Earlier in the year, we had some "riverboat gambler" trick plays and fake kicks.

"The Boehm" seemed to work against OSU, till we overused it.

Speaking of "overuse" did we try Richard Rodgers at RB a bit too much? Wouldn't Gingold have been a better bet, being used to the position?

Starting out with a lot of short passes, then trying to stretch the field vertically later: I think our opponents have picked up on the pattern!

Maybe we start holding up two fingers: "The second quarter is ours!"

Coach on the sidelines, looking stoic and/or grumpy. Lip readers notice "bull sh!t" repeatedly.

There were no trick plays against WSU either. Earlier there was a sense of having fun, but now it's like they've just given up. I really thought we would see an on-side kick to start the half against UCLA.

SFBear2012;842198468 said:

---

There were no trick plays against WSU either. Earlier there was a sense of having fun, but now it's like they've just given up. I really thought we would see an on-side kick to start the half against UCLA.

---

Trick plays do not a successful offense make, as some say. And yet, I could sense a certain grimness the past two weeks that I didn't feel the first three games.

Flea FLicker? Tackle eligible? What do you think would actually work under the circumstances?? Pizazz is just that, pissing in the rain..

The trick play from the first fame was meant to satiate all the nega-JT fans who complained he never ran trick plays. More of a political move, if anything (1st drive, game not on the line).

Otherwise we just haven't been close enough to warrant then.

The Pizazz is injured like everyone else. He's out the rest of the season.

Not sure any tricks plays would have worked agaisnt ucla. That was arguably the best defense that Cal has faced this year. There wasn't much time to pull anything off before someone was in Goff's or the ball carrier's face. Is there a reverse in the play arsenal? Might be something to throw in with these teams that pursue so hard.

72CalBear;842198735 said:

---

Flea FLicker? Tackle eligible? What do you think would actually work under the circumstances?? Pizazz is just that, pissing in the rain..

---

I totally know what you're saying and agree with it and, to that extent, I did not word my original post well. Perhaps I should have called it "panache" instead of "pizazz" and perhaps bury the part about "trick plays" lower, instead of leading with it.

True, if an offense can't block and can't execute on a consistent basis, then throwing in some trick plays -- heck, even a QUADRUPLE reverse, center eligible, statue-of-flea-flicker -- isn't going to help.

However, my overarching point was that something (swagger?) has been missing the past two weeks. Why not try Boehm in the red zone again? Why come out EVERY GAME trying to stretch east-west, when other teams are onto it? Why the grim looks on the sideline?

It's not really the trick plays or the fake punts/FGs themselves as much as it is having the panache to try them.

Big C_Cal;842199004 said:

---

Why the grim looks on the sideline?

---

1-5

or

Opponents 262
Cal 149

Just sayin.

Tedhead94;842199062 said:

---

1-5

or

Opponents 262
Cal 149

Just sayin.

---

Oh yeah, I get why Dykes might FEEL grim, but he needs to project some positive energy to the players, right?

freshfunk;842198753 said:

---

The trick play from the first fame was meant to satiate all the nega-JT fans who complained he never ran trick plays. More of a political move, if anything (1st drive, game not on the line).

Otherwise we just haven't been close enough to warrant then.

---

Sonny's entire shtick,has been political, from opening practice to mini playbook. Unfortunately at some point you actually have to coach.

Thought Boehm was a real possibility early on as we heard how crucial it was going to be to have the best athletes on the field, that was a real weapon, etc. Doesn't work if we don't try it. Once you talk about it, get him in there. Let's see what you said you saw before?

It starts with a qb who scrambles and runs for first downs. Have not seen any of that in the last few games

Sure he should. But he's human. He hasn't ever gone through losing like this. His first year at LaTech, his bad year by all accounts, they were 5-7 (4-4) and finished in the middle of the WAC. They only got blown out 3 times for the whole season.

We've already been blown out that many times. Im sure the injuries add the futility. We suck and he knows it . . . and he knows we suck on his watch.

Metalocalypse: It Needs Zazz

Quote:

---

William Murderface: We've been talking Skwisgar and, we think this whole production could be a lot more... zippy. It just, it needs zazz! Am I, I mean I'm right to say that right?

Nathan Explosion: No, you're right to say that. It's just, you know, you could stand to zazz it a up a little bit more.

Pickles the Drummer: No offense Skwisgar but I gotta say this whole thing, it uh, it lacks zazz.

William Murderface: You could just put it on the zazz train to zazz-ville.

Toki Wartooth: Yeah because no offense there's absolutely no zazz to be found, not here anyway, not in these parts.

Nathan Explosion: What we're trying to say is that there's two kinds of shows out there, those with and those without...

Skwisgaar Skwigelf: Could you please stop saying zazz?

Nathan Explosion: Zazz.

Pickles the Drummer: Zazz.

Skwisgaar Skwigelf: Please stop saying zazz.

Pickles the Drummer: Why don't you let us help you out?

William Murderface: Yeah and lighten the load, make it more zaaa - ohh, you know.

---

apparently you missed #11 at RB in bone formation 4x in the row in the redzone.

72CalBear;842198735 said:

---

Flea FLicker? Tackle eligible? What do you think would actually work under the circumstances?? Pizazz is just that, pissing in the rain..

---

Pizzazz doesn't have to be a trick. It's something we hadn't shown before- something creative to take advantage of the few things we've got. For example, if we are moving Bigs to wr, can we run a fly sweep? He needs to run on the edge, not between the guards.

I tried out Pieology in San Jose (soon to be opening in Berkeley) on Saturday and we both really liked our sausage & mushroom pizazz.

Davidson;842199479 said:

---

apparently you missed #11 at RB in bone formation 4x in the row in the redzone.

---

Not sure if you're responding directly to me (OP), but I mentioned that move. Yeah, that was something, but, as you mentioned, it was overused. I'm wondering if Gingold might have been more effective than Rodgers, who was taking his first game snaps at that position.

I wonder if they can get #11 the ball on some sort of inside-receiver reverse.

Tedhead94;842199315 said:

---

Sure he should. But he's human. He hasn't ever gone through losing like this. His first year at LaTech, his bad year by all accounts, they were 5-7 (4-4) and finished in the middle of the WAC. They only got blown out 3 times for the whole season.

We've already been blown out that many times. Im sure the injuries add the futility. We suck and he knows it . . . and he knows we suck on his watch.

---

Leaders need to get over being "human".

Agreed. Im just being practical - stating what is, not how it should be.

http://www.yelp.com/biz/pizzahhh-berkeley

Big C_Cal;842199544 said:

---

Not sure if you're responding directly to me (OP), but I mentioned that move. Yeah, that was something, but, as you mentioned, it was overused. I'm wondering if Gingold might have been more effective than Rodgers, who was taking his first game snaps at that position.

---

Rodgers is probably 10 pounds heavier, a better athlete overall, and occasionally a horrific blocker. Gingold blocks well and in a 1 dimensional short yard power run your blockers are probably more important anyway.