Are you serious?? Tedford's teams played with NO heart, his offense was predictable, and we had MUCH better players on D last year. At the start of this year, we had 2 defensive starters returning...that's right, 2. Then, we have had a horrific rash of injuries so that we have a CB playing at S and a converted WR at CB.
Plus, Ohio St. is absolutely better than they were last year - if you try to say otherwise, you are completely clueless about college football.
If a Tedford team went down big early in the game, it was a guaranteed blowout with no chances taken (remember SC?) Cal's offense is 1000x better, it's D will go through a rough year with inexperience and injuries, and Dykes will throw everything at an opponent that Tedford would NEVER attempt. If you really believe that Tedford would do better, your picture should be next to the word "insanity" in the dictionary.

SchadenBear;842176322 said:

---

NK

---

Pendergast runs this D and we don't go down 21-0 in the first 6 minutes.

The because problem I have with Sonny Dykes is he doesn't care about defense. He comes from this new era football school that just says score more points than the other team. Buh was an obvious hire out of this school of thought and until he changes I think we will continue to see the same

So Tedford is a "genius" for giving Bigelow 4 carries against Ohio State?

This Cal team is not as good as last year's team. When a 3 win team loses its starting QB, its star WR to the NFL, and most of its defense to graduation why would you expect it to perform the same or better?


In my opinion one big problem other than the defense has been Cal's weak running game. Bigelow is a junior and he should be running for more yardage in this offense whether the OL is inexperienced or not. Dykes needs to fix that. I also want to see the defense improve between now and the end of the year because it is atrocious now.


Do you think Dykes can manage two more wins this year? I think he can.

I will say this. Tedford would have never hired buh as a DC. Because tedford actually knows a bit about defense

DO makes the OP look like a genius.

Tedford;842176520 said:

---

I will say this. Tedford would have never hired buh as a DC. Because tedford actually knows a bit about defense

---

Thanks, Tedford.

Look guys, with all due respect, this thread blows. It's based on an assertion with no backup by a guy who didn't come to the game and "started cooking dinner" in disgust before the game was over.

This is not a Cal fan.

gooski;842176448 said:

---

You're forgetting how Tedford finished last season - we gave up 49 points to Utah, 59 points to Oregon and 62 points to Oregon St. We also only scored 9 points against USC, 3 against Stanford, and didn't score more than 20 in the last three games of the season (UW, UO, Oregon St).

Let's see how Dykes finishes after the Oregon game which I expect to be a blowout. If he gets more than three wins, he will have done better than Tedford last year.

It's like you've forgotten about all of the other abysmal losses last season - we can do a game by game comparison when this season is over to really see how Dykes stacks up against Tedford. I want to see progress and I like his playcalling way more than Tedford's complicated playbook.

---

My god you're right. I guess I erased that from my memory. Thanks (but no thanks ;P) for reminding me.

JimmyMcNulty;842176534 said:

---

Look guys, with all due respect, this thread blows. It's based on an assertion with no backup by a guy who didn't come to the game and "started cooking dinner" in disgust before the game was over.

This is not a Cal fan.

---

+1000 Thanks Jimmy for perfectly describing the absurdity of this thread. I think some of these so-called Cal fans need to take a mandatory 24 hour timeout from posting on BI after a loss.

freshfunk;842176431 said:

---

Honest question: How many times (and which games) did a Tedford led team allow the opponent to score 52 points?

I suppose running a quicker offense could be factor to giving opponents more opportunities to score.

---

Look at the way our team ended last season. Look at all the blowout losses we endured the past two seasons. Our team lacked heart with Tedford at the helm. Like I said, I appreciate what he did, but good riddance. I thought it was the Tedford haters who needed to turn the page, but the Tedford homers are looking even worse right now.

YuSeeBerkeley;842176548 said:

---

Look at the way our team ended last season. Look at all the blowout losses we endured the past two seasons. Our team lacked heart with Tedford at the helm. Like I said, I appreciate what he did, but good riddance. I thought it was the Tedford haters who needed to turn the page, but the Tedford homers are looking even worse right now.

---

It's true. But I was remembering our performance last year against tOSU where we actually had a chance to win (and a defense that stopped them) instead of getting smoked like we did today.

freshfunk;842176558 said:

---

It's true. But I was remembering our performance last year against tOSU where we actually had a chance to win (and a defense that stopped them) instead of getting smoked like we did today.

---

Different teams, different era. I can see the desire to compare the two, but it's kinda apples and oranges. We'll be ok. We'll compete hard this season. It'll pay dividends, maybe sooner than any of us think.

freshfunk;842176558 said:

---

It's true. But I was remembering our performance last year against tOSU where we actually had a chance to win (and a defense that stopped them) instead of getting smoked like we did today.

---

Tedford had a few games last year where the team looked unexpectedly good (UCLA also), but they were the exceptions and not the rule.

LMAO. Way to take the leap, dude. Move this thread to trash or entertainment for a rainy night or places to eat in Berkeley.

We caught aOSU sleep walking last year... think about it Maynard had his best game!... this year they are not only more experienced, but came in with something even more to prove than we did.

The title of this thread makes it easy to see why players think fans are idiots and should be seen and not heard. We had issues last year or have some of the brainiacs forgotten the APR, the lack of scoring and meltdown that occurred last year under Tedford. Dykes has the program and more specifically the offense going in the right direction. Don't forget, Tedford didn't play freshmen at QB. Concerning the defense, Buh needs to come up with a defensive scheme that doesn't give up 500+ yrds a game or suffer the consequences as the Defensive Coordinator. It's that simple, Dykes can't afford it, the program can't afford it, Cal can't afford it, and fans won't stand for it. If we want to play with the big boys, we have to willing to do what the big boys would do if their Defensive Coordinator continued to give up 500+ yrds a game and did not show any improvement over the season.

freshfunk;842176400 said:

---

I don't want Tedford back but I think he would've done better in all 3 of these games than Sonny has. As much as i like Sonny, we need to keep some perspective.

---

If Tedford was here, we'd be watching Bridgford qb a young team with an incredibly complicated playbook. Anyone comparing the personnel on this team to last years is an idiot. Tedford left the cupboard completely empty and the irony is that many are blaming dykes for that.

Dykes isn't perfect, but he played to win which is more than we can say about JT last year at OSU.

schaden - do yourself a favor and spend more time on imagefap, i mean seriously

SchadenBear;842176414 said:

---

Last year Cal played a respectful 35- 28 loss to tosu in Columbus. In fact, the game was very much in doubt until the last minutes of the fourth quarter.

All I know is that I always felt we could have won that game going into the 4th quarter.

Tonight, I started cooking dinner.

---

Maybe you should actually attend games instead if spewing idiocy on the Internet if you care so much about Cal

The really annoying thing about the end of the Tedford era was that you'd get psyched up all week for a game.

And it was essentially over within 5 minutes.

On the other hand, we were still in it at halftime. At least it was a game for a small time, despite being down 21-0.

freshfunk;842176411 said:

---

I think the record would be the same and, yes, it would be more boring but i think our margins of win/loss would've been better. We definitely would be doing better on defense.

---

I guess you didn't pay attention to the margin of losses in the latter part of last season, huh?

SchadenBear;842176467 said:

---

Bite me. You don't know what you are talking about.

---

Actually, you are the one coming across as not knowing what you are talking about. Sorry. But you are looking foolish at the moment. Take a breath.

SchadenBear;842176429 said:

---

How so? Last year we had a running game and controlled the tempo of the game.

This year we rushed for half the yardage, and most of it was useless.

Teams don't go from battling a highly ranked team to a 35-28 score away, then go to loosing by 30 at home without there being a serious systemic problem.

---

1. We did not lose by 30. We lost by 18,

2. We played the number 4 team in the nation.

3. We are the second least experienced team in the nation

4. We put up 508 yards against the number 4 team in the nation.

5. Our true freshmen QB LEADS the nation in passing yardage.

6. Our defense is giving up way too many yards. However, the are young and many payers are out.

7. This team is very fun to watch and will only get better.

8. Last years team would have rolled over and given up once they were down 21-0. We would have lost 70-3.

9. Stop the fire this guy and that guy thread. Lets give the coaches a chance. Everybody expects this team to win every game. It is not going to happen. In the next 1-3 years when Dykes and company has had a chance to get their own players and shape the team, we are going to be good, real good.

oskibear1988;842176922 said:

---

1. We did not lose by 30. We lost by 18,

2. We played the number 4 team in the nation.

3. We are the second least experienced team in the nation

4. We put up 508 yards against the number 4 team in the nation.

5. Our true freshmen QB LEADS the nation in passing yardage.

6. Our defense is giving up way too many yards. However, the are young and many payers are out.

7. This team is very fun to watch and will only get better.

8. Last years team would have rolled over and given up once they were down 21-0. We would have lost 70-3.

9. Stop the fire this guy and that guy thread. Lets give the coaches a chance. Everybody expects this team to win every game. It is not going to happen. In the next 1-3 years when Dykes and company has had a chance to get their own players and shape the team, we are going to be good, real good.

---

This. I have never seen a team this young, inexperienced and injury decimated but we were still fighting until the end and exciting to watch. At the end of the day we are at 1-2, which is where most of us thought we'd be even before we suffered all these injuries on D. We are most likely going to be 1-3 after playing Oregon. It's weird to say it but as unhappy as I am about the record, I'm absolutely hopeful about this team and our future. They are mesmerizing. Tedford's teams haven't been that in years.

freshfunk;842176431 said:

---

Honest question: How many times (and which games) did a Tedford led team allow the opponent to score 52 points?

I suppose running a quicker offense could be factor to giving opponents more opportunities to score.

---

At least 3 times ast year

HaloBear;842176371 said:

---

Ohio State at that point last year was likely nowhere near the team they are this year at this point.

Also, Meyer's program is STOCKED with talent. It's very similar to the situation Mora inherited. Both programs were loaded and deep with talent.

I loved him for what he did for our program, but JT let his program crash and burn in every respect possible.

---

JT himself was a crash and burn, which was reflected in the team. Sonny will turn this around. Give him time.

SchadenBear;842176442 said:

---

La Tech v. tamu. Final score 59-57 tamu. Moral victory?

---

SchadenBear;842176414 said:

---

Last year Cal played a respectful 35- 28 loss to tosu in Columbus. In fact, the game was very much in doubt until the last minutes of the fourth quarter.

---

Sooooo..... moral victory?

The problem with arguing with an idiot in public is its often hard to tell which poster is the idiot.

StillNoStanfurdium;842176502 said:

---

Pendergast runs this D and we don't go down 21-0 in the first 6 minutes.

---

Well, by golly, you are probably right about this. But so what? Would you really want Clancy Pendergast back? Pendergast's defenses usually did not give up more than 14 points in the first quarter, but then his defenses could get progressively worse over the next 3 quarters. Would you really want a defense that could not get much better over the course of a game, or a season?

In 2010, his first year, Cal gave up only 7 points in the first quarter to Nevada, but we ended up losing 52-13. Against USC, his defense gave up 14 in the first quarter, but then USC scored 28 points in the 2nd quarter, to put us down by 42-0 at the half, eventually losing 48-14. Against Stanford, Pendergast's defense gave up 10 points in the first quarter, and then proceeded to collapse, as Stanford had us down by 45-0 at the end of 3 quarters, and ended up winning 48-14, tying the all-time record for most points ever scored by a team in the Big Game.

In 2011, Oregon scored 14 in the first quarter, and went on to blow Cal out, 43-15. In 2012, against football powerhouse Utah, Clancy's defense gave up 14 in the 1st quarter, and Cal eventually lost 49-27. Against Oregon, Clancy's defense gave up 14 in the 1st quarter, as Cal was creamed, 59-17. Against Oregon State, Clancy again gave up 14 in the 1st quarter, and it got a lot worse, as Cal was crushed 62-14.

So three games in, and you are ready to fire Buh, and replace him with Pendergast? Pendergast is a guy who belongs in the NFL, and should have stayed there. You can't play a 3-4 in college, or anywhere, unless you have three absolute stud defensive linemen, like Ohio State had yesterday, and we did not and do not have them now. Pendergast was also a guy who did not understand modern college offenses, and he was a guy who could not stop a running QB.

I would guess that Pendergast never had to deal with this many injuries at once, or this young and inexperienced a team, or this tough a schedule, all at the same time, and in his first 3 games. Buh has had 3 games with this patchwork or makeshift group. Give the guy a chance, for goodness sakes.

And in a few weeks, we will put up over 600 yards and at least 45 points against Pendergast's USC defense. You read it here first.

ykes

SFCityBear;842177344 said:

---

Well, by golly, you are probably right about this. But so what? Would you really want Clancy Pendergast back? Pendergast's defenses usually did not give up more than 14 points in the first quarter, but then his defenses could get progressively worse over the next 3 quarters. Would you really want a defense that could not get much better over the course of a game, or a season?

In 2010, his first year, Cal gave up only 7 points in the first quarter to Nevada, but we ended up losing 52-13. Against USC, his defense gave up 14 in the first quarter, but then USC scored 28 points in the 2nd quarter, to put us down by 42-0 at the half, eventually losing 48-14. Against Stanford, Pendergast's defense gave up 10 points in the first quarter, and then proceeded to collapse, as Stanford had us down by 45-0 at the end of 3 quarters, and ended up winning 48-14, tying the all-time record for most points ever scored by a team in the Big Game.

In 2011, Oregon scored 14 in the first quarter, and went on to blow Cal out, 43-15. In 2012, against football powerhouse Utah, Clancy's defense gave up 14 in the 1st quarter, and Cal eventually lost 49-27. Against Oregon, Clancy's defense gave up 14 in the 1st quarter, as Cal was creamed, 59-17. Against Oregon State, Clancy again gave up 14 in the 1st quarter, and it got a lot worse, as Cal was crushed 62-14.

So three games in, and you are ready to fire Buh, and replace him with Pendergast? Pendergast is a guy who belongs in the NFL, and should have stayed there. You can't play a 3-4 in college, or anywhere, unless you have three absolute stud defensive linemen, like Ohio State had yesterday, and we did not and do not have them now. Pendergast was also a guy who did not understand modern college offenses, and he was a guy who could not stop a running QB.

I would guess that Pendergast never had to deal with this many injuries at once, or this young and inexperienced a team, or this tough a schedule, all at the same time, and in his first 3 games. Buh has had 3 games with this patchwork or makeshift group. Give the guy a chance, for goodness sakes.

And in a few weeks, we will put up over 600 yards and at least 45 points against Pendergast's USC defense. You read it here first.

ykes

---

I'm a Clancy fan so I'm going to add a little bit to what you've written here.

In 2010, our defense was awful against Nevada. I don't exactly remember who was injured, but I think Browner was at MLB and was supposed to handle the QB on the read option. He did no such thing. However, the score was 21-24 in the 3rd, with Cal driving when Riley threw a pick-6. After that, Cal fell completely apart and turned it over on downs and allowed 3 consecutive TD drives. Final score was 52-31, not 13.

There's no real excuse for the 2010 USC game, but I still believe Tedford was intimidated by SC and coached that way. We had the ball 4 times in the 1st quarter, and went 3 and out every single time. USC's starting field position was: SC 44, Cal 43, SC 35 and CAL 41. Thats pretty close to midfield. In the second quarter, we picked up 5 first downs and threw 2 interceptions. This was a complete team failure.

2010 Furd game. Mansion starting at QB, fumbles at Cal 26. We hold Furd to a FG. Next drive we make it to the Furd 25, Mansion throws a pick. Furd drives the entire field for the TD. It then goes Punt-Punt-INT and Furd scores a TD on every possession in the 2nd. Again, complete team failure.

Amongst the above stinkers, he held Davis to 3, CU to 7, AZ to 10, UCLA to 7, AZ St to 17, UO to 15, UW to 16. We lost 3 of the above games. They weren't the same teams as they are now, but we've given up 30 to Portland St. already.

In 2011, we actually held UO to 14 points in the first half. They destroyed us in the 3rd.

In 2012, the Utah game, they returned 2 KOs for TDs. I won't hold the pick-6s against Buh and don't expect people to hold STs breakdowns against Pendegast. It was obvious by the time the UO and Or St games rolled around that Tedford had completely lost the team.

I know it looks like I'm making excuses for him, but I'm just trying to frame the numbers. I always felt like the offense let the defense down in those years and blowouts, just like the defenes is letting the offense down now. He was villified when he left, but I don't know how someone can go from fired Cal DC to USC DC without being able to show something.

I'm hoping Buh can turn this around, especially since I know we're realistically keeping him around for at least 2 years. If our injured players return and make that big of an impact, thats fantastic. Right now, I'm concerned that UO will score 56 in the first half.

StillNoStanfurdium;842176502 said:

---

Pendergast runs this D and we don't go down 21-0 in the first 6 minutes.

---

completely agree. Love the offense and Goff but Buhler needs to go.
Buh might make Sonny an O-coordinator again soon.

SFCityBear;842177344 said:

---

Well, by golly, you are probably right about this. But so what? Would you really want Clancy Pendergast back?


In a heartbeat.

I think Dykes is showing what an incompetent coach Tedford had become. We are unbalanced in both class and position distribution. Tedford had several years to fix both of these issues. To make it worse, Tedford either whiffed on talent evaluation or failed to develop the talent while he was coaching. The result is a year like this where there is no experience, depth or talent in certain positions. We don't have the DL or DB to run any defensive scheme right now. We barely have enough OL to be competent. We're lucky that Franklin's scheme is flexible enough to be productive without a running game these first three games. Tedford properly fucked the program and it's going to take a while to restock and redistribute the talent.