http://www.mercurynews.com/cal-bears/ci_21837526/cal-offenses-woes-no-fun-topic-jeff-tedford

Doesn't want to talk about last week...can't be inventive if the defense doesn't dictate allowing it. Wtf?

Just more evidence that he doesn't have a clue and will never be able to right the program.

BearlyAggie;841984850 said:

---

http://www.mercurynews.com/cal-bears/ci_21837526/cal-offenses-woes-no-fun-topic-jeff-tedford

Doesn't want to talk about last week...can't be inventive if the defense doesn't dictate allowing it. Wtf?

---

He clearly has no concept of what "inventive" means.

He seems to be channeling Braun in his last years here.

ACTIVATED LINK ---> http://www.mercurynews.com/cal-bears/ci_21837526/cal-offenses-woes-no-fun-topic-jeff-tedford

Our Domicile;841984857 said:

---

ACTIVATED LINK ---> http://www.mercurynews.com/cal-bears/ci_21837526/cal-offenses-woes-no-fun-topic-jeff-tedford

---

Loved this one:

Quote:

---

Two moments against Stanford prompted questions about play calling and the Bears' inability or unwillingness to be more creative. Midway through the first half, trailing 7-0, Cal had a first-and-goal at the 2, but three straight running plays netted minus-1 yard and prompted a field goal.
"We go in with six to eight plays down there, but you only get three. You don't get eight," Tedford said.

---

Yes, too bad we don't have 8 plays to score from 1st and goal on the 2.

the_purple_drank;841984865 said:

---

Jesus... what is going on??

This reminded me of the Poinsettia Bowl when he sent out the FG unit on the PAT, when the team was down by 10 and obviously needed to go for 2.

---

While we didn't have 8 plays to go two yards, many coaches might have considered that we had 4.

They also might have used a jumbo lineup, ran their fullback, used a QB keeper...tried play action and thrown to the TE in the back of the endzone...

Do these reporters ever ask him if a change at QB might be warranted?

It's a doom state of affair when the players believe this.

Quote:

---

Linebacker Nick Forbes said that's a back-burner concern.

"The season right now is Utah," he said. "Coach Tedford mentioned the possibility of a bowl game, which is still attainable. But we're not going to beat Oregon State or Oregon this week. The only team we can beat this week is Utah."

---

Tedford and our coaching staffs need to all be fired!

My favorite part was this:

Quote:

---

Asked generally about trying something outside the box, Tedford said opposing defenses dictate what might work in a given circumstance.
"You can't just throw caution to the wind and say we're going to do these crazy things and not be sound in your run blocking, not be sound in your pass protection," he said.

---

Being "sound" has not worked time and time again. Time and time again your schemes have proven not to be effective against defenses. We aren't even asking to throw caution to the wind, just do SOMETHING different rather than running an undersized back behind a weak line. That wouldn't be sound even if the defenses didn't see it a mile away.

We made no attempt to throw down field the entire game and exploit possibly the weakest part of Stanfurd's defense.

-kap

kaplanfx;841984889 said:

---

My favorite part was this:


Being "sound" has not worked time and time again. Time and time again your schemes have proven not to be effective against defenses. We aren't even asking to throw caution to the wind, just do SOMETHING different rather than running an undersized back behind a weak line. That wouldn't be sound even if the defenses didn't see it a mile away.

We made no attempt to throw down field the entire game and exploit possibly the weakest part of Stanfurd's defense.

-kap

---

They were expecting us to run, so go with play action, bootlegs, and throw over the top.

Thanks for fixing the link!

Watching the ESPNU Road Trip show now. I wish our product was as good as the highlights they are showing of the game, and the great game day experience all over campus they they've shown.

We can dream...

At least they stayed the entire game...

the_purple_drank;841984902 said:

---

But, that would require Maynard throwing the football. At least, for play action or throws over the top.

---

At least not a delay. Why not a Maynard sneak or a FB dive?

-kap

the_purple_drank;841984902 said:

---

But, that would require Maynard throwing the football. At least, for play action or throws over the top.

---

Yup here's the problem when you go all in on a QB that has no upside and cannot be depended on to win you a game. Tedford cannot throw deep despite possibly our only advantage against Furd - speed. It's a Catch-22 for JT that he created on his own.

the_purple_drank;841984902 said:

---

But, that would require Maynard throwing the football. At least, for play action or throws over the top.

---

He did complete 61% of his passes Saturday so there is a chance, but at least you can be assured that if he misses, it will likely be very high and out of bounds.

the_purple_drank;841984917 said:

---

Our offensive line was so bad, if Maynard tried to sneak the ball in (from the 2 yard line, no less), he would have lost 5 yards.

In all seriousness, I actually like the draw play call on 3rd down. Show pass, spread out Furd, don't let Maynard throw it. Too bad they still stopped us.

---

I don't think you go with the straight QB sneak--I think you go jumbo and have the RB plunge into the line but have Maynard keep the ball and dive in behind Tagaloa blocking at TE.

calumnus;841984923 said:

---

He did complete 61% of his passes Saturday so there is a chance, but at least you can be assured that if he misses, it will likely be very high and out of bounds.

---

Someone said ZM was 10-18 for like 88 yards before that final drive where he hit Harper and Keenan down the middle. Furd played prevent on that last drive.

Anyone remember seeing any shovel passes after it got blown up in 2004 against SC? that play was money for us for two years but because it didn't work against SC that one time, it disappeared from the playbook. Fake the slant and shovel pass it to anderson last week would have scored for sure.

The 4th and 1 zone read with Isi behind this O-line has to be the lowest percentage play to convert in our whole playbook. Let me see, give the ball to a small easy to tackle running back with no forward momentum 5 yard behind the line of scrimmage and hope a hole magically opens up....sounds great! Stanford was playing disciplined on the zone all day taking away the outside from zack so that he had to give the ball to isi, who stanford knew they could stuff running up the middle. Apparently we can't run sweeps, off tackle, or pitches with this team. What about a fullback dive that has worked all year long? Stevens hasn't been denied one yard that he needed yet.

GoCalBears;841984883 said:

---

It's a doom state of affair when the players believe this.

Tedford and our coaching staffs need to all be fired!

---

What is wrong with the Nick Forbes quote. I think that is exactly the right attitude.

RealDrew2;841984949 said:

---

What is wrong with the Nick Forbes quote. I think that is exactly the right attitude.

---

I'm with you on this one. I have a lot of negative things to complain about but if the players are truly buying in and still trying to improve... then... well isn't that what we want? I, for one, totally appreciate that quote. We could be undefeated and I'd want him still talking only about Utah.

RealDrew2;841984949 said:

---

What is wrong with the Nick Forbes quote. I think that is exactly the right attitude.

---

everyone losing their minds ...

KoreAmBear;841984930 said:

---

Someone said ZM was 10-18 for like 88 yards before that final drive where he hit Harper and Keenan down the middle. Furd played prevent on that last drive.

---

That was me, although actually that was before the final two drives (both in the 4th quarter).

caltripper;841984944 said:

---

The 4th and 1 zone read with Isi behind this O-line has to be the lowest percentage play to convert in our whole playbook. Let me see, give the ball to a small easy to tackle running back with no forward momentum 5 yard behind the line of scrimmage and hope a hole magically opens up....sounds great!

---

The sad thing is that this kind of (boneheaded) play continues to get called game after game and in critical situations.

to yourselves? Are you all masochists? We all KNOW what is wrong with this team..but if it makes you feel better....:horse

I am reading this and really laughing. The same crap for weeks now. I feel sorry for the players who came to Berkeley thinking we had a capable creative coach. We don't. As for our team, I just don't want Kline to transfer. Tedford didn't ruin Boller. Kline may be in that class as well. Whoever is coaching next year, even Tedford, can't keep me from coming to see Kline play.

RealDrew2;841984949 said:

---

What is wrong with the Nick Forbes quote. I think that is exactly the right attitude.

---

I'm looking at it too and I don't see anything wrong. Forbes is only saying that we're not going to beat those other teams this week, only potentially Utah. Did I miss something? Maybe GoCalBears read it as if he was saying we're not going to beat Oregon or OSU at all.

Of course, I personally don't think we will beat those teams at all, and I don't think we're going to a bowl, but I'm glad the players still think so.

KoreAmBear;841984930 said:

---

Someone said ZM was 10-18 for like 88 yards before that final drive where he hit Harper and Keenan down the middle. Furd played prevent on that last drive.

---

10 of 18 (56%) is still better than Nunes was on the day and was still better than our running game--1 yard per carry average by our running backs, longest run was 4 yards.

We should have been throwing down the middle all day, preferably off of play-action.

OneKeg;841985016 said:

---

I'm looking at it too and I don't see anything wrong. Forbes is only saying that we're not going to beat those other teams this week, only potentially Utah. Did I miss something? Maybe GoCalBears read it as if he was saying we're not going to beat Oregon or OSU at all.

Of course, I personally don't think we will beat those teams at all, and I don't think we're going to a bowl, but I'm glad the players still think so.

---

Forbes' quote is perfect for the situation, and yes, that may actually indicate he is getting good coaching in that regard or he may just be really mature, level headed with a naturally positive attitude--hopefully both are true.

calumnus;841985022 said:

---

10 of 18 (56%) is still better than Nunes was on the day and was still better than our running game--1 yard per carry average by our running backs, longest run was 4 yards.

We should have been throwing down the middle all day, preferably off of play-action.

---

But we started to move the ball when we went hurry up. And I mean real hurry up and not look-at-me hurry up. Then, once we got down to the five, we started the look-at-me crap and didn't gain another yard. Oregon (and now Arizona) really have it right: run plays at 100 miles per hour, run short yardage plays (eg. 4th and short) even faster, recruit speedy guys and make everyone on your team an aerobic freak. I'm not even convinced Oregon's Oline is that good. They just get enough of a piece of the defenders that the speedy backs are bound to break through given the breakneck speed at which they run their plays. And their QB is a running weapon so you can't just key on the backs. Our offense may look like theirs but it is light years different.

1979bear;841985014 said:

---

I am reading this and really laughing. The same crap for weeks now. I feel sorry for the players who came to Berkeley thinking we had a capable creative coach. We don't. As for our team, I just don't want Kline to transfer. Tedford didn't ruin Boller. Kline may be in that class as well. Whoever is coaching next year, even Tedford, can't keep me from coming to see Kline play.

---

And this offense is not QB friendly. Kline will be ruined if he plays for Tedford in this offense. I have no doubt about that.

GoCalBears - what do you want the players to believe? I think that quote is the perfect attitude for a player to have.

Tedford wants 8 plays to get 2 yards.

I just thought that was funny.

calumnus;841984876 said:

---

While we didn't have 8 plays to go two yards, many coaches might have considered that we had 4.

They also might have used a jumbo lineup, ran their fullback, used a QB keeper...tried play action and thrown to the TE in the back of the endzone...

---

Exactly, with one yard to gain, there is only one solution for the Bears this season. That would be the short yardage back, Stevens. You know the guy who has yet to be denied a short yardage first down all season?
This instance would definitely set up the play action no doubt.

calumnus;841984928 said:

---

I don't think you go with the straight QB sneak--I think you go jumbo and have the RB plunge into the line but have Maynard keep the ball and dive in behind Tagaloa blocking at TE.

---

The only problem with this is that the first RB would get tackled creating a pile at the line of scrimmage. This would make it difficult for Maynard to get around without slowing his momentum down quite bit.

But a counter boot pass to Rodgers dragging across the back of the endzone would have been more Tedford'esq pre 2007.