outrageous message to bait people to answer. Forum Troll delights in sowing discord on the forums. A troll is someone who inspires flaming rhetoric, someone who is purposely provoking and pulling people into flaming discussion. Flaming discussions usually end with name calling and a flame war.

---

Quote:

---

An Internet troll, or simply troll in Internet slang, is someone who posts controversial, inflammatory, irrelevant or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum or chat room, with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response or to generally disrupt normal on-topic discussion.

---

I'm a stanford fan as well although I do follow/root for cal when they are not playing Stanford. Anyway, Cal's current problems are more complicated than just blaming Tedford or Maynard. Cal has had a sort of revolving door of assistant coaches over the years and there has been bad luck with injuries to certain players at inopportune moments but the Pac 10/12 has also become way more competitive from the top on down as well. However, I think the biggest issue (as of the last 3-4 years) is a culture at the Cal football program that seems to allow talented individuals more importance than the team as a whole. Everyone knows that Cal football has a collection of althletically gifted individuals but for some reason they do not come together/jell as a sound fundamental team. What I've noticed is a general lack of dicipline in terms of execution (i.e. missed assignments) and of course penalties that are self inflicted. Couple that with inconsistent play calling, lacking leadership by senior players and a now curious strategy of not playing to one's strengths in terms of personel (forcing Maynard for example to be a pocket passer, not giving Bigelow more touches, etc) and you have a much harder time winning games. The margin of victory and defeat is razor thin (hinging many times on one or two plays, penalties) and I think that Cal would put itself in a better position to consistently compete as well as win and be able to close out games if they play to their personel strengths and of course are more diciplined in execution and perhaps more creative in their offensive/defensive schemes. Cal's football teams now kind of resemble those Gilbertson teams of the 90's....very talented but one never knows which team will show up on Saturday....they can beat anybody in the country on a given day yet also inexplicably lose as well. No consistency or dicipline which does tend to ultimately reflect back on the coach. I know that this is sort of a rambling post but many of us in the bay area are puzzled by the performance of Tedford's teams the last 3-4 years and so it is really hard to describe in one or two sentences.

CardinalTPS;841984048 said:

---

You really can't fault your coach for being lazy. Your AD made a monumental mistake and signed him to that long contract so it is only natural for him to not have the incentive to work hard. Without your coach working hard, what incentive do your players have? The consensus over here on the west side of the bay is that the College near a BART station's players were more talented but just not trying hard out there. You got beat on the line of scrimmage because less-talented guys played better as a unit and used better technique. While getting rid of your coach will likely help somewhat, your #1 priority should be to address the Sandy issue. The timing will be best in a few months when the new Chancellor comes into office.

---

So why is he still sleeping in his office most of the week, working 12+ hour days, and still racking up all of that mileage on the recruiting trail instead of sending out his underlings to do the dirty work if he supposedly doesn't give a damn and isn't working hard?
So who are these "plenty of coaches out there like Harbaugh" you talk about who would be realistic hires?

You dickheads at Stanfurd were as lucky with the Harbaugh (and maybe Shaw) hiring as you were unlucky with the Teevens and Harris hirings. Then, you win a few Big Games and come over here spouting off twaddle as if you knew something. You don't.

Go look at the Axe, while you still have it.

CardinalTPS;841984813 said:

---

After seeing the lack of effort by your team on Saturday, I may have jumped to too many conclusions. But admittedly, it's uncommon to see more-talented players get beaten so badly by less-talented players and to show such a lack of effort. I highly doubt you will see more than one player from our current roster play in the NFL whereas your team will undoubtedly have a whole bunch. Admittedly, with Berkeley having so many individuals living off the system, I may have extrapolated your coach to be the same with his extended contract. The point is, maybe he still works hard. You know better than I. But that only goes to show he and your AD are more incompetent than previously thought. He's basically gone at this point so it doesn't really matter.

---

One player from Furd is definitely underselling your team - you have Chase Thomas, Skane Skov, Zach Ertz, Levine Toilolo and Stephan Taylor who are all predicted to be drafted and have a good chance at playing in the NFL.

I think that Cal has more depth however and that we do have a slight advantage in overall talent. However, the one major area that you have more talent is the line and that will continue especially with the class that Shaw recently brought in.

That being said, Cal with our talent should have been competitive on Saturday and we weren't - that comes down on Tedford.

CardinalTPS;841984813 said:

---

After seeing the lack of effort by your team on Saturday, I may have jumped to too many conclusions. But admittedly, it's uncommon to see more-talented players get beaten so badly by less-talented players and to show such a lack of effort. I highly doubt you will see more than one player from our current roster play in the NFL whereas your team will undoubtedly have a whole bunch. Admittedly, with Berkeley having so many individuals living off the system, I may have extrapolated your coach to be the same with his extended contract. The point is, maybe he still works hard. You know better than I. But that only goes to show he and your AD are more incompetent than previously thought. He's basically gone at this point so it doesn't really matter.

---

I would like to point out....Cal is not that overwhelming more talented than Stanford as you are saying. Granted I do believe that Cal has a plethora of talented individuals....more so overall than Stanford but that is oversimplyfing your analysis. If you break it down by position then yes, you can definitely say that Cal has more quantity of talented players in the secondary and wide receiver positions. More overall depth in terms of team speed as well but Stanford has more talent/depth at O-line, Tight Ends, D-Line and linebackbers. Stanford actually has several NFL caliber players at all of these aforementioned positions plus at least one at running back (Taylor). It's not like Stanford is talent wise the same as Presbyterian or UC Davis for example.

FarmFanUCDgrad;841984832 said:

---

I would like to point out....Cal is not that overwhelming more talented than Stanford as you are saying. Granted I do believe that Cal has a plethora of talented individuals....more so overall than Stanford but that is oversimplyfing your analysis. If you break it down by position then yes, you can definitely say that Cal has more quantity of talented players in the secondary and wide receiver positions. More overall depth in terms of team speed as well but Stanford has more talent/depth at O-line, Tight Ends, D-Line and linebackers. Stanford actually has several NFL caliber players at all of these aforementioned positions plus at least one at running back (Taylor). It's not like Stanford is talent wise the same as Presbyterian or UC Davis for example.

---

+1 Great summary of Cal and Stanford's talent level.

That Furd Troll you addressed just kept running her mouth and got pwned.

FarmFanUCDgrad;841984776 said:

---

I'm a stanford fan as well although I do follow/root for cal when they are not playing Stanford. Anyway, Cal's current problems are more complicated than just blaming Tedford or Maynard. Cal has had a sort of revolving door of assistant coaches over the years and there has been bad luck with injuries to certain players at inopportune moments but the Pac 10/12 has also become way more competitive from the top on down as well. However, I think the biggest issue (as of the last 3-4 years) is a culture at the Cal football program that seems to allow talented individuals more importance than the team as a whole. Everyone knows that Cal football has a collection of althletically gifted individuals but for some reason they do not come together/jell as a sound fundamental team. What I've noticed is a general lack of dicipline in terms of execution (i.e. missed assignments) and of course penalties that are self inflicted. Couple that with inconsistent play calling, lacking leadership by senior players and a now curious strategy of not playing to one's strengths in terms of personel (forcing Maynard for example to be a pocket passer, not giving Bigelow more touches, etc) and you have a much harder time winning games. The margin of victory and defeat is razor thin (hinging many times on one or two plays, penalties) and I think that Cal would put itself in a better position to consistently compete as well as win and be able to close out games if they play to their personel strengths and of course are more diciplined in execution and perhaps more creative in their offensive/defensive schemes. Cal's football teams now kind of resemble those Gilbertson teams of the 90's....very talented but one never knows which team will show up on Saturday....they can beat anybody in the country on a given day yet also inexplicably lose as well. No consistency or dicipline which does tend to ultimately reflect back on the coach. I know that this is sort of a rambling post but many of us in the bay area are puzzled by the performance of Tedford's teams the last 3-4 years and so it is really hard to describe in one or two sentences.

---

Reminding us of the Gilbertson teams really was a low blow, but, unfortunately, accurate.
Those teams drove me crazy with their inconsistent play.

And this team (for the last few years) has done the same.

FarmFanUCDgrad;841984776 said:

---

I'm a stanford fan as well although I do follow/root for cal when they are not playing Stanford. Anyway, Cal's current problems are more complicated than just blaming Tedford or Maynard. Cal has had a sort of revolving door of assistant coaches over the years and there has been bad luck with injuries to certain players at inopportune moments but the Pac 10/12 has also become way more competitive from the top on down as well. However, I think the biggest issue (as of the last 3-4 years) is a culture at the Cal football program that seems to allow talented individuals more importance than the team as a whole. Everyone knows that Cal football has a collection of althletically gifted individuals but for some reason they do not come together/jell as a sound fundamental team. What I've noticed is a general lack of dicipline in terms of execution (i.e. missed assignments) and of course penalties that are self inflicted. Couple that with inconsistent play calling, lacking leadership by senior players and a now curious strategy of not playing to one's strengths in terms of personel (forcing Maynard for example to be a pocket passer, not giving Bigelow more touches, etc) and you have a much harder time winning games. The margin of victory and defeat is razor thin (hinging many times on one or two plays, penalties) and I think that Cal would put itself in a better position to consistently compete as well as win and be able to close out games if they play to their personel strengths and of course are more diciplined in execution and perhaps more creative in their offensive/defensive schemes. Cal's football teams now kind of resemble those Gilbertson teams of the 90's....very talented but one never knows which team will show up on Saturday....they can beat anybody in the country on a given day yet also inexplicably lose as well. No consistency or dicipline which does tend to ultimately reflect back on the coach. I know that this is sort of a rambling post but many of us in the bay area are puzzled by the performance of Tedford's teams the last 3-4 years and so it is really hard to describe in one or two sentences.

---

this poster obviously has seen many recent games.

the_purple_drank;841984907 said:

---

lol you obviously haven't been here long. This board was once so pro-Tedford that anything anti-Tedford resulted in a ban (drunkoski). In hindsight, we should have known. But but because we weren't 1-11 anymore, we wanted to give Tedford a statue.

---

the positive to hang on is that Cal football in 2012 is in such great shape compared to 2001. I mean the facilities, the talent level, a decade of winning (when was the last time one could say that?) and of course much much higher expectations. I mean Cal football as is is only a few tweaks away from being extremely competitive. Hell in this bizarro world, Stanford is winning (barely) with an unbelievable defense and a mostly apathetic and predictable offense. Weird....Anyway, The Cal Bear Faithful are restless and they should be but this may very well turn around (with Tedford) or if not then with someone else at the helm. Tedford will start having to coach for his "coaching life" and maybe that's a good thing. The Maynard marriage with Tedford's existing offensive philosophy has been to me like fitting a square peg in a circle. Everything may turn around next year...that how fickle college football can be from one year to the next (see Oregon State as an example). I believe that Tedford stays to coach until next year unless they are blown out in all four remaining games and the players begin rebelling openly. IMO, As much as people are griping with frustration, 2013 will be Tedfords make or break year.

Big C_Cal;841984812 said:

---

You dickheads at Stanfurd were as lucky with the Harbaugh (and maybe Shaw) hiring as you were unlucky with the Teevens and Harris hirings. Then, you win a few Big Games and come over here spouting off twaddle as if you knew something. You don't.

Go look at the Axe, while you still have it.

---

There is no need to get worked up. We were specifically invited to share our opinions in this thread. These aren't earth shattering relevations and nothing many of you don't know already. No reason why we can't coexist in peace and if the forum administrators don't want any Stanford fans posting on these forums, they can always ban us.

As to overall talent level, I think Stanford's roster may be more talented. We are clearly more talented at the bulk of the DL and LB positions. Secondary is probably a wash. Cal probably has better corners but Stanford has better safeties.

On offense, the OL disparity in favor of Stanford is so large that some of our non-starters (i.e. Peat, Garnett) would likely be starting for Cal right now. QB is probably a wash as they both are mediocre at best. RB is also a wash as both teams have a strong stable of running backs. The only area where I see a big mismatch in favor of Cal is at wide receiver. Your 3 wide receivers are all better than any receiver Stanford has. At TE, I see a big mismatch in favor of Stanford.

Cardinal96;841985459 said:

---

a wash.

---

:cheer:Monty:cheer:cheer

BMroom;841984049 said:

---

If we're asking the weakest fan base in the Pac-12 for advice, we truly have hit rock bottom.

---

We have, we just don't know it yet!

wifeisafurd;841984888 said:

---

this poster obviously has seen many recent games.

---

And taken lots of notes!!

All I have is [COLOR="Blue"][SIZE="4"]F*CK F*RD[/SIZE][/COLOR].

Cardinal96;841985456 said:

---

There is no need to get worked up. We were specifically invited to share our opinions in this thread. These aren't earth shattering relevations and nothing many of you don't know already. No reason why we can't coexist in peace and if the forum administrators don't want any Stanford fans posting on these forums, they can always ban us.

---

Sorry. The reason I am (still) worked up is because you, our arch-rival, just kicked our ass.

Also, the ideas posited by the other Card poster were pretty asinine. If you have what seems to be a good, solid coach, you shouldn't attempt to keep with a long-term contract? Said poster also (in another post) seems to have a bizarre vendetta against our AD.

I did sort of imply that I though you should get off this board. My bad: I would actually encourage more of you people to come over and post. Without a rival, there can be no rivalry.