Did Dykes go out of his way to talk about the decision to play Goff over Kline in all those weeks? Not that I remember. The media asked him about making a switch every single week, and everything he said about Kline was in response to that. So, I don't think Dykes could've waited until the end of the season and pulled Kline aside privately, because (1) he felt Goff was the guy, and (2) that decision was discussed in the press conference every week. I'm sure Sonny would've rather not talked about a QB controversy at all.

What people really wanted is for Dykes to start Kline, and picking apart his character from the way he "handled" the situation is just a proxy argument to vent that frustration. Sonny can't just be a bad coach, he also has to be a bad person, just like Tedford, Keenan, Maynard, DeSean, etc. This is the opposite phenomenon of fans bending over backwards to exculpate players who commit crimes or what have you, so long as they're winning.

I think the sentiment of fans has less to do with liking either player individually and more to do with disappointment in Dykes as a coach. In a coach I would want to play for, and one who I want to represent the University I love, I want a guy who gives every player that commits to play for the University a chance to develop.

I fundamentally disagree with a coach making a decision to start one player over another if two players show approximately equal ability in practice. If one player is clearly better in practice, then fine start him and don't give the other guy a chance until the first guy goes down. However, when you pick a guy over another in a close decision, then you are letting your judgment replace actual results on the field in game situations, which is all that really matters. Kline did enough in my opinion to be given a shot to compete on the field. So I am disappointed when Dykes doesn't give him the chance to compete.

That doesn't mean I disagree with Dykes making the call at the season to start Goff. It does mean that I completely disagree with Dykes sticking with Goff after repeated poor performances, even if expected of a true freshman, and not giving Kline a fair shake. That is a failure of leadership and something which can quickly kill team morale and divide a locker room. A coach should keep politics and personal preference out of his decisions, encourage development of players, teach fundamentals, and devise a game plan week to week. That coach should then give everyone on the team a chance to compete on the field and execute that gameplan.

As people have discussed, Dykes and Franklin appeared to do this with every other position on the field, except QB. If Goff played lights out and was winning games and Cal was competitive, then I think people say that his QB choice was potentially fine and Goff simply beat out Kline and got the opportunity to play and performed. But by the tOSU and Oregon games it was clear that Goff had some serious issues and that maybe Dykes should put Kline in a position to succeed. It appears to most that Dykes put his personal feelings of which quarterback was better over results in a game situation and I think that speaks to a failure of him as a coach.

People may say that Kline didn't make the most of his opportunities, but I think he played better than Goff in worse situations (i.e., he never came in with a tie or a lead) until the very end of the season when he knew he had to transfer based on the politics within the coaching staff and a full year of poor development in practice and at games. I think somewhat that this is a self-fulfilling prophecy.

So I think that bitching about whether someone supports Goff or Kline is misdirected. I think many of us support both Goff and Kline and want to see the coaching staff do the right thing for both of their development. As a player, as in life, all you can ask for is an equal opportunity, and I don't think Kline got that here. Therefore, I am disappointed in the staff for their failures, not individual players.

The U$C and 'Furd games were Goff's best games by numbers, and they were 2 of the last 3 games. Im not sure if you call that repeated poor performances.

btw, Kline had 3 TD's and 4 INTs.

briloker;842246951 said:

---

I think the sentiment of fans has less to do with liking either player individually and more to do with disappointment in Dykes as a coach. In a coach I would want to play for, and one who I want to represent the University I love, I want a guy who gives every player that commits to play for the University a chance to develop.

I fundamentally disagree with a coach making a decision to start one player over another if two players show approximately equal ability in practice. If one player is clearly better in practice, then fine start him and don't give the other guy a chance until the first guy goes down. However, when you pick a guy over another in a close decision, then you are letting your judgment replace actual results on the field in game situations, which is all that really matters. Kline did enough in my opinion to be given a shot to compete on the field. So I am disappointed when Dykes doesn't give him the chance to compete.

That doesn't mean I disagree with Dykes making the call at the season to start Goff. It does mean that I completely disagree with Dykes sticking with Goff after repeated poor performances, even if expected of a true freshman, and not giving Kline a fair shake. That is a failure of leadership and something which can quickly kill team morale and divide a locker room. A coach should keep politics and personal preference out of his decisions, encourage development of players, teach fundamentals, and devise a game plan week to week. That coach should then give everyone on the team a chance to compete on the field and execute that gameplan.

As people have discussed, Dykes and Franklin appeared to do this with every other position on the field, except QB. If Goff played lights out and was winning games and Cal was competitive, then I think people say that his QB choice was potentially fine and Goff simply beat out Kline and got the opportunity to play and performed. But by the tOSU and Oregon games it was clear that Goff had some serious issues and that maybe Dykes should put Kline in a position to succeed. It appears to most that Dykes put his personal feelings of which quarterback was better over results in a game situation and I think that speaks to a failure of him as a coach.

People may say that Kline didn't make the most of his opportunities, but I think he played better than Goff in worse situations (i.e., he never came in with a tie or a lead) until the very end of the season when he knew he had to transfer based on the politics within the coaching staff and a full year of poor development in practice and at games. I think somewhat that this is a self-fulfilling prophecy.

So I think that bitching about whether someone supports Goff or Kline is misdirected. I think many of us support both Goff and Kline and want to see the coaching staff do the right thing for both of their development. As a player, as in life, all you can ask for is an equal opportunity, and I don't think Kline got that here. Therefore, I am disappointed in the staff for their failures, not individual players.

---

BeachyBear;842246916 said:

---

Ayoob was also a 5* recruit who got lost his starting job to a third-string fullback.

The enthusiasm over someone whose done so little on the field is beyond puzzling, but I think it's more the troll echo chamber here than what the Cal fan community at large is thinking.

---

In fact, I think he started every game until the SC game. So there was a feeling he had more than his fair shot, and could try again to next year. And once Levy looked good in relief, Tedford gave him his shot - as a starter.

Current staff has shown nothing like that. Had we actually won a game last year (Por. St. does not count), and we had some confidence the staff knew what they were doing, we might feel differently. Had Kline started one or two games after a week of practice, and looked no good, might also feel differently. But until Kline does not pan out elsewhere, there will always be a "what could have been" feeling.

Many also think that Or. St. is a perfect fit for a pro-style QB, like Kline. And none of us hate Or. St, unlike some of our other rivals.

In any case, I think it is unlikely that Kline will haunt Dykes, because I doubt Dykes will last long enough.

MiZery;842246839 said:

---

Dante Smith some years back on the BBall team.

Cant explain it. We should be happy with Goff, who had a good year for a true Freshman QB playing behind a porous O-LIne...

---

Let's hope it's an injury-free season.

BeachyBear;842246916 said:

---

Ayoob was also a 5* recruit who got lost his starting job to a third-string fullback.

The enthusiasm over someone whose done so little on the field is beyond puzzling, but I think it's more the troll echo chamber here than what the Cal fan community at large is thinking.

---

Ayoob started and played almost the whole damn year, on a pretty good team, and was horrible. Kline barely saw the field and it was always on a spur of the moment decision. The Ayoob-Kline comparison is ridiculous as was the troll echo chamber comment.

berk18;842246950 said:

---

Did Dykes go out of his way to talk about the decision to play Goff over Kline in all those weeks? Not that I remember. The media asked him about making a switch every single week, and everything he said about Kline was in response to that. So, I don't think Dykes could've waited until the end of the season and pulled Kline aside privately, because (1) he felt Goff was the guy, and (2) that decision was discussed in the press conference every week. I'm sure Sonny would've rather not talked about a QB controversy at all.

What people really wanted is for Dykes to start Kline, and picking apart his character from the way he "handled" the situation is just a proxy argument to vent that frustration. Sonny can't just be a bad coach, he also has to be a bad person, just like Tedford, Keenan, Maynard, DeSean, etc. This is the opposite phenomenon of fans bending over backwards to exculpate players who commit crimes or what have you, so long as they're winning.

---

B go back to some of the quotes dykes said on kline. its clear that he said some underhanded comments about him.

i dont get why the two have to be linked. im pretty sure almost all of my posts are in support of Goff starting, yet i dont think Dykes handled the situation correctly through the media with regards to Kline. you do know that if there is something that a coach doesnt want to talk about, he doesnt have to talk about it. but there were some comments where it was clear to me at least that dykes went out of his way to degrade Kline.

I honestly think that Dykes is thin-skinned and let all the talk amongst fans on who should start get to him and Kline happened to be the dog that he kicked. its partly why he lashed out at the message boards as well.

dykes has proven himself to be a poor coach and to think that is strategy to win the Pac-12 is by having Goff throw 2 yard out passes every down just demonstrates that he and his buddy franklin are in over their heads...also the buh hire is unforgivable...this clown makes Gilbertson look competent...
:headbang

MiZery;842246839 said:

---

Dante Smith some years back on the BBall team.

Cant explain it. We should be happy with Goff, who had a good year for a true Freshman QB playing behind a porous O-LIne...

---

Not hard to figure out why.

He was a VERY early commit to Cal, had always wanted to go to Cal, irrespective of football, stayed loyal to Cal when his coach got sh*t canned and lobbied other players to stay. Stayed loyal when he was not names the starter.


Unlike MOST football players, his heart was in CAL, not in football. He demonstrated that over and over.


Then you get Coach Dykes who obviously broke down 19 years of Cal love to the point where he says "**** it, Oregon State!"




It is not hard to understand why people are upset. By all accounts it would have to be something a LOT bigger than "not starting" to get him to jump ship on his dream of graduating from Cal. People have a hard time believing that Kline suddenly gave up on his dream of a Cal degree because he MIGHT start one day at OSU (for two years, starting a year from now). He has a similar chance of starting here, now that Goff has been injured. SO, what did Dykes do or say that makes him trade in a dream and not starting for OSU and not starting?

goodrich;842246996 said:

---

dykes has proven himself to be a poor coach and to think that is strategy to win the Pac-12 is by having Goff throw 2 yard out passes every down just demonstrates that he and his buddy franklin are in over their heads...also the buh hire is unforgivable...this clown makes Gilbertson look competent...
:headbang

---

I'm confused by this, there are many plays where Goff threw down field or hit an inside receiver over the middle. I don't think your statement " having Goff throw 2 yard out passes every down" is at all factual.

MiZery;842246896 said:

---

How about the 'Furd game? I wonder how other staring qb's did against the Furd compared to Goff.

Goff was underperforming and mediocre? Wow his numbers must be pretty crappy combared to Kline.

---

Did you watch the Oregon games? Goff was horrible in those games. I think it's fair to say that Goff was mediocre this year, given that he ranked 11th in the pac12 in QB rating.
By Big Game, Kline had gotten limited time and Dykes even played Hinder ahead of him so yeah Kline isn't going to look good then.

gobears725;842246986 said:

---

B go back to some of the quotes dykes said on kline. its clear that he said some underhanded comments about him.

i dont get why the two have to be linked. im pretty sure almost all of my posts are in support of Goff starting, yet i dont think Dykes handled the situation correctly through the media with regards to Kline. you do know that if there is something that a coach doesnt want to talk about, he doesnt have to talk about it. but there were some comments where it was clear to me at least that dykes went out of his way to degrade Kline.

I honestly think that Dykes is thin-skinned and let all the talk amongst fans on who should start get to him and Kline happened to be the dog that he kicked. its partly why he lashed out at the message boards as well.

---

I'd actually be interested in looking at some specific quotes, because something that's been lacking from this discussion is specific material.

I know people had a problem with the "He's not Michael Vick comment." On that, I'd have two things to say: (1) There's a salient football point that he's making. In a lot of ways I think Kline is Kevin Riley with a better recruiting ranking. They're both better at the long ball than the short stuff, and mobile enough to surprise you here and there. The football point here is that Riley, in early games with the adrenaline pumping, made some amazing scramble plays. That part of his game just wasn't sustainable, though, because he wasn't that kind of athlete. He was quick enough to catch a defense by surprise early on, but not quick enough or with enough vision to do it consistently. He wasn't even that good on broken plays as his career progressed. When Kline ran early on, I had a similar feeling about him.

(2) If the press asks Dykes what he thought of Kline's mobility, I don't think the fans or the media would view "No comment" as an acceptable answer, so I disagree that he has the option to not talk about it. At that point, if you don't think he's the guy, your options are coach speak: "Yeah, he really did a good job out there for us today" and than continue to not play him, or you can give your honest assessment: "He made some plays, but that's not ultimately sustainable." Tedford got skewered for the former option, so I really do think that if the press is going to ask you, specifically, about why a guy isn't playing more, there aren't a lot of good ways to deal with that. It's an inherently negative conversation.

89Bear;842246894 said:

---

People are saying Kline was "all Cal." So is Goff.
People are saying "Kline is so highly rated. So is Goff.
Kline recruited for Cal. Goff didn't at camps?
Kline stuck with Cal. Goff didn't?
Standing up for Kline and in the process minimizing Goff?

---

Dykes made the right decision in going with Goff. He was clearly the better QB. Having said that, I still don't think much of Dykes and his coaching staff. When a team gets worst as the season progresses (and we got much worst), it's a very poor reflection on the coaching staff. Say all you want about injuries and youth, no competent coaching staff would have delivered the results we saw this season.

gobears725;842246986 said:

---

I honestly think that Dykes is thin-skinned and let all the talk amongst fans on who should start get to him and Kline happened to be the dog that he kicked. its partly why he lashed out at the message boards as well.

---

I meant to talk about this too, which I think is an interesting issue. Dykes actually talks more football in his press conferences than a lot of other coaches do, and seems more willing to explain specifically why things went wrong. So, in the Portland State game he said stuff like "They came out in an unbalanced formation and leveraged us a bit, but we took care of that through switching up some gap assignments and things," which I don't remember hearing from Tedford in similar contexts.

As a coach, one of your options is to say nothing specific about football at all (coach-speak), which lets you be easily translatable for fans and the media. Or, you can say football-specific things that try to make sense of what's happening to the fans and the media. It seems, to me, that Dykes' "insults" to Kline are his attempts at the latter approach. He thinks Kline doesn't have game. He's not going out of his way to bring that up, but people ask him about it and so he gives his rationale. He could go the Tedford route, but in part I agree with you that he feels that he should justify his decisions to the fans. That could be because he's thin-skinned, or it could be that he's just more up-front with the media than Tedford was. Either way, it is what we wanted from our next coach, and I'm not so sure I see his comments as being more negative than honest.

I think that many of us were disappointed that Kline never got a real chance, and after a disastrous season it's a shame to lose a guy with so much promise and so much enthusiasm for the school we all love. Once the season was down the drain, would it not have been a good idea to announce in advance of one of the late season games that Kilne would get to play, say, the entire second quarter? Just to give him a chance to establish a rhythm and to send him a message that he was still wanted. Well, I guess that perhaps he was NOT still wanted.

On the other hand, I don't really remember Dykes disparaging Kline publicly all that much. After the Big Game the first question an obviously shell-shocked Dykes was asked what he thought of Kline's performance, and his quick reply was dismissive, something like, "Not very good." Obviously he could have been more supportive. But he gave a series of curt replies after that until he was asked on which specific areas the team needed to improve. Then he gained his composure and went down a long and I thought rather impressive list. Not just block and tackle but stuff like how to pick up the locker room, how to rest and recover. Were there many other instances of Dykes publicly criticizing Kilne? Refresh my memory.

In any case, sorry to see Zach go. Wish him the best. And hoping to see the Bears competitive on the field once again.

berk18;842247027 said:

---

I meant to talk about this too, which I think is an interesting issue. Dykes actually talks more football in his press conferences than a lot of other coaches do, and seems more willing to explain specifically why things went wrong. So, in the Portland State game he said stuff like "They came out in an unbalanced formation and leveraged us a bit, but we took care of that through switching up some gap assignments and things," which I don't remember hearing from Tedford in similar contexts.

As a coach, one of your options is to say nothing specific about football at all (coach-speak), which lets you be easily translatable for fans and the media. Or, you can say football-specific things that try to make sense of what's happening to the fans and the media. It seems, to me, that Dykes' "insults" to Kline are his attempts at the latter approach. He thinks Kline doesn't have game. He's not going out of his way to bring that up, but people ask him about it and so he gives his rationale. He could go the Tedford route, but in part I agree with you that he feels that he should justify his decisions to the fans. That could be because he's thin-skinned, or it could be that he's just more up-front with the media than Tedford was. Either way, it is what we wanted from our next coach, and I'm not so sure I see his comments as being more negative than honest.

---

i guess it could be a different perspective to look at it. id say that he needs to and should be smarter or more aware of some of the things that he says. its why some coaches just resort to coach speak because things can be taken and construed a certain way. in that respect, i feel like coaches always need to have an awareness of what they say and have an ability to choose their words carefully. the ability to do so is important in their leadership capabilities.

all in all, i really hope that dykes and the staff learn from this year. if they can move forward and learn from this experience then perhaps they can become better coaches and get the program moving back in the right direction. its a different game than the WAC. from on the field to off of it. different kind of pressure and its probably more of a challenge than what our own people and fans even acknowledge

MiZery;842246865 said:

---

Uh where did he 'jerk' Kline around? Why are fans getting so butthurt about a guy they haent even met and they have no idea on what happened behind the scenes.

In fact, Kline said in an interview he appreciated that Dykes was honest with him. I guess the mob will not believe that, instead believe what they want to believe.

---

Check out Sonny's post furd game interview.Threw Kline under the bus. Not very classy. Kline is too much a gentleman to respond in kind. Before I saw that I was on the fence with Dykes. No mas.


:gobears:

MiZery;842246839 said:

---

Dante Smith some years back on the BBall team.

Cant explain it. We should be happy with Goff, who had a good year for a true Freshman QB playing behind a porous O-LIne...

---

Bigs is a joke attempting to be in the NFL draft. A guy who is fumbles, isn't durable, can't run between the tackles, and I could go.

Kline on the other hand likely looks good in the standard pro-set run by Oregon State. Smart move on his part. My sense is he was not a great fit for the Bear Raid, despite his obvious strong arm.

Just as a point of reference, here are the combined stats for each player in the 5 games they both played in (same competition)...

Goff: 124-209, 59%, 1,347 yds, 6.4 avg, 6 TD, 3 Int
Kline: 43-82, 52%, 443 yds, 5.4 avg, 3 TD, 4 Int

I'd posit if you need two long paragraphs to rationalize it - probably not worth it. The tone was key- he was mocking him. Coaches get hot at players - sure, but you don't see them mocking their players much for good reason.

Irishbear;842247037 said:

---

Check out Sonny's post furd game interview.Threw Kline under the bus. Not very classy. Kline is too much a gentleman to respond in kind. Before I saw that I was on the fence with Dykes. No mas.


:gobears:

---

This is what Dykes said about Kline in his post-game comments. As far as I can see, those were the only comments he made about Kline post-game.

"Q. How did you feel about Kline's
performance coming in?
COACH DYKES: I didn't think it was very
good."


Are those the comments you were referring to?

UCBerkGrad;842247045 said:

---

This is what Dykes said about Kline in his post-game comments. As far as I can see, those were the only comments he made about Kline post-game.

"Q. How did you feel about Kline's
performance coming in?
COACH DYKES: I didn't think it was very
good."


Are those the comments you were referring to?

---

Thanks for the specifics. So, yeah, SD did not broach the subject, but was responding to a reporter's question. True, he probably should have said something like, "Zach came in and played his heart out, but wasn't able to turn the tide. Those Stanfurdite bastards have a great defense this year." Still, not quite what I would call "throwing him under the bus."

I thought SD should've given Kline home starts against Arizona and $C, so we could've gotten a clearer picture of what he can do, but, of all the problems we have, the QB situation -- including Dykes' handling of it -- is barely in the top ten, if that.

Phantomfan;842246999 said:

---

Not hard to figure out why.

He was a VERY early commit to Cal, had always wanted to go to Cal, irrespective of football, stayed loyal to Cal when his coach got sh*t canned and lobbied other players to stay. Stayed loyal when he was not names the starter.


Unlike MOST football players, his heart was in CAL, not in football. He demonstrated that over and over.


Then you get Coach Dykes who obviously broke down 19 years of Cal love to the point where he says "**** it, Oregon State!"




It is not hard to understand why people are upset. By all accounts it would have to be something a LOT bigger than "not starting" to get him to jump ship on his dream of graduating from Cal. People have a hard time believing that Kline suddenly gave up on his dream of a Cal degree because he MIGHT start one day at OSU (for two years, starting a year from now). He has a similar chance of starting here, now that Goff has been injured. SO, what did Dykes do or say that makes him trade in a dream and not starting for OSU and not starting?

---

That pretty much sums it up for me. Nice post.

KoreAmBear;842246866 said:

---

Just for the tOSU alone though, Bigs didn't fumble, and basically single-handedly kept us in the game. Yet JT gave him the ball like 4 times (I don't think he had a run less than like 8 yards -- 4 carries, 160 yards, 2 TDs). Just for that game alone, it was insane that he did not get him the ball more. tOSU defenders could not keep up. Plus Bigs was way more explosive last year. This year (due to coming off injuries and him hesitating on cuts), I don't think anyone was clamoring for him to play more.

---

Exactly. OSU was SCARED of Bigelow, you need to leave him in just for the threat that you MIGHT toss it to him again (and what the hell, maybe you actually DO toss it to him again!).

Phantomfan;842246999 said:

---

Not hard to figure out why.

He was a VERY early commit to Cal, had always wanted to go to Cal, irrespective of football, stayed loyal to Cal when his coach got sh*t canned and lobbied other players to stay. Stayed loyal when he was not names the starter.


Unlike MOST football players, his heart was in CAL, not in football. He demonstrated that over and over.


Then you get Coach Dykes who obviously broke down 19 years of Cal love to the point where he says "**** it, Oregon State!"




It is not hard to understand why people are upset. By all accounts it would have to be something a LOT bigger than "not starting" to get him to jump ship on his dream of graduating from Cal. People have a hard time believing that Kline suddenly gave up on his dream of a Cal degree because he MIGHT start one day at OSU (for two years, starting a year from now). He has a similar chance of starting here, now that Goff has been injured. SO, what did Dykes do or say that makes him trade in a dream and not starting for OSU and not starting?

---

^This.

Never understand the knee-jerk reaction to always side with/support the current head coach regardless of his body of work at hand.

MiZery;842246839 said:

---

Dante Smith some years back on the BBall team.

Cant explain it. We should be happy with Goff, who had a good year for a true Freshman QB playing behind a porous O-LIne...

---

How quickly we forget....Maynard vs Bridgford debate was very similiar

UCBerkGrad;842247058 said:

---

How quickly we forget....Maynard vs Bridgford debate was very similiar

---

No it wasn't. Bridg got his shot and we noped the **** off that bandwagon. Kline was a freshman and got a raw deal.

concernedparent;842247088 said:

---

No it wasn't. Bridg got his shot and we noped the **** off that bandwagon. Kline was a freshman and got a raw deal.

---

A raw deal? A freshman got beat by another freshman. Happens.

UCBerkGrad;842247096 said:

---

A raw deal? A freshman got beat by another freshman. Happens.

---

the raw deal could be that he came to Cal with the expectation of playing in Tedford's pro style offense and got Dykes with Franklin and was forced into trying to perform in system thats not really suited to his strengths.

Dykes and Franklin did do a long evaluation from spring to the middle of fall camp on who would be best suited for their offense. i have little doubt that they were wrong in choosing Goff. Kline didnt ever look comfortable in the gun to me.

coaching changes happen and it was a bit of the risk he took signing with Cal when it was pretty clear that tedford was on the hot seat. i think that Kline will be in a very good situation up at Oregon st learning under Riley in an offense suited more towards his strengths.

gobears725;842247106 said:

---

the raw deal could be that he came to Cal with the expectation of playing in Tedford's pro style offense and got Dykes with Franklin and was forced into trying to perform in system thats not really suited to his strengths.

Dykes and Franklin did do a long evaluation from spring to the middle of fall camp on who would be best suited for their offense. i have little doubt that they were wrong in choosing Goff. Kline didnt ever look comfortable in the gun to me.

coaching changes happen and it was a bit of the risk he took signing with Cal when it was pretty clear that tedford was on the hot seat. i think that Kline will be in a very good situation up at Oregon st learning under Riley in an offense suited more towards his strengths.

---

I enjoyed reading this reasonable perspective, thanks.

gobears725;842247106 said:

---

the raw deal could be that he came to Cal with the expectation of playing in Tedford's pro style offense and got Dykes with Franklin and was forced into trying to perform in system thats not really suited to his strengths.

---

Wouldn't that mean that every player that was recruited under Tedford's system got a raw deal with the Sonny hire?

UCBerkGrad;842247113 said:

---

Wouldn't that mean that every player that was recruited under Tedford's system got a raw deal with the Sonny hire?

---

Running Backs yes.

I was a Kline-supporter (albeit admittedly silent on this board) who wanted to see him get a chance or two to play (or better yet, start) if for no other reason than to evaluate better his abilities in a game when the outcome was still in question.

That the coaching staff steadfastly refused to start Kline in place of Goff during the latter's struggles mid-season was a little disappointing. Yet, from what we did see of Kline (in particular during the Oregon and Oregon St games), it appeared that Kline had some undeniable playmaking abilities and could probably play in the Pac-12, but would probably also not really excel in the TFS system.

That said, given that he remained committed to Cal* in spite of Tosh-gate (and the subsequent de-commitments by other players), I am still disappointed that Kline is transferring--especially to a conference opponent.

Still, I wish him luck going forward (except when OSU plays Cal).

*From what I recall during my lurking days, it appears that Kline also actively exhorted other Cal commits to stay committed.

SchadenBear;842247054 said:

---

That pretty much sums it up for me. Nice post.

---

+1

01Bear;842247157 said:

---

I was a Kline-supporter (albeit admittedly silent on this board) who wanted to see him get a chance or two to play (or better yet, start) if for no other reason than to evaluate better his abilities in a game when the outcome was still in question.

That the coaching staff steadfastly refused to start Kline in place of Goff during the latter's struggles mid-season was a little disappointing. Yet, from what we did see of Kline (in particular during the Oregon and Oregon St games), it appeared that Kline had some undeniable playmaking abilities and could probably play in the Pac-12, but would probably also not really excel in the TFS system.

That said, given that he remained committed to Cal* in spite of Tosh-gate (and the subsequent de-commitments by other players), I am still disappointed that Kline is transferring--especially to a conference opponent.

Still, I wish him luck going forward (except when OSU plays Cal).

*From what I recall during my lurking days, it appears that Kline also actively exhorted other Cal commits to stay committed.

---

+1