According to SI.com's Saturday Blitz.

http://saturdayblitz.com/2013/05/23/pac-12-preview-three-keys-for-the-north-in-2013/

Even if Kline is the final starter - and I believe he will be - I think this writer is basing that off of what he's hearing thus far. Pretty sure that ultimate decision hasn't been made yet.

Or maybe this guy hasn't done his full research and is just assuming Kline will be the starter since he is the most highly rated QB recruit we have on roster?

The TRUTH according to an SI writer who has to throw some words together for a column IN JUNE ... and, of course, he KNOWS what Sonny and his staff don't know yet.

Kline MAY start, Hinder MIGHT start, Goff COULD start ...

SonOfCalVa;842127778 said:

---

The TRUTH according to an SI writer who has to throw some words together for a column IN JUNE ... and, of course, he KNOWS what Sonny and his staff don't know yet.

Kline MAY start, Hinder MIGHT start, Goff COULD start ...

---

I wouldn't call him an SI.com writer because that's not what he describes himself.

He's a "freelance sportswriter" who runs that site, which is affiliated with SI.com.

But he's no Stewart Mandel (an actual SI.com writer).

It's like Bleacher Report and CNN. The two are affiliated, but you wouldn't describe a Bleacher Report writer as a CNN journalist.

I thought I owed NYCgoBears some lunch.

whatever he is, whomever he is ... his article is garbage.
Too much in there that can be picked apart based on facts of which he is oblivious.

Klindergoff is our starting quarterback until Sonny and Tony separate them.

The Duke!;842127781 said:

---

I thought I owed NYCgoBears some lunch.

---

Haha. I was hoping.

Based on the (two) Spring practices I attended, I'd say this competition is far from over. Goff "moved the chains" so to speak and Coach Dykes has indicated that's the main thing he's looking for in a quarterback. Kline definitely has competition.

I agree that all the preseason mags and articles that have unanimously identifed Kline as starter are almost cettainly not doing so with inside info. They are just "fluff" for fun discussion purposes. But I think the writer is correct in one very important way - pick the QB and let him develop, and not yank him at first sigh of trouble. Whether that is Kline or someone else. Its ok not to have picked the QB in spring, but I think they flirt with disaster if its not picked by first week on Aug. As Ive said before, at this level the difference between guys on roster - especially if all have little game exp - is not night and day. They are all good and should be all very close. But they have to pick a horse and stay with it.

Have any of these "writers" ever coached at or above the college level?
Sonny and Tony will make whatever decisions are necessary ... before, during and after games.

SonOfCalVa;842127782 said:

---

whatever he is, whomever he is ... his article is garbage.
Too much in there that can be picked apart based on facts of which he is oblivious.

Klindergoff is our starting quarterback until Sonny and Tony separate them.

---

Klindergoff. Love the name.

But it always reminds me of Zaphod Beeblebrox the humanoid alien in Hitchhiker's Guide to the Galaxy -- Humanoid but with two heads which are always arguing with each other.

BoaltBear;842127809 said:

---

Based on the (two) Spring practices I attended, I'd say this competition is far from over. Goff "moved the chains" so to speak and Coach Dykes has indicated that's the main thing he's looking for in a quarterback. Kline definitely has competition.

---

I too was at the Spring Game. Both Kline and Goff seemed to be about even. Kine has a little more accuracy on the long ball (two were really really accurate). Goff has a better short throw (at least at first, then Kline improved his short throws later in the game).

My call: either Kline or Goff. Hinder if Sonny wants to run the "Wild Bear" (run-pass option).

SonOfCalVa;842127844 said:

---

Have any of these "writers" ever coached at or above the college level?
Sonny and Tony will make whatever decisions are necessary ... before, during and after games.

---

In all seriousness, are you really implying that only people who have had collegiate level coaching experience can display accurate insights concerning college football? I'm pretty sure this guy hasn't done his homework which is why he's commenting on the QB position battle with such certainly, but that's really a terrible blanket position to adopt seeing as how a couple months ago you could feasibly have plugged in:

"Have any of these "writers" ever coached at or above the college level?
Tedford and Michalczik will make whatever decisions are necessary ... before, during and after games."

They choose Kline as the QB because Kline is more well known and therefore more "newsworthy" than either Hinder or Goff. Hinder is so under the radar that award winning sports columnist Bruce Jenkins on the Chron. completely left him out of the discussion in an article on Dykes printed last December. Kline sells more articles than the other 2. It's all about getting readers. Journalism has very little to do with it. Marketing has everything to do with it.

Many of us want Kline at QB because it is the best scenario for keeping all 3 QBs on the roster, but it wouldn't surprise me to see Goff beat out Kline in a year or 2. Kline has to get more consistent to live up to his hype and rating.

heartofthebear;842127850 said:

---

They choose Kline as the QB because Kline is more well known and therefore more "newsworthy" than either Hinder or Goff. Hinder is so under the radar that award winning sports columnist Bruce Jenkins on the Chron. completely left him out of the discussion in an article on Dykes printed last December. Kline sells more articles than the other 2. It's all about getting readers. Journalism has very little to do with it. Marketing has everything to do with it.

Many of us want Kline at QB because it is the best scenario for keeping all 3 QBs on the roster, but it wouldn't surprise me to see Goff beat out Kline in a year or 2. Kline has to get more consistent to live up to his hype and rating.

---

I am not so sure that Goff will beat out Kline in a year or two.
But I am sure of two things.
1. Sonny will have no hestitation in putting the best man on the field and will not give playing-time priority over talent and will not play someone simply because his brother is the star of the team.

2. Each one of Klindergoff is head and shoulders above Maynard.

68great;842127914 said:

---

I am not so sure that Goff will beat out Kline in a year or two.
But I am sure of two things.
1. Sonny will have no hestitation in putting the best man on the field and will not give playing-time priority over talent and will not play someone simply because his brother is the star of the team.

2. Each one of Klindergoff is head and shoulders above Maynard.

---

I'm sure of #1, but only hopeful when it comes to #2. Unfortunately, we have no idea if any of these guys will be better than Maynard. We all thought Maynard would be heads and shoulders above Reilly, but it turned out that he was about on the same level. We just have to hope for the best and wait and see.

But nothing is guaranteed. It's quite possible they could even be worse (Oski forbid).

The Duke!;842128024 said:

---

I'm sure of #1, but only hopeful when it comes to #2. Unfortunately, we have no idea if any of these guys will be better than Maynard. We all thought Maynard would be heads and shoulders above Reilly, but it turned out that he was about on the same level. We just have to hope for the best and wait and see.

But nothing is guaranteed. It's quite possible they could even be worse (Oski forbid).

---

luckily they wont have to be very good to be better than maynard. being better than maynard is a really low bar. i think theres a good chance that they can manage that.

The Duke!;842128024 said:

---

We all thought Maynard would be heads and shoulders above Reilly.

---

I would never, in a million years, have thought Maynard would be anywhere near as good as Riley. . . though I did think Riley would be better than Longshore. lol

Tedhead94;842128038 said:

---

I would never, in a million years, have thought Maynard would be anywhere near as good as Riley. . . though I did think Riley would be better than Longshore. lol

---

Honestly, pre-injury, Longshore would've been our marquee QB post Rodgers... that injury changed EVERYTHING

The Duke!;842128024 said:

---

We all thought Maynard would be heads and shoulders above Reilly, but it turned out that he was about on the same level.

---

Personally I never came close to thinking that.

i did think maynard would be better than what he turned out to be. he showed in that first fresno st game that he had a decent amount of talent. i just dont think that tedford really ever took advantage of the things that zach could do. he almost never rolled him out, he almost never put him out on designed running plays. tedford highlighted zach's weaknesses, "happy feet" by dropping him back in the pocket and expecting him to be rodgers. just a horrible, horrible combination. (tedford's style of coaching, maynard's strengths and weaknesses)

gobears725;842128047 said:

---

i did think maynard would be better than what he turned out to be. he showed in that first fresno st game that he had a decent amount of talent. i just dont think that tedford really ever took advantage of the things that zach could do. he almost never rolled him out, he almost never put him out on designed running plays. tedford highlighted zach's weaknesses, "happy feet" by dropping him back in the pocket and expecting him to be rodgers. just a horrible, horrible combination. (tedford's style of coaching, maynard's strengths and weaknesses)

---

He also had to deal with a receiver who only threw to his brother/overthrew the ball more times than other.

Riley > Maynard. One thing Maynard didnt have that Riley did - a running back to bail him out. Riley had Jahvid and Vereen. Maynard had Isi and CJ.

Who is this Reily character?

Klindergoff will be better than Maynurd because they will be playing in Sonny's system and not Tedford's complicated rocket science of an offense. All of them have stated how easy it was to pick up. Clearly, Maynurd couldn't do that with Tedford's, plus he was a terrible QB to begin with.

These guys have promise. I would love to see Kline start, but I'll be good with either of the other two if coach thinks they are ready.

75bear;842128055 said:

---

Who is this Reily character?

---

Get with the program:

Shortly after his senior season, the Cal QB known at the time as Kevin Riley changed the spelling of his last name because he was receiving too many crank calls, e-mails, tweets, etc.

Big C_Cal;842128069 said:

---

Get with the program:

Shortly after his senior season, the Cal QB known at the time as Kevin Riley changed the spelling of his last name because he was receiving too many crank calls, e-mails, tweets, etc.

---

what, really?

Tedhead94;842128038 said:

---

I would never, in a million years, have thought Maynard would be anywhere near as good as Riley. . . though I did think Riley would be better than Longshore. lol

---

I had my doubts when ZM was recruited. I knew that he had not been recruited by the better programs and finally landed in Buffalo. His record there was mediocre at best with as many INT's as TD's.
I hoped that JT could bring back some of the magic he had shown with Boller but then Boller was recruited by a number of strong programs and was a highly touted recruit when he came to Cal.

In his first training camps he did not blow away his opposition (Bridgford and Boehm and Hinder) and he (surprise surprise) had trouble with INT's. I hoped that JT would choose any of the other QB's.

Then when he took the field against FSU, does anyone remember his first pass attempt -- pick 6!

Then prior to the 2012 season I new Cal was going to have a terrible season in 2012 (and I was not alone in coming to this conclusion.)

gobears725;842128073 said:

---

what, really?

---

He was advised to do so after consulting with his teammate Shane Vareen.

mechaniCAL;842128043 said:

---

Honestly, pre-injury, Longshore would've been our marquee QB post Rodgers... that injury changed EVERYTHING

---

I think the injury impacted the second half of 2007. Riley looked great in 2007 but both he and Longshore looked bad in 2008.

I think the reason our QBs (when healthy) looked great in 2006 and 2007 but both looked bad in 2008?

2007 Leading Receivers/Yards:
Lavelle Hawkins 872
Desean Jackson 762
Robert Jordan 698
Justin Forsett 202
Craig Stevens 204
Cameron Morrah 155

2008 Leading Receivers/Yards:
Nyan Boateng 439
Cameron Morrah 326
Jahvid Best 246
Shane Vereen 221
Verran Tucker 362
L Cunningham 276
Jeremy Ross 210
Sean Young 192
Michael Calvin 103

That was just a huge drop-off in talent. We tend to think the passing the game is all about the quarterback(s), but it is not.

The board was very optimistic after 2010. The overwhelming sentiment was that whoever emerged (Bridgford or Maynard) would likely be better than the Riley and Longshore mediocrity we had endured the last few years.

And indeed occasionally Maynard was better than those guys. For instance: he outplayed Andrew Luck in the 2011 Big Game. He showed steady improvement towards the end of 2011 before the Holiday Bowl. But he never capitalized on that momentum.

I am hopeful that one of the Klindergoff will be much better. But I am trying not to get carried away until it actually happens. They could be much better than Maynard. But there is always the possibility that they could also be worse. Same with Sonny. He seems like a smart and personable guy. But I am waiting to see if he wins more games than Tedford before we anoint him as a savior.

calumnus;842128104 said:

---

I think the injury impacted the second half of 2007. Riley looked great in 2007 but both he and Longshore looked bad in 2008.

I think the reason our QBs (when healthy) looked great in 2006 and 2007 but both looked bad in 2008?

2007 Leading Receivers/Yards:
Lavelle Hawkins 872
Desean Jackson 762
Robert Jordan 698
Justin Forsett 202
Craig Stevens 204
Cameron Morrah 155

2008 Leading Receivers/Yards:
Nyan Boateng 439
Cameron Morrah 326
Jahvid Best 246
Shane Vereen 221
Verran Tucker 362
L Cunningham 276
Jeremy Ross 210
Sean Young 192
Michael Calvin 103

That was just a huge drop-off in talent. We tend to think the passing the game is all about the quarterback(s), but it is not.

---

In Riley's Junior year Cal WR's had hands of stone and dropped many catchable passes some that in fact hit them in the chest.
In Maynard's years Cal had a good group of WR's especially last year with receivers who made acrobatic catches making ZM's completion stats better than they should have been.

The Duke!;842128184 said:

---

The board was very optimistic after 2010. The overwhelming sentiment was that whoever emerged (Bridgford or Maynard) would likely be better than the Riley and Longshore mediocrity we had endured the last few years.

And indeed occasionally Maynard was better than those guys. For instance: he outplayed Andrew Luck in the 2011 Big Game. He showed steady improvement towards the end of 2011 before the Holiday Bowl. But he never capitalized on that momentum.

I am hopeful that one of the Klindergoff will be much better. But I am trying not to get carried away until it actually happens. They could be much better than Maynard. But there is always the possibility that they could also be worse. Same with Sonny. He seems like a smart and personable guy. But I am waiting to see if he wins more games than Tedford before we anoint him as a savior.

---

ZM's "momentum" was highly touted by JT and his crew. But that "momentum" was more apparent than real. Cal had a weak schedule in the latter part of the season compared to the earlier part of the season.
The only tough game was Stanfurd and during that game, JT went more to a running attack and limited the passing from ZM. When Cal played a tough opponent in the bowl game the results were similar to what they had been when Cal played tough opponents earlier in the season - embarrasing loss.

68great;842128245 said:

---

ZM's "momentum" was highly touted by JT and his crew. But that "momentum" was more apparent than real. Cal had a weak schedule in the latter part of the season compared to the earlier part of the season.
The only tough game was Stanfurd and during that game, JT went more to a running attack and limited the passing from ZM. When Cal played a tough opponent in the bowl game the results were similar to what they had been when Cal played tough opponents earlier in the season - embarrasing loss.

---

In 2012 if you count Holiday Bowl into things, Maynard sort of consistently managed to do sequences of 2 bad games followed by 2 good games until he got injured. Some of those 2 good games were losses where he actually did well though.

68great;842128245 said:

---

ZM's "momentum" was highly touted by JT and his crew. But that "momentum" was more apparent than real. Cal had a weak schedule in the latter part of the season compared to the earlier part of the season.
The only tough game was Stanfurd and during that game, JT went more to a running attack and limited the passing from ZM. When Cal played a tough opponent in the bowl game the results were similar to what they had been when Cal played tough opponents earlier in the season - embarrasing loss.

---

That is just not true.

Versus Stanford in Big Game:

Maynard 20 of 29 (69%) for 280 yards 2 TDs 0 Int

Sofele 21 carries for 96 yards 0 TDs
Anderson 4 carries for 2 yards 1 TD

We threw more than we ran, and far more than Tedford typically does, and Maynard passed more effectively than Sofele or CJ ran. 14 yards per complete and 9.7 yards per attempt. A 172.83 passing rating. It was definitely one of Maynard's better games (he played better than future #1 pick Luck). You would be hard pressed to find a better day of passing against a top opponent by a Cal quarterback.

Maynard actually had some of his best games against top opponents (last year it was Ohio State and UCLA). He had many bad games, but you have to give him his good games, and Big Game 2011 was definitely a good, even great game.