This is my one of my few posts this season, since there wasn't much to be said that wasn't being said already on BI. Although I admit, I also didn't have much to write about since I avoided watching most of the latter games this year on my DVR once I found out about the final blowout scores.

However, tonight was a little different since I decided to actually sit down and see how the team played in the Big Beatdown this year. While I expected to see the declining performance of a terrible team and terrible coaching (inferred from all of the other posts), I was quite surprised to see it a little differently. In my view, I didn't think Cal played awfully; in fact, I think that the team actually played hard - and I believe, really tried their best. The result of the game, and of the many other loss games I assume, was the result of a multitude of factors; some of which are situational, and some of are which are coaching.

Allow me to elaborate (not discussed are the crazy injuries which has contributed to our issues):

[U]Offense:[/U]

1) OL is inexperienced. Youth, combined with constant shuffling, results in a group that gets manhandled and punked by most experienced DL/LB groups. I saw that Furd was toying with the OL quite a bit with stunts and 1:1 speed rushes that the OL just couldn't handle over 60 min. The one play where Goff got hit the 2nd time, the stunt just caught our LG way off guard and let Skov come in at full speed to lay a huge hit. It was almost as if they had never seen that move before in practice to know how to handle it...so either was a youth/inexperience issue and/or a coaching fault. Probably both, but I will lean more to the youth part since I'd imagine most of practice time is less spent on dealing with all diff. types of D pressures they'll face, and more on just learning the basics of the TFS OL. And it seems like that is likely the case, as shown in The Drive episode where the OL was learning how to just call a cadence mid-season. Yikes. And as we know, the offense goes as far as the OL performs.

2) Trickle-down effect. Comes back to the OL. Young OL still adjusting to each other and forming a chemistry on the battlefield is probably the worst place to do so. Ideally, practice is the best place to earn your stripes, but that may be hard if the basics are still being learned. But again, an OL that is not an well-oiled machine makes playcalling a difficult task. Running plays, more or less, can be handled by a strong 4-5 in the box. The pulling of OL requires a lot of dexterity and quickness to pull off nicely, but when a DL adjusts to it quick, they can blow up a play before it goes. Furd adjusts to the run scheme nicely after the first few series, and since they can handle it with only 4-5, they can commit more to the secondary to stop the pass. So once the run is stopped and the pass is contained, well, the offense just stalls more often than not. So, without an experienced and strong OL to give a run game, a lot of 3-and-outs are expected.

3) QBs. Choosing between Goff/Kline isn't the problem, I realize. Kline starting the game may get some more energy in the game early on, but no way could he sustain that for 60 min without getting drilled play after play. Neither of the QB's are run threats, so Def could probably commit 4-5 DL/LB to the box and 1:1 cover the WRs all day. With no one ever open, no time to read the progressions, no threat to scramble, and no running game to rely on, any QB is in for a load of trouble. Goff would seem the reasonable choice then, since he reads and releases fast, and usually doesn't force the ball like Kline does. From a moneyball-type standpoint, Goff is less risky when is on the field (not withstanding some of the easy INTs he threw earlier in the season).

[U]Defense:[/U]

1) Defense largely playing underclassmen. Mostly due to injuries, I believe, so while most don't realize it (including me), it makes for a really really big difference. Simplistically-speaking, it's like fielding a HS Freshman football team against the Varsity team. The size, skill, and experience levels are so different it's not remotely even fair. Watching some of the replay, I saw a Furd FB(?) coming down to block Lucas King on the wildcat TD run, and it really was like King was a pee-wee sized player compared to the Furdie. Just completely knocked him back after he took a wrong step to the side. So, being in the right position or not, I don't think it would make that much of a difference since there was no way to be able to handle that size difference.

2) Playcalling. Yeah, Buh gets a bad rap, and probably justified. Lots of alum players also criticizing him, which is not very good. For the game, though, I think he had no way of making lemonade out of his lemons. It was pretty much, pick your poison. Gaffney is a huge threat, so naturally, he would need to commit to stopping the run at all costs. Load the box, play aggressive, lock it down. The standard run game was stifled most of the time. Great! But...as with any decent OC would do, exploit the D's aggressiveness with some mis-direction, play-action, and boom...there you have it. Big plays up the yin-yang. Yeah, lots of the big plays could've been contained with good technique and tackling, but that goes back to issue #1 above...youth. It's actually pretty mean to be punked in such a fashion since the team is just not in the same league as Furd right now. Also, for an opposing QB, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to read Cal's D to know where the play should go. No attempts at hiding the D playcall, since well, everyone was just trying to figure out where they should be standing. It is that hodgepodge.

3) Technique, tackling, position. Tackling I think was much better this game, with much less shoulder bumping or 2-hand touching going on. Being in position, taking wrong angles...that's youth combined with coaching. The coaching piece is tough, though. Coaching players to do the right thing takes a few years, since it needs to trained, re-trained, and molded to become a natural instinct. Players will naturally go to what they know, what they've always done...so breaking that down, and building them up with the right technique takes time and patience. This is why most players don't see the field until year 3 as RS sophmores or even juniors when they are finally comfortable. They have been ingrained with the right techniques by then, so they can play fast and trust themselves. But, when you have freshmen...a lot of freshmen with a few weeks in bootcamp of "this is what you should be doing" go onto the field...well, the first thing that comes to mind when that 320 lb OL is coming your way, is whatever gets you from getting killed. May be ok with 1-2 freshmen on the field at the same time since they have much more experienced teammates who can cover for them...but when there are 5-6 noobs on the field, it's going to be preschool playground chaos. So, coaches aren't the problem...well, not to the extent they are made out to be.

[U]Tosh's Legacy?[/U]

1) Bare cupboard. I think this has been brought up in another post, but this is definitely a big cause of where we are today. Tosh has been credited with a lot of big-name recruiting classes in 09, 10, and 11(?). Most of those big time players should be seniors now and leaders and carrying the team. Big enough, experienced enough, and smart enough to match up with USC and Furd this year instead of the young kids on the block...but where are they? Most transferred, dropped out, or whatever, but I think there are only a few contributors on the team now. One has to wonder if they are no longer here because Tosh (their big bro) decidedly left with a big FU to JT. Well, we know for sure Armstead, Shittu, Shaq dropped Cal as soon as Tosh took off.

2) Culture. The locker room culture has been a sore subject during Tedford's tenure, with 2 sides fighting over this and that, and never a "we are one" mentality. Is this a result of recruiting big name stars who are, well, more for themselves than the team? Looking at the big names Tosh has successfully recruited, maybe there is some validity. This is something that Dykes seems to be trying to fix in the locker room: to be about the team, being a good student, and appreciate being at Cal.

3) JT - a victim of Tosh, in the end. I believe that JT knew Tosh was a problem on his staff. He loved his passion and his ability to relate to new recruits, but I think he saw the types of kids he was bringing in. Highly-ranked, very skilled, but probably not a team-first type player. But he was getting the kids and the great recruiting classes. It was a calculated risk, but also a catch-22. Get the good players, get more national recognition, and more good players will want to play for Cal. More good players means higher chance to win games --> good record, bowl games, alums happy, donations roll in, new stadiums, --> job security. Long-term, probably a death knell for a program. At some point, when the chips start falling, they will fall HARD. Those players will abandon ship, and only the true loyal kids will be left. But the damage will be done already, and as the APR shows, all the "non-team" type players leave or drop out, and what is left is a program in a bad situation. The easy solution? Blame the coach, so JT had to go.
[U]
What now?[/U]

1) Dykes and staff. Understanding the situation now, it probably would've made sense to bring in a staff that has a strong pedigree and strong personality to undo a lot of the program's culture that has been set. Actually, a Todd Graham-type coach might not be a bad idea. Someone who shows extreme confidence, riles up the troops, makes non-believers into believers just on their inspiring nature. Tough, but soft too. I think Dykes would be good for a team that is looking to play with the big boys with less resources. Cal, having good athletes but desperately needing leadership, requires a natural leader to lead them through the storm. Someone, who says, "don't worry, I will guide you out of this darkness"....instead of "yeah, i'm lost too. not sure what is going on. I'll talk to some other coaches and get some advice. come see me in a few months, and I should have a good idea what to do then." But since Dykes is not that type, he is going to need to learn real fast how to be a inspiring leader, not just a hand-shaker. Inspire the troops and make them believe he is the man to lead them to the promised land (no more of "if you follow steps 1-10, you will be a winner. trust me." Without that, the troops will look elsewhere for that leadership and stop listening to him.

2) Recruit JC immediately. Shore up the team with physically bigger players who can be a presence on the field. Probably 8-9 on the field on both sides of the ball should be JC or upper classmen next year. Yeah, they are bit of mercenaries, but hey, the team needs some physical presence on the field to get some wins. Wins will get HS recruits interested, and there he can build for the long-term. How will culture be solved here? Hmm, probably won't be with hired guns. Culture may take a while to fix, unless there are player transfers or drop outs that happen to solve it.

3) A full offseason will help. Yeah, stupidly sunshine-pumping mode here, but a first full-offseason helps on multiple fronts.
- Injury recovery
- Chemistry development on all fronts (OL, QB/WR, Def)
- Technique training
- Increased playbook comfort level
- Strength training, getting bigger
- Continue to clean-up and re-establish the right culture
Now the team knows what is required to be competitive in the Pac-12 these days, the experience will not be a waste.
[U]
Next year prediction:[/U]

Expect a 3-4 win season. Better than this year, more comfortable and more competitive, but not quite there yet to turn the corner and know how to win games. Team chemistry will continue to get better, but I see some of the players who want instant results to leave elsewhere. Recruiting will not have any big names, but will have good kids who believe in Cal, the opportunity to get a great education, and a chance to be a part of turning around the program. Football fans will be upset and sad about the state of affairs still, and lament the fact we fired JT. (JT is/was not the answer, but we can probably thank him for where things are today, good and bad.)

[U]Bold 2015 prediction:[/U]

Dare I say, a 6-7 win season? A much more experienced/stronger team should be scoring more, and a JC/upperclassmen D should stop the flood of scoring to provide good chances of winning. Expect most games to be competitive.


[U]TL;DR version:[/U]
Things aren't as hopeless as we most believe. The team needs our continued support, especially in these dark times. If we have some sort of understanding of the problems they are faced with, perhaps we can be a little more compassionate and supportive. Go Bears!

calbear75;842231938 said:

---

[U]Tosh's Legacy?[/U]

1) Bare cupboard. I think this has been brought up in another post, but this is definitely a big cause of where we are today. Tosh has been credited with a lot of big-name recruiting classes in 09, 10, and 11(?). Most of those big time players should be seniors now and leaders and carrying the team. Big enough, experienced enough, and smart enough to match up with USC and Furd this year instead of the young kids on the block...but where are they? Most transferred, dropped out, or whatever, but I think there are only a few contributors on the team now. One has to wonder if they are no longer here because Tosh (their big bro) decidedly left with a big FU to JT. Well, we know for sure Armstead, Shittu, Shaq dropped Cal as soon as Tosh took off.

---

This right here is the only reason why I'm not calling Sandy to fire Dykes, even though I'd be ok with Dykes quitting himself. Our 2010 class really fucked us with their inability to stay in school

Thanks calbear75 for your thoughtful posts. Reading your analysis gave me some hope. Yeah I admit I did not know the team culture was so bad and I expected a quick result.

I agree with you the players played their hearts out and Buh just tried to do best with what he had. I do see "improvements" in the defense last few games. It can be hard to judge Buh's performance based on what's handed to him, with inexperience and injuries.

But I do have problems with Dykes and Franklin. Like you said, Dykes is not the type of leader who can inspire the troops through this difficult time. I'm afraid he's losing his players' confidence fast. And Franklin, I don't know if he has fully implemented his playbook, but it's been quite unimaginative and not difficult for opposing teams to defend against. On top of that, Dykes / Franklin have done some real peculiar moves that made everyone question their ability to lead this team, poor play calling at the goal line, sending in Kline for just 7 plays last week, and this afternoon calling out Kline's poor performance. What did he expect when he didn't give the RS freshman enough preparation?

Anyhow I hope you're right with your optimism.

If you had seen the game in person yesterday, you might feel differently.

It's not hard to judge Buh's insistence on single covering all pac-12 receivers.

calbear75;842231938 said:

---

[U]Tosh's Legacy?[/U]

1) Bare cupboard. I think this has been brought up in another post, but this is definitely a big cause of where we are today. Tosh has been credited with a lot of big-name recruiting classes in 09, 10, and 11(?). Most of those big time players should be seniors now and leaders and carrying the team. Big enough, experienced enough, and smart enough to match up with USC and Furd this year instead of the young kids on the block...but where are they? Most transferred, dropped out, or whatever, but I think there are only a few contributors on the team now. One has to wonder if they are no longer here because Tosh (their big bro) decidedly left with a big FU to JT. Well, we know for sure Armstead, Shittu, Shaq dropped Cal as soon as Tosh took off.

2) Culture. The locker room culture has been a sore subject during Tedford's tenure, with 2 sides fighting over this and that, and never a "we are one" mentality. Is this a result of recruiting big name stars who are, well, more for themselves than the team? Looking at the big names Tosh has successfully recruited, maybe there is some validity. This is something that Dykes seems to be trying to fix in the locker room: to be about the team, being a good student, and appreciate being at Cal.

3) JT - a victim of Tosh, in the end. I believe that JT knew Tosh was a problem on his staff. He loved his passion and his ability to relate to new recruits, but I think he saw the types of kids he was bringing in. Highly-ranked, very skilled, but probably not a team-first type player. But he was getting the kids and the great recruiting classes. It was a calculated risk, but also a catch-22. Get the good players, get more national recognition, and more good players will want to play for Cal. More good players means higher chance to win games --> good record, bowl games, alums happy, donations roll in, new stadiums, --> job security. Long-term, probably a death knell for a program. At some point, when the chips start falling, they will fall HARD. Those players will abandon ship, and only the true loyal kids will be left. But the damage will be done already, and as the APR shows, all the "non-team" type players leave or drop out, and what is left is a program in a bad situation. The easy solution? Blame the coach, so JT had to go.
[U]
What now?[/U]

1) Dykes and staff. Understanding the situation now, it probably would've made sense to bring in a staff that has a strong pedigree and strong personality to undo a lot of the program's culture that has been set. Actually, a Todd Graham-type coach might not be a bad idea. Someone who shows extreme confidence, riles up the troops, makes non-believers into believers just on their inspiring nature. Tough, but soft too. I think Dykes would be good for a team that is looking to play with the big boys with less resources. Cal, having good athletes but desperately needing leadership, requires a natural leader to lead them through the storm. Someone, who says, "don't worry, I will guide you out of this darkness"....instead of "yeah, i'm lost too. not sure what is going on. I'll talk to some other coaches and get some advice. come see me in a few months, and I should have a good idea what to do then." But since Dykes is not that type, he is going to need to learn real fast how to be a inspiring leader, not just a hand-shaker. Inspire the troops and make them believe he is the man to lead them to the promised land (no more of "if you follow steps 1-10, you will be a winner. trust me." Without that, the troops will look elsewhere for that leadership and stop listening to him.

2) Recruit JC immediately. Shore up the team with physically bigger players who can be a presence on the field. Probably 8-9 on the field on both sides of the ball should be JC or upper classmen next year. Yeah, they are bit of mercenaries, but hey, the team needs some physical presence on the field to get some wins. Wins will get HS recruits interested, and there he can build for the long-term. How will culture be solved here? Hmm, probably won't be with hired guns. Culture may take a while to fix, unless there are player transfers or drop outs that happen to solve it.

3) A full offseason will help. Yeah, stupidly sunshine-pumping mode here, but a first full-offseason helps on multiple fronts.
- Injury recovery
- Chemistry development on all fronts (OL, QB/WR, Def)
- Technique training
- Increased playbook comfort level
- Strength training, getting bigger
- Continue to clean-up and re-establish the right culture
Now the team knows what is required to be competitive in the Pac-12 these days, the experience will not be a waste.
[U]
Next year prediction:[/U]

Expect a 3-4 win season. Better than this year, more comfortable and more competitive, but not quite there yet to turn the corner and know how to win games. Team chemistry will continue to get better, but I see some of the players who want instant results to leave elsewhere. Recruiting will not have any big names, but will have good kids who believe in Cal, the opportunity to get a great education, and a chance to be a part of turning around the program. Football fans will be upset and sad about the state of affairs still, and lament the fact we fired JT. (JT is/was not the answer, but we can probably thank him for where things are today, good and bad.)

[U]Bold 2015 prediction:[/U]

Dare I say, a 6-7 win season? A much more experienced/stronger team should be scoring more, and a JC/upperclassmen D should stop the flood of scoring to provide good chances of winning. Expect most games to be competitive.


[U]TL;DR version:[/U]
Things aren't as hopeless as we most believe. The team needs our continued support, especially in these dark times. If we have some sort of understanding of the problems they are faced with, perhaps we can be a little more compassionate and supportive. Go Bears!

---

You're excusing Dykes for too much more than he deserves but whatever. As long as we have fans like you we'll continue to suck.

Not sure how you see 3-4 wins next year not to mention 2015, besides that you spouted off a lot of words to spin 2013. We suck badly with this coaching staff, and they're thoroughly unprepared for big time football, if not straight ulterior motivates against Cal's interests.

Any way, we suck, and we'll continue to suck given people who think they can actually defend this season

1979bear;842231948 said:

---

If you had seen the game in person yesterday, you might feel differently.

---

I saw it in person yesterday. I feel the same way as calbear75

calbear75;842231937 said:

---

This is my one of my few posts this season, since there wasn't much to be said that wasn't being said already on BI. Although I admit, I also didn't have much to write about since I avoided watching most of the latter games this year on my DVR once I found out about the final blowout scores.

However, tonight was a little different since I decided to actually sit down and see how the team played in the Big Beatdown this year. While I expected to see the declining performance of a terrible team and terrible coaching (inferred from all of the other posts), I was quite surprised to see it a little differently. In my view, I didn't think Cal played awfully; in fact, I think that the team actually played hard - and I believe, really tried their best. The result of the game, and of the many other loss games I assume, was the result of a multitude of factors; some of which are situational, and some of are which are coaching.

Allow me to elaborate (not discussed are the crazy injuries which has contributed to our issues):

[U]Offense:[/U]

1) OL is inexperienced. Youth, combined with constant shuffling, results in a group that gets manhandled and punked by most experienced DL/LB groups. I saw that Furd was toying with the OL quite a bit with stunts and 1:1 speed rushes that the OL just couldn't handle over 60 min. The one play where Goff got hit the 2nd time, the stunt just caught our LG way off guard and let Skov come in at full speed to lay a huge hit. It was almost as if they had never seen that move before in practice to know how to handle it...so either was a youth/inexperience issue and/or a coaching fault. Probably both, but I will lean more to the youth part since I'd imagine most of practice time is less spent on dealing with all diff. types of D pressures they'll face, and more on just learning the basics of the TFS OL. And it seems like that is likely the case, as shown in The Drive episode where the OL was learning how to just call a cadence mid-season. Yikes. And as we know, the offense goes as far as the OL performs.

2) Trickle-down effect. Comes back to the OL. Young OL still adjusting to each other and forming a chemistry on the battlefield is probably the worst place to do so. Ideally, practice is the best place to earn your stripes, but that may be hard if the basics are still being learned. But again, an OL that is not an well-oiled machine makes playcalling a difficult task. Running plays, more or less, can be handled by a strong 4-5 in the box. The pulling of OL requires a lot of dexterity and quickness to pull off nicely, but when a DL adjusts to it quick, they can blow up a play before it goes. Furd adjusts to the run scheme nicely after the first few series, and since they can handle it with only 4-5, they can commit more to the secondary to stop the pass. So once the run is stopped and the pass is contained, well, the offense just stalls more often than not. So, without an experienced and strong OL to give a run game, a lot of 3-and-outs are expected.

3) QBs. Choosing between Goff/Kline isn't the problem, I realize. Kline starting the game may get some more energy in the game early on, but no way could he sustain that for 60 min without getting drilled play after play. Neither of the QB's are run threats, so Def could probably commit 4-5 DL/LB to the box and 1:1 cover the WRs all day. With no one ever open, no time to read the progressions, no threat to scramble, and no running game to rely on, any QB is in for a load of trouble. Goff would seem the reasonable choice then, since he reads and releases fast, and usually doesn't force the ball like Kline does. From a moneyball-type standpoint, Goff is less risky when is on the field (not withstanding some of the easy INTs he threw earlier in the season).

[U]Defense:[/U]

1) Defense largely playing underclassmen. Mostly due to injuries, I believe, so while most don't realize it (including me), it makes for a really really big difference. Simplistically-speaking, it's like fielding a HS Freshman football team against the Varsity team. The size, skill, and experience levels are so different it's not remotely even fair. Watching some of the replay, I saw a Furd FB(?) coming down to block Lucas King on the wildcat TD run, and it really was like King was a pee-wee sized player compared to the Furdie. Just completely knocked him back after he took a wrong step to the side. So, being in the right position or not, I don't think it would make that much of a difference since there was no way to be able to handle that size difference.

2) Playcalling. Yeah, Buh gets a bad rap, and probably justified. Lots of alum players also criticizing him, which is not very good. For the game, though, I think he had no way of making lemonade out of his lemons. It was pretty much, pick your poison. Gaffney is a huge threat, so naturally, he would need to commit to stopping the run at all costs. Load the box, play aggressive, lock it down. The standard run game was stifled most of the time. Great! But...as with any decent OC would do, exploit the D's aggressiveness with some mis-direction, play-action, and boom...there you have it. Big plays up the yin-yang. Yeah, lots of the big plays could've been contained with good technique and tackling, but that goes back to issue #1 above...youth. It's actually pretty mean to be punked in such a fashion since the team is just not in the same league as Furd right now. Also, for an opposing QB, it doesn't take a rocket scientist to read Cal's D to know where the play should go. No attempts at hiding the D playcall, since well, everyone was just trying to figure out where they should be standing. It is that hodgepodge.

3) Technique, tackling, position. Tackling I think was much better this game, with much less shoulder bumping or 2-hand touching going on. Being in position, taking wrong angles...that's youth combined with coaching. The coaching piece is tough, though. Coaching players to do the right thing takes a few years, since it needs to trained, re-trained, and molded to become a natural instinct. Players will naturally go to what they know, what they've always done...so breaking that down, and building them up with the right technique takes time and patience. This is why most players don't see the field until year 3 as RS sophmores or even juniors when they are finally comfortable. They have been ingrained with the right techniques by then, so they can play fast and trust themselves. But, when you have freshmen...a lot of freshmen with a few weeks in bootcamp of "this is what you should be doing" go onto the field...well, the first thing that comes to mind when that 320 lb OL is coming your way, is whatever gets you from getting killed. May be ok with 1-2 freshmen on the field at the same time since they have much more experienced teammates who can cover for them...but when there are 5-6 noobs on the field, it's going to be preschool playground chaos. So, coaches aren't the problem...well, not to the extent they are made out to be.

---

Great post, Calbear75!


I like your analogy of high school freshmen competing against seniors on the varsity. To me, this should put the whole season in perspective as to what the coaches were facing. Cal has never had depth on its footbal teams. When a majority of the starting 22 went down this year, the coaching staff had to plug the holes with freshmen and sophomores who were inexperienced, undersized and nowhere near as athletic as their opponents. This was certainly more evident on defense as players seemed to be a step or two slow in getting to the ball, when they got there, then they were out of position to make the tackle or they would just get beat deep.

Your other astute observation is the making of lemonade out of lemons. Dykes isn't god or his "magic wand" must be broken. He and his staff was not going to make his second and third stringers into all leaguers or even competent starters in a matter of a couple of months. This isn't reality.....only the best 4 and 5 star freshmen and sophomores are able to compete at the college level and make an impact. I'm not sure Cal had any impact freshmen except for maybe Goff or Klein. Their lack of success i.e. wins was hampered by the inexperience of the OL.

In regards to the tackling and not sure it applies to Cal but I read a story that SC stopped tackling drills in practice to prevent injuries. Since sanctions had limited their rosters, Kiffin stopped the tackling drills to ensure he had enough players to play on Saturday. Don't know if Cal did this but seeing the number of injuries Cal's defense sustained during the year, this policy would make sense.

The grade on Dykes and staff is an incomplete. He may be a lousy head coach with a lousy staff supporting him......but this year was not the year to determine his competency. If he's not able to improve next year and perhaps the year after that, then, I agree he's in over his head.

NeverOddOrEven;842231961 said:

---

I saw it in person yesterday. I feel the same way as calbear75

---

I saw it as well.
I agree, there will be improvement next year.
David Shaw said the same in his post game comments, and that Cal has hired the right guy.

This is a mess, and it isn't on Sonny Dykes ...yet.

(...and for the Dykes bashers, please hold off posting along the lines of "Well....what do you expect him to say after a 50 point win???!!!)

calbear75;842231938 said:

---

[U]Tosh's Legacy?[/U]

1) Bare cupboard. I think this has been brought up in another post, but this is definitely a big cause of where we are today. Tosh has been credited with a lot of big-name recruiting classes in 09, 10, and 11(?). Most of those big time players should be seniors now and leaders and carrying the team. Big enough, experienced enough, and smart enough to match up with USC and Furd this year instead of the young kids on the block...but where are they? Most transferred, dropped out, or whatever, but I think there are only a few contributors on the team now. One has to wonder if they are no longer here because Tosh (their big bro) decidedly left with a big FU to JT. Well, we know for sure Armstead, Shittu, Shaq dropped Cal as soon as Tosh took off.

2) Culture. The locker room culture has been a sore subject during Tedford's tenure, with 2 sides fighting over this and that, and never a "we are one" mentality. Is this a result of recruiting big name stars who are, well, more for themselves than the team? Looking at the big names Tosh has successfully recruited, maybe there is some validity. This is something that Dykes seems to be trying to fix in the locker room: to be about the team, being a good student, and appreciate being at Cal.

3) JT - a victim of Tosh, in the end. I believe that JT knew Tosh was a problem on his staff. He loved his passion and his ability to relate to new recruits, but I think he saw the types of kids he was bringing in. Highly-ranked, very skilled, but probably not a team-first type player. But he was getting the kids and the great recruiting classes. It was a calculated risk, but also a catch-22. Get the good players, get more national recognition, and more good players will want to play for Cal. More good players means higher chance to win games --> good record, bowl games, alums happy, donations roll in, new stadiums, --> job security. Long-term, probably a death knell for a program. At some point, when the chips start falling, they will fall HARD. Those players will abandon ship, and only the true loyal kids will be left. But the damage will be done already, and as the APR shows, all the "non-team" type players leave or drop out, and what is left is a program in a bad situation. The easy solution? Blame the coach, so JT had to go.
[U]
What now?[/U]

1) Dykes and staff. Understanding the situation now, it probably would've made sense to bring in a staff that has a strong pedigree and strong personality to undo a lot of the program's culture that has been set. Actually, a Todd Graham-type coach might not be a bad idea. Someone who shows extreme confidence, riles up the troops, makes non-believers into believers just on their inspiring nature. Tough, but soft too. I think Dykes would be good for a team that is looking to play with the big boys with less resources. Cal, having good athletes but desperately needing leadership, requires a natural leader to lead them through the storm. Someone, who says, "don't worry, I will guide you out of this darkness"....instead of "yeah, i'm lost too. not sure what is going on. I'll talk to some other coaches and get some advice. come see me in a few months, and I should have a good idea what to do then." But since Dykes is not that type, he is going to need to learn real fast how to be a inspiring leader, not just a hand-shaker. Inspire the troops and make them believe he is the man to lead them to the promised land (no more of "if you follow steps 1-10, you will be a winner. trust me." Without that, the troops will look elsewhere for that leadership and stop listening to him.

2) Recruit JC immediately. Shore up the team with physically bigger players who can be a presence on the field. Probably 8-9 on the field on both sides of the ball should be JC or upper classmen next year. Yeah, they are bit of mercenaries, but hey, the team needs some physical presence on the field to get some wins. Wins will get HS recruits interested, and there he can build for the long-term. How will culture be solved here? Hmm, probably won't be with hired guns. Culture may take a while to fix, unless there are player transfers or drop outs that happen to solve it.

3) A full offseason will help. Yeah, stupidly sunshine-pumping mode here, but a first full-offseason helps on multiple fronts.
- Injury recovery
- Chemistry development on all fronts (OL, QB/WR, Def)
- Technique training
- Increased playbook comfort level
- Strength training, getting bigger
- Continue to clean-up and re-establish the right culture
Now the team knows what is required to be competitive in the Pac-12 these days, the experience will not be a waste.
[U]
Next year prediction:[/U]

Expect a 3-4 win season. Better than this year, more comfortable and more competitive, but not quite there yet to turn the corner and know how to win games. Team chemistry will continue to get better, but I see some of the players who want instant results to leave elsewhere. Recruiting will not have any big names, but will have good kids who believe in Cal, the opportunity to get a great education, and a chance to be a part of turning around the program. Football fans will be upset and sad about the state of affairs still, and lament the fact we fired JT. (JT is/was not the answer, but we can probably thank him for where things are today, good and bad.)

[U]Bold 2015 prediction:[/U]

Dare I say, a 6-7 win season? A much more experienced/stronger team should be scoring more, and a JC/upperclassmen D should stop the flood of scoring to provide good chances of winning. Expect most games to be competitive.


[U]TL;DR version:[/U]
Things aren't as hopeless as we most believe. The team needs our continued support, especially in these dark times. If we have some sort of understanding of the problems they are faced with, perhaps we can be a little more compassionate and supportive. Go Bears!

---

Yes, let's lower the bar to 3-4 wins in a 12 game schedule and declare victory. That is pitiful. Sorry, SD no longer deserves the benefit of the doubt. He needs to present a creditable program or hit the bricks. Another season with 1 or 2 P-12 wins is not acceptable, not progress and should not be lauded.

In large part I agree that there have been a confluence of factors that have contributed to our success this year. I am not sure you can pin things on a single factor, person, or player, which makes me think we have to stick with what we got for at least one more year.

With that said, I also have some reservations about what I have seen.

1) I think most would agree that Dykes comes in with a reputation as a offensive minded coach. However, I am at a loss as to what we would actually have on offense if Tony Franklin wasn't around. If Dykes isn't a defensive guy and his offense is known as the TFS, then what value does Dykes bring to the team? His connection to the air raid coaching lineage is clear, but what has he done to improve upon this concept? What is Dykes' vision for the offense (not Franklin's)? Which ties into my second point.

2) Dykes doesn't appear to me to be an overly inspirational coach to play for. His body language on the side lines is awful watching from my couch, and I assume is no better in person. The few half time speeches I've watched him give have never made my neck hair stand on end. He doesn't come across as tough or scrappy. I'll give him points for saying the right things to reporters and on camera, but I don't see the demeanor necessary from him to build the culture I think CAL needs to win. For somebody whose teams have historically started games in the hole only to come back in the second half as the tempo of the game wears on the opposition, or so they claim, his body language doesn't make me feel like he believes. He should at least fake it. I feel like he has completely deferred the running of the offense to Franklin and to Buh on defense. I don't know what Dyke's signature stamp is on CAL's game, nor do I feel like he has any idea what it would be. He has simply put all his eggs in one basket of coaches and I don't feel he has the leadership or experience to figure this out.

I hold out hope that in time things will regress to the mean, so to speak, and this coach, system and group of players will start to find themselves. Among the many things I think Tedford did wrong was to change for the sake of change as it applied to his coaching staff. I don't think CAL can afford to change an entire staff and system just because. We don't have the luxury of resources or time.

Needless to say this will be an exciting off season.

DrDanger;842231981 said:

---

I saw it as well.
I agree, there will be improvement next year.
David Shaw said the same in his post game comments, and that Cal has hired the right guy.

This is a mess, and it isn't on Sonny Dykes ...yet.

(...and for the Dykes bashers, please hold off posting along the lines of "Well....what do you expect him to say after a 50 point win???!!!)

---

The staff is a mess. That is 1000% on Sonny Dykes.

Right, blame it on fans who actually have some depth of knowledge that building a football program isn't necessarily flipping a switch. Last I looked no one posting on here plays DB or O-line.
I never read one word in the OP that said he was happy, satisfied. What I heard was a fan that didn't turn and run when his team sucked.
This just in: a team goes 1-11, there isn't anyone who isn't looking and saying, okay, is the staff going to get it turned around?
Fine, you say the answer is no, and want him fired now. That's not going to happen.
So, I want fans who show recruits, yeah, we love and support this team/school, and guess what, we pack the house no matter what. You want to call out fans, call them out for lack of support, not because they have a reality of how long this might take to get it right...

MiltyBear;842231956 said:

---

You're excusing Dykes for too much more than he deserves but whatever. As long as we have fans like you we'll continue to suck.

Not sure how you see 3-4 wins next year not to mention 2015, besides that you spouted off a lot of words to spin 2013. We suck badly with this coaching staff, and they're thoroughly unprepared for big time football, if not straight ulterior motivates against Cal's interests.

Any way, we suck, and we'll continue to suck given people who think they can actually defend this season

---

Blame it on Tosh, who has become the metaphor of all that is wrong and evil with Cal football. Time to let that one go. This season is all on Dykes!

It's okay to admit that Dykes and his coaching staff flat out suck.

No need to bring up all these "excuses" when the biggest reason why our team is so horrible is to look at our coaches.

We may have still finished 1-11 with better coaching staff (likely 2-10 or even 3-9 with better coaches), but at least we would have shown some improvements and played more competitive football.

There is little to no hope for this team with Dykes and Co.

mbBear;842232000 said:

---

Right, blame it on fans who actually have some depth of knowledge that building a football program isn't necessarily flipping a switch. Last I looked no one posting on here plays DB or O-line.
I never read one word in the OP that said he was happy, satisfied. What I heard was a fan that didn't turn and run when his team sucked.
This just in: a team goes 1-11, there isn't anyone who isn't looking and saying, okay, is the staff going to get it turned around?
Fine, you say the answer is no, and want him fired now. That's not going to happen.
So, I want fans who show recruits, yeah, we love and support this team/school, and guess what, we pack the house no matter what. You want to call out fans, call them out for lack of support, not because they have a reality of how long this might take to get it right...

---

P.S. As a graduate of UC Berkeley, I want the Cal administration to apply the same standards of excellence to fielding intercollegiate athletic teams as it does in hiring professors and admitting students. Unfortunately, this football staff is an embarrassment to itself, and all that's left is for us fans to debate how bad the humiliation has been this season. The students on the team deserve better....

Across the country, this system works, provides exciting winning football as long as the players are comparative to the opposition. The Bears were ridiculously out manned this year. A wait and see attitude is appropriate even though this year's waiting has been extremely painful.

Quote "2) Culture. The locker room culture has been a sore subject during Tedford's tenure, with 2 sides fighting over this and that, and never a "we are one" mentality. Is this a result of recruiting big name stars who are, well, more for themselves than the team? Looking at the big names Tosh has successfully recruited, maybe there is some validity. This is something that Dykes seems to be trying to fix in the locker room: to be about the team, being a good student, and appreciate being at Cal."

That right there is it in OMHO. We have a horrid football culture at Cal. That is why we lose games when we shouldn't and why we are known as the Bad News Bears. Luckily Dykes figured it out this year and will address it. I am happy to hear of transfers actually. One bad apple can wreak havoc in that crate. I think after the transfers we will start winning again.

Quite honestly, I do not believe in the the injury excuse. I think that is code for bad attitude and "I am not going to play" by some. Unfortunately we have no way of knowing from the good apple with actual injuries. I think that explains Dykes questioning all the injuries at the beginning of the season explains it all about the culture. The cultural problem started with selfish players who shall remain nameless. But I think it will end within the next couple of years. This is what I like about Dykes. The difference between Dykes and Tedford is Dykes has the balls to weed out the bad student athletes and send him on his way.

Having said my peace about players, I think there are several position coaches that need to go. Starting with Yenser. OL line is where it all starts.

ykes

very thoughtful and great opening post.

BearinOC;842232028 said:

---

Quote "2) Culture. The locker room culture has been a sore subject during Tedford's tenure, with 2 sides fighting over this and that, and never a "we are one" mentality. Is this a result of recruiting big name stars who are, well, more for themselves than the team? Looking at the big names Tosh has successfully recruited, maybe there is some validity. This is something that Dykes seems to be trying to fix in the locker room: to be about the team, being a good student, and appreciate being at Cal."

That right there is it in OMHO. We have a horrid football culture at Cal. That is why we lose games when we shouldn't and why we are known as the Bad News Bears. Luckily Dykes figured it out this year and will address it. I am happy to hear of transfers actually. One bad apple can wreak havoc in that crate. I think after the transfers we will start winning again.

Quite honestly, I do not believe in the the injury excuse. I think that is code for bad attitude and "I am not going to play" by some. Unfortunately we have no way of knowing from the good apple with actual injuries. I think that explains Dykes questioning all the injuries at the beginning of the season explains it all about the culture. The cultural problem started with selfish players who shall remain nameless. But I think it will end within the next couple of years. This is what I like about Dykes. The difference between Dykes and Tedford is Dykes has the balls to weed out the bad student athletes and send him on his way.

Having said my peace about players, I think there are several position coaches that need to go. Starting with Yenser. OL line is where it all starts.

ykes

---

I hope you are right. The other possibility is that Dykes and staff are just not good enough. We'll see.

I agree with about 99% of 75's post, and I sat through the entire game yesterday. Where I disagree is on the need for a Todd Graham type coach. I think Graham is a jerkwad - the Drive confirmed that for me. He's an effective coach and probably good at motivating the types of players ASU gets, but I have a hard time believing he'd have much success at a school where the players are probably smarter than he is. I don't know if Dykes is the answer or not, but I'll take him over Graham or someone like him.

It reasonably takes a few years to rebuild a program. I expect that if things are on the right track, we'll probably win 4-5 games next year, and not get blown out in any of the losses. In 2015, we should win 6-8 games. If we do worse than those targets, then we're probably not on the right track. If Dykes pulls a Mike Leach and does much better, then great. But that's why coaches who have to rebuild a program get contracts where it's not feasible to let them go during the first few years.

ecb;842231949 said:

---

It's not hard to judge Buh's insistence on single covering all pac-12 receivers.

---

This is probably the most maddening aspect of Buh's scheme for me. He continues to trot out our CBs in man coverage with no help and expects them to hold up against elite Pac12 Wrs. I don't blame our DB coach Stewart for this...I blame Buh. Take a look at all of Montgomery's receiving TDs. All single coverage, man to man. There was 1 TD where the announcer said Lowe was suppose to provide support, but I think the announcer was wrong. I believe Lowe made the "right" read on the play...i.e. he did what the coaches told him to do and went after the underneath man.

Pendergast did this alot too but he was good at disguising coverages. Buh just trots them out their man-to-man.

waltwa;842232034 said:

---

very thoughtful and great opening post.

---

Agree. Thanks to OP for thoughtful, unhysterical analysis of this year's debacle. Refreshing contrast to all the hair-on-fire posts. But I do also agree with ecb about the mysterious decision to single cover all Pac-12 receivers. How many times do you have to get burned before you try something else?

Excellent analysis Calbear 75. Thanks!

You don't fire the most successful coach in school history if you weren't applying some of the mentioned standards.

"If he's not able to improve next year and perhaps the year after that, then, I agree he's in over his head."


Dam, your' on a roll.......how about the year after THAT................

mbBear;842232623 said:

---

You don't fire the most successful coach in school history if you weren't applying some of the mentioned standards.

---

Cal didn't fire the most successful coach in school history, Andy Smith, he died. Cal did fire the second most successful coach in school history, Pappy Waldorf.

If we're using raw number of wins, and ignoring winning percentage, then we should also look at raw number of losses and recognize that Cal fired the losingest coach in school history when they fired Tedford.

But yeah, we're Cal, and we will apply some of the mentioned standards.

BearinOC;842232028 said:

---

Quote "2) Culture. The locker room culture has been a sore subject during Tedford's tenure, with 2 sides fighting over this and that, and never a "we are one" mentality. Is this a result of recruiting big name stars who are, well, more for themselves than the team? Looking at the big names Tosh has successfully recruited, maybe there is some validity. This is something that Dykes seems to be trying to fix in the locker room: to be about the team, being a good student, and appreciate being at Cal."

That right there is it in OMHO. We have a horrid football culture at Cal. That is why we lose games when we shouldn't and why we are known as the Bad News Bears. Luckily Dykes figured it out this year and will address it. I am happy to hear of transfers actually. One bad apple can wreak havoc in that crate. I think after the transfers we will start winning again.

Quite honestly, I do not believe in the the injury excuse. I think that is code for bad attitude and "I am not going to play" by some. Unfortunately we have no way of knowing from the good apple with actual injuries. I think that explains Dykes questioning all the injuries at the beginning of the season explains it all about the culture. The cultural problem started with selfish players who shall remain nameless. But I think it will end within the next couple of years. This is what I like about Dykes. The difference between Dykes and Tedford is Dykes has the balls to weed out the bad student athletes and send him on his way.

Having said my peace about players, I think there are several position coaches that need to go. Starting with Yenser. OL line is where it all starts.

ykes

---

Wow, really? Dykes figured it out? We've got such a great locker room atmosphere now that a player went to the hospital. Now instead of losing games we shouldn't we just lose all games because I guess your rationale is that we should be losing all of them so it's okay?

And if you really think that the names being bandied about for transfer are the players that are "bad apples" then you're crazy. Furthermore to insinuate that players like Scarlett and Forbes are just players with bad attitude is repudiated by their actions off the field and behavior otherwise.

I tend to agree with 75, although I probably ascribe somewhat more responsibility to Dykes than he does.

What is troubling is that so many posters here apparently cannot tolerate either ambiguity or complexity. A comment such as "this is 1000% Dykes' fault" is flat out stupid (not to mention mathematically impossible). Dykes is the head coach, and ultimately responsible for the product on the field, but he also had no capacity to alter the hand he was dealt. Suggesting that part of the problem was the legacy of Lupoi should NOT mean that "it's all Tosh's fault." The season was a perfect storm: bad locker room attitude meets too little talent meets too many injuries meets a coaching staff that was both unprepared to deal with the myriad problems and had some serious strategic and systemic flaws. The best coach in the country would not have had a winning record with this team, and I doubt Dykes and Co. would have had a winning record without the injuries and some of the other problems. In other words, everything went wrong. While I realize that it is comforting to the simple-minded to fixate on a single villain, it doesn't match reality.

I wasn't arguing methodology, and I'm not the first to use "total wins" as a benchmark...quick, is Nick Saban the most successful coach in College Football History because of win percentage? We both know the designation for the most successful coach in Cal history will be the one that takes the Bears to the next Rose Bowl.
My point had to do with Cal isn't in some mystical land of college football-they are playing big boy football, recruiting to the edge of what is allowed, and trying to keep players eligible. Going 1-11 isn't okay in anyone's book, but building a program isn't a flip of a switch and boom, instant gratification (which is common expectation among some 20somethings!). There isn't some great recruiting base and legacy to work from; yes, better than it was, but its still an incredibly difficult process ahead.

UrsaMajor;842232764 said:

---

I tend to agree with 75, although I probably ascribe somewhat more responsibility to Dykes than he does.

What is troubling is that so many posters here apparently cannot tolerate either ambiguity or complexity. A comment such as "this is 1000% Dykes' fault" is flat out stupid (not to mention mathematically impossible). Dykes is the head coach, and ultimately responsible for the product on the field, but he also had no capacity to alter the hand he was dealt. Suggesting that part of the problem was the legacy of Lupoi should NOT mean that "it's all Tosh's fault." The season was a perfect storm: bad locker room attitude meets too little talent meets too many injuries meets a coaching staff that was both unprepared to deal with the myriad problems and had some serious strategic and systemic flaws. The best coach in the country would not have had a winning record with this team, and I doubt Dykes and Co. would have had a winning record without the injuries and some of the other problems. In other words, everything went wrong. While I realize that it is comforting to the simple-minded to fixate on a single villain, it doesn't match reality.

---

Agree, though I don't know if this is a BI problem so much as it is an "Internet forum" problem. People want to boil things down to something simple, when often they are anything but.

I'm not impressed with the job the coaching staff has done this year, but that said they were dealt a pretty awful hand with this roster and the injuries that happened to it. I agree that there is probably no head coach in the nation who could have coached this group to a winning record.

The comments in the OP about how much we were physically dominated are spot on. I did not watch the Big Game live (I knew what was going to happen, so why submit myself to the torture in real time?), but in going back and zipping through the highlights it was painfully obvious that our guys could not physically match up with the Stanford guys. We looked like a high school team trying to block and tackle top-tier collegiate opposition, and that is because we basically are; we have a bunch of raw freshmen and sophomores trying to stop an experienced, talented, senior-laden Cardinal team. No contest. It was like this in a lot of our games, particularly after injuries and departures gutted the defense.

sycasey;842232856 said:

---

Agree, though I don't know if this is a BI problem so much as it is an "Internet forum" problem. People want to boil things down to something simple, when often they are anything but.

I'm not impressed with the job the coaching staff has done this year, but that said they were dealt a pretty awful hand with this roster and the injuries that happened to it. I agree that there is probably no head coach in the nation who could have coached this group to a winning record.

The comments in the OP about how much we were physically dominated are spot on. I did not watch the Big Game live (I knew what was going to happen, so why submit myself to the torture in real time?), but in going back and zipping through the highlights it was painfully obvious that our guys could not physically match up with the Stanford guys. We looked like a high school team trying to block and tackle those guys, and that is because we basically are; we have a bunch of raw freshmen and sophomores trying to stop an experienced, talented, senior-laden Cardinal team. No contest. It was like this in a lot of our games, particularly after injuries and departures gutted the defense.

---

Your last paragraph sums up the season well. Better coaching might have made the scores a bit more respectable but we would still be 1-11. We just didn't have the personnel this year to compete. That's not to say they won't be better in a year or two but as with the coaching, player development doesn't happen over night .

UrsaMajor;842232764 said:

---

I tend to agree with 75, although I probably ascribe somewhat more responsibility to Dykes than he does.

What is troubling is that so many posters here apparently cannot tolerate either ambiguity or complexity. A comment such as "this is 1000% Dykes' fault" is flat out stupid (not to mention mathematically impossible). Dykes is the head coach, and ultimately responsible for the product on the field, but he also had no capacity to alter the hand he was dealt. Suggesting that part of the problem was the legacy of Lupoi should NOT mean that "it's all Tosh's fault." The season was a perfect storm: bad locker room attitude meets too little talent meets too many injuries meets a coaching staff that was both unprepared to deal with the myriad problems and had some serious strategic and systemic flaws. The best coach in the country would not have had a winning record with this team, and I doubt Dykes and Co. would have had a winning record without the injuries and some of the other problems. In other words, everything went wrong. While I realize that it is comforting to the simple-minded to fixate on a single villain, it doesn't match reality.

---

If BI ever becomes dominated by folks who post stuff like, "Hey, we don't know much because we are fans so we have to just sit back and wait a couple of years to see how this plays out." I'll quit reading.

I know, no big loss but it just seems senseless to have an internet opinion board and then criticize when folks post opinions good or bad, right or wrong, ridiculous or reasoned, etc. I'm pretty sure most people on this board can handle ambiguity and complexity. I would guess they just don't see the need to do so on BI. But you are entitled to your opinion. Like I said even ridiculous opinions are appreciated here on BI. :p

82gradDLSdad;842232875 said:

---

If BI ever becomes dominated by folks who post stuff like, "Hey, we don't know much because we are fans so we have to just sit back and wait a couple of years to see how this plays out." I'll quit reading.

I know, no big loss but it just seems senseless to have an internet opinion board and then criticize when folks post opinions good or bad, right or wrong, ridiculous or reasoned, etc. I'm pretty sure most people on this board can handle ambiguity and complexity. I would guess they just don't see the need to do so on BI. But you are entitled to your opinion. Like I said even ridiculous opinions are appreciated here on BI. :p

---

I'll agree.
But it becomes a problem to me when the same opinions are repeated over and over and over and over again by the same posters, on multiple threads.
Where's the give and take in that?