Agree - should have linked article but saw them as stand alone comments, similar in pattern to prior year...

KevBear;842316430 said:

---

Who said anything about an "awesome" roster? Why can't some people see any ground between unreasonably high expectations for an immediately "awesome" team and unacceptably low 1-4 win seasons?

BTW, the problem with this team is not QB, it's pretty much every other position. Sure, Dykes was not dealt a pat hand, but don't you think the approx. 15 guys who've left the program with eligibility remaining since Dykes took over might have been helpful in this regard? Yeah, some of them may have been problem cases who had to be removed. But some if not most may have been guys who a better leader could have salvaged. Exactly why does Dykes get the benefit of the doubt for every player who leaves this program?

---

He killed his parents and now wants us to feel sorry for him because he's an orphan.

heartofthebear;842316679 said:

---

Thank you, this saved me the trouble.

Cal doesn't generally have a ton of impact seniors. They usually either default academically or go pro or both. This year Cal has a ton of impact juniors. I don't mind Sonny spinning a little bit in an interview, but he shouldn't be outright misleading.

---

if we're going to be decent this year. its going to have to be our juniors leading the way. lasco is going to have to run the ball, treggs, harper and davis will all need to be big time weapons and im really waiting for treggs to have a breakout season. he was pretty good last year, but im waiting for that greatness to come out of him.

scarlett, jefferson and avery are going to have to anchor down their respective units.

its not we dont have many upperclassmen to depend on, its we really are depending on our upperclassmen to lead this team in reality. our most important players outside of Goff are our upperclassmen. If i were Sonny, id be talking that up and putting pressure on them to lead. we really need these guys to step up, really take control of the team, make their teammates better as well

Our true juniors, technically upperclassmen, shall lead the charge to victory!

gobears725;842316690 said:

---

if we're going to be decent this year. its going to have to be our juniors leading the way. lasco is going to have to run the ball, treggs, harper and davis will all need to be big time weapons and im really waiting for treggs to have a breakout season. he was pretty good last year, but im waiting for that greatness to come out of him.

scarlett, jefferson and avery are going to have to anchor down their respective units.

its not we dont have many upperclassmen to depend on, its we really are depending on our upperclassmen to lead this team in reality. our most important players outside of Goff are our upperclassmen. If i were Sonny, id be talking that up and putting pressure on them to lead. we really need these guys to step up, really take control of the team, make their teammates better as well

---

i feel like i can't expect anything out of Treggs and our WRs w/o an improved OL play. if they don't get better, Goff is going to continue to throw 0-3 yard balls into the flat. and guys like Treggs aren't YAC guys...

beeasyed;842316734 said:

---

i feel like i can't expect anything out of Treggs and our WRs w/o an improved OL play. if they don't get better, Goff is going to continue to throw 0-3 yard balls into the flat. and guys like Treggs aren't YAC guys...

---

well good part of WR yac in this system is based on WR BLOCKING ..yes OL has to block better of course but the OL is not going to be 10 yrs down field to block in front of WRs wow wouldnt that be a fast group of OL

down field blocking is key to yac

going4roses;842316758 said:

---

well good part of WR yac in this system is based on WR BLOCKING ..yes OL has to block better of course but the OL is not going to be 10 yrs down field to block in front of WRs wow wouldnt that be a fast group of OL

down field blocking is key to yac

---

the point is if it won't matter if WRs can block if OL doesn't give Goff time to throw the deep ball...

I suggest you guys use my mantra - "I will not freak out again this year". Repeat 5x





It may not work but it may save your marriage or keep you from breaking furniture.

beeasyed;842316762 said:

---

the point is if it won't matter if WRs can block if OL doesn't give Goff time to throw the deep ball...

---

One of the important keys to any success on offense!

beeasyed;842316762 said:

---

the point is if it won't matter if WRs can block if OL doesn't give Goff time to throw the deep ball...

---

.. yes its a given OL has to block better period .. did i say that yes i did .. but regardless of the number yards on pass play ( OL pass pro / goff having time) if the WRs do not block there will be no yac .. i was not speaking on OL protection at all .. it was more so the "treggs is not a yac guy " comment

going4roses;842316775 said:

---

....if the WRs do not block there will be no yac ...... it was more so the "treggs is not a yac guy " comment

---

2 things

- you can have YAC even if you have poor WR blocking. it depends on the player.

- Treggs is not a YAC type guy. he's a pure route-runner with the ability to stretch the field, or to take advantage of mismatches. that's what coaches have said, that's what his father says. give him some deep routes and take advantage of his strengths instead of that dink-and-dunk 1-2 yard flat pass that NECESSITATES blocks in order to get anywhere.

saying Treggs can be a YAC guy if we have good WR blocking is like saying Khalfani Muhammad can be a short-yardage back/power back if we can open holes up for him up the middle.

KevBear;842316631 said:

---

There is a material basis for calling Dykes out as incompetent. The 1-11 record itself is a huge piece of evidence. Then, there's the character of the losses, one disgusting blowout after another. Then, there's the players fleeing like rats from a sinking ship. Then, there's the endless succession of stupid predictions and self-serving statements made by him.

---

I actually don't think the 1-11 record says anything at all about Dykes' competence or there lack of. The team was not successful, but it doesn't mean Dykes doesn't have the skills to right the ship. You are extremely short sighted if you think pulling the plug after the first season after transition, even at 1-11, will do anything to right the ship faster. It suggests to me that you are not looking at the bigger picture and taking all potential factors into consideration. Do you not agree that we had injuries more than the average NCAA Div I team? Do you not agree that we had to play younger players as a result? Do you not agree that when younger players play you are prone to making mistakes and being physically outmatched by more mature teams? Do you not agree that new systems take time to install?

KevBear;842316631 said:

---

You mean under Dykes, or under a coach who provided better leadership?

---

No, I mean you don't have a crystal ball sitting in front of you that can tell what the future would be like under Dykes or under an alternative coach of your choice. What you have is a keyboard and some free time (and maybe a scotch on the rocks).

KevBear;842316631 said:

---

You're right, I don't know how many of those guys would have contributed this year, but it smells like bullshit when you preside over an exodus of experienced players and then complain about how you don't have enough experience on the roster. It's like getting offered three or four free lunch options, turning them all down for various reasons and then complaining that you're hungry.

---

We can argue all day on why players left. Perhaps some of it was on Dykes or some of it was on the players. Dykes can't keep the players here if they don't choose to be here. But you can't fault Dykes for saying he is hungry after the meatballs rolled out the door, since that is the truth no matter how you cut it.

KevBear;842316631 said:

---

That only makes sense if one considers him an impartial source, which he obviously is not. Just curious, how long would you continue to extend this benefit of the doubt if players kept prematurely leaving the program at a rate of 7-8 player per year?

---

You do realize that in this latest NFL draft there was a record 98 underclassmen who declared and a record 36 of those players going unselected. That tells me this is not an issue with Dykes so much as it is with the system of college football relative to the NFL. The draw to play on Sundays balanced by the risk of injury (we had some of those didn't we) leads to players doing what is in their best interest regardless of the coaches competence or leadership.

KevBear;842316631 said:

---

For the record, I never said I knew why each of those players left the program. What I will say is that the volume of departures combined with the generally poor morale the team experienced during Dykes' entire first season lends a poor impression of his leadership skills on a "where there's smoke, there's usually fire" basis.

---

You certainly inferred that the players left solely because of Dykes' poor leadership and so much as suggest the same above. Frankly what I saw last year despite the difficult result in the W/L column was a team that gave it their all every game. I actually don't recall Tedford's last few teams showing nearly as much fight in games as Dykes' team did, although they won a few extra games.

beeasyed;842316787 said:

---

2 things

- you can have YAC even if you have poor WR blocking. it depends on the player.

- Treggs is not a YAC type guy. he's a pure route-runner with the ability to stretch the field, or to take advantage of mismatches. that's what coaches have said, that's what his father says. give him some deep routes and take advantage of his strengths instead of that dink-and-dunk 1-2 yard flat pass that NECESSITATES blocks in order to get anywhere.

saying Treggs can be a YAC guy if we have good WR blocking is like saying Khalfani Muhammad can be a short-yardage back/power back if we can open holes up for him up the middle.

---

Yep, both are too small. Just heavy breathing in the zone of convergence can bring them down.

:p

beeasyed;842316787 said:

---

2 things

- you can have YAC even if you have poor WR blocking. it depends on the player.

not when 8 men drop in coverage cause there is NO running game to respect including QB

- Treggs is not a YAC type guy. he's a pure route-runner with the ability to stretch the field, or to take advantage of mismatches. that's what coaches have said, that's what his father says. give him some deep routes and take advantage of his strengths instead of that dink-and-dunk 1-2 yard flat pass that NECESSITATES blocks in order to get anywhere.

i am not going to put unknown probables on trigga i leave that up 2 you

saying Treggs can be a YAC guy if we have good WR blocking is like saying Khalfani Muhammad can be a short-yardage back/power back if we can open holes up for him up the middle.

---

once again where to you get these ideas from ..

saying trigga is not aka NOT an YAC guy ... is a bit much too me .. is he going to run over DB's nope but if db are worried about a run game i can see him getting around or away from a cb or safety .. as it stands with lil to no wr blocking hell no ..

you said not a YAC guy mean NO YAC .. None ? he will get some if the offense is working together everyone doing their job .. treggs will get some YAC .. perhaps not as much a 6'4 220 wr but he will get some

do you know how many YAC yards trigga had last season ?

CALiforniALUM;842316506 said:

---

Dude, you don't know how many of those 15 guys would or wouldn't have been helpful towards the relative success of the team. Clearly your assumption is that Dykes was given the keys to the barn and left the door open only to see the best players leave for better pastures. By all accounts there were several reasons why players left the program, all of which have nothing to do with Dykes leadership. Some were academic casualties (Molala), some were not a good fit for the new system (Rodgers), some saw dollar signs (Jackson), some had disciplinary problems off the field (McCain). The reason why Dykes gets the benefit of the doubt is that he KNOWS the real story why players left. You simply make a judgement based on your lack of inner peace with a 1-11 season and levy blame with no material basis for calling him out.

---

......I would lime to know where you got your info...Jackson did not leave because of dollar signs...thank you

socalimamma;842316835 said:

---

......I would lime to know where you got your info...Jackson did not leave because of dollar signs...thank you

---

CALiforniALUM;842316506 said:

---

... Some were academic casualties (Molala), some were not a good fit for the new system (Rodgers), some saw dollar signs (Jackson), some had disciplinary problems off the field (McCain). The reason why Dykes gets the benefit of the doubt is that he KNOWS the real story why players left. You simply make a judgement based on your lack of inner peace with a 1-11 season and levy blame with no material basis for calling him out.

---

hahahahahaha, you're right ALUM, you don't know why they left.

The " TFS " will not work at Cal, unfortunately. It may work everywhere else, but not at Cal. We will lose ,but maybe not as big a blowout because of slightly better defense. I want them to win, I want Dykes to succeed, but it wont. Not trying to be 1/2 full or empty. Just slowly and calmly stating a fact. It's too bad. He's a nice person, but that's all

CALiforniALUM;842316789 said:

---

I actually don't think the 1-11 record says anything at all about Dykes' competence or there lack of. The team was not successful, but it doesn't mean Dykes doesn't have the skills to right the ship. You are extremely short sighted if you think pulling the plug after the first season after transition, even at 1-11, will do anything to right the ship faster. It suggests to me that you are not looking at the bigger picture and taking all potential factors into consideration. Do you not agree that we had injuries more than the average NCAA Div I team? Do you not agree that we had to play younger players as a result? Do you not agree that when younger players play you are prone to making mistakes and being physically outmatched by more mature teams? Do you not agree that new systems take time to install?



No, I mean you don't have a crystal ball sitting in front of you that can tell what the future would be like under Dykes or under an alternative coach of your choice. What you have is a keyboard and some free time (and maybe a scotch on the rocks).



We can argue all day on why players left. Perhaps some of it was on Dykes or some of it was on the players. Dykes can't keep the players here if they don't choose to be here. But you can't fault Dykes for saying he is hungry after the meatballs rolled out the door, since that is the truth no matter how you cut it.



You do realize that in this latest NFL draft there was a record 98 underclassmen who declared and a record 36 of those players going unselected. That tells me this is not an issue with Dykes so much as it is with the system of college football relative to the NFL. The draw to play on Sundays balanced by the risk of injury (we had some of those didn't we) leads to players doing what is in their best interest regardless of the coaches competence or leadership.



You certainly inferred that the players left solely because of Dykes' poor leadership and so much as suggest the same above. Frankly what I saw last year despite the difficult result in the W/L column was a team that gave it their all every game. I actually don't recall Tedford's last few teams showing nearly as much fight in games as Dykes' team did, although they won a few extra games.

---

Regarding the 98 underclassmen - so that is fewer than 1 per team on average. And 36 is fewer than 1/3 per team. How many did we have in each category?

Here is the problem I have with your general opinion. You have set up criteria where essentially there was nothing Dykes could have done that would have been unacceptable. We not only went 1-11, we got decimated in almost every game. We are a passing team that was last in conference in pass efficiency. We are an offense oriented team that was last in conference in scoring. (Hiring Buh was the best thing he could have done for himself. Buh's performance distracted from the offense's total failure). We did not have many injuries on offense and our offensive personnel was not bad. We were last or near the bottom of conference in almost every category (unless it was a negative stat where we were 1st or near the top) Our play was undisciplined and mistake prone. We'll have to agree to disagree on quitting. You don't lose by 50 without quitting and there was video evidence of obvious half-assing.

The problem is that I can tell you that 1-11 is not what has me thinking Dykes isn't the guy. I can tell you all the things I observed beyond the score, and you are just going to pin everything on injuries and youth. That is fine, you aren't ready yet, but I'd like you to ask yourself what Dykes could have possibly done to make you think - okay, that did suck.

I was not expecting big things. I was here before the season saying people were getting carried away and needed to temper expectations. A couple of wins and being competitive would have placated me.

I'll challenge you as I've challenged this board twice before. Instead of telling me all the reasons he had to fail, tell me one thing he did that was football related (I'm happy APR has improved) that was a positive. One reason from last year that makes you think he will succeed. One thing he accomplished. Not a bunch of yapping at alumni functions. One thing he accomplished. No matter what the obstacles, there has to be SOMETHING positive. Something that progresses. For instance, CU sucked - got tragically beat down in every Pac-12 game other than us. But they played us like they believed and the they took us down easily. I don't think they had a ton of positives, but they had SOME. The last two times I did this I got nothing from anyone other than several admissions that no, there were no positives. Basically, it was a lost year. Good coaches don't have lost years.

davetdds;842316841 said:

---

The " TFS " will not work at Cal, unfortunately. It may work everywhere else, but not at Cal. We will lose ,but maybe not as big a blowout because of slightly better defense. I want them to win, I want Dykes to succeed, but it wont. Not trying to be 1/2 full or empty. Just slowly and calmly stating a fact. It's too bad. He's a nice person, but that's all

---

So you aren't buying the TFS, Dave? But wait. I have Mr. T and George Foreman here to tell you that you want your TFS. You need your TFS! Why, here is Auburn with a testimonial...whoops, technical difficulties on that one. Anyway, if you order right now, we'll throw in the vertical blocking scheme for absolutely nothing! Have you been fired from Henderson State? Feeling a little down? The TFS will get you back making six figures in no time.

So you get the TFS AND the vertical blocking scheme. But wait. Ron Popeil is here to throw in a can of spray on hair and a set of Ginsu knives. If you bought all these items separately you'd pay $150 dollars. But right now, you can get them all for...not $129.99...not $99.99...no, not even $59.99...but the low low price of $659,999.99.

OaktownBear;842316844 said:

---

Regarding the 98 underclassmen - so that is fewer than 1 per team on average. And 36 is fewer than 1/3 per team. How many did we have in each category?

Here is the problem I have with your general opinion. You have set up criteria where essentially there was nothing Dykes could have done that would have been unacceptable. We not only went 1-11, we got decimated in almost every game. We are a passing team that was last in conference in pass efficiency. We are an offense oriented team that was last in conference in scoring. (Hiring Buh was the best thing he could have done for himself. Buh's performance distracted from the offense's total failure). We did not have many injuries on offense and our offensive personnel was not bad. We were last or near the bottom of conference in almost every category (unless it was a negative stat where we were 1st or near the top) Our play was undisciplined and mistake prone. We'll have to agree to disagree on quitting. You don't lose by 50 without quitting and there was video evidence of obvious half-assing.

The problem is that I can tell you that 1-11 is not what has me thinking Dykes isn't the guy. I can tell you all the things I observed beyond the score, and you are just going to pin everything on injuries and youth. That is fine, you aren't ready yet, but I'd like you to ask yourself what Dykes could have possibly done to make you think - okay, that did suck.

I was not expecting big things. I was here before the season saying people were getting carried away and needed to temper expectations. A couple of wins and being competitive would have placated me.

I'll challenge you as I've challenged this board twice before. Instead of telling me all the reasons he had to fail, tell me one thing he did that was football related (I'm happy APR has improved) that was a positive. One reason from last year that makes you think he will succeed. One thing he accomplished. Not a bunch of yapping at alumni functions. One thing he accomplished. No matter what the obstacles, there has to be SOMETHING positive. Something that progresses. For instance, CU sucked - got tragically beat down in every Pac-12 game other than us. But they played us like they believed and the they took us down easily. I don't think they had a ton of positives, but they had SOME. The last two times I did this I got nothing from anyone other than several admissions that no, there were no positives. Basically, it was a lost year. Good coaches don't have lost years.

---

he'll succeed if Goff turns out to be an absolute superstar which for a true frosh, he was pretty good. but i think thats pretty much the only way. even gilby won 9 games with Barr

OaktownBear;842316847 said:

---

So you aren't buying the TFS, Dave? But wait. I have Mr. T and George Foreman here to tell you that you want your TFS. You need your TFS! Why, here is Auburn with a testimonial...whoops, technical difficulties on that one. Anyway, if you order right now, we'll throw in the vertical blocking scheme for absolutely nothing! Have you been fired from Henderson State? Feeling a little down? The TFS will get you back making six figures in no time.

So you get the TFS AND the vertical blocking scheme. But wait. Ron Popeil is here to throw in a can of spray on hair and a set of Ginsu knives. If you bought all these items separately you'd pay $150 dollars. But right now, you can get them all for...not $129.99...not $99.99...no, not even $59.99...but the low low price of $659,999.99.

---

That was funny. The thing that actually makes me squeal a bit is that if this 'TFS' offense doesn't work, we're so screwed on our next coach. Dykes is recruiting for this 'TFS' system and if we go back to any kind of pro-style..it will take years to recover again. I'm gonna go watch youtube highlights again of our early 2000s football teams..

OaktownBear;842316627 said:

---

Really? His last post about the Cal coaching staff was March 6. Since that date, he has had two posts about football, neither particularly negative until today. Contrast that with SonofVA who had 270 posts in April alone. ...

---

You spend time researching the number of posts by other people ????
:woohoo
That's the best you can do with your time and your life ????
:facepalm

Helluva combination of funny and pathetic.

Continue on with your circle jerk. :rollinglaugh:

interesting thread ...

have you ever been late on a thread .. like way too late, thread has taken on a life of its own ...

all one can do is watch basically for the most part ...well that is what im doing

lol


GOBEARS

davetdds;842316841 said:

---

The " TFS " will not work at Cal, unfortunately. It may work everywhere else, but not at Cal. We will lose ,but maybe not as big a blowout because of slightly better defense. I want them to win, I want Dykes to succeed, but it wont. Not trying to be 1/2 full or empty. Just slowly and calmly stating a fact. It's too bad. He's a nice person, but that's all

---

Why not? Is the TFS too difficult to execute for Cal players? Is it the football version of rocket science?

Your opinion belies the true purpose of a true Universitywhere anything and everything is possible.

Perhaps that poem made famous by Joe Roth would help:

Don't Quit

When things go wrong, as they sometimes will, 
When the road you're trudging seems all uphill, 
When the funds are low and the debts are high, 
And you want to smile, but you have to sigh, 
When care is pressing you down a bit, 
Rest, if you must, but don't you quit.
Life is queer with its twists and turns, 
As every one of us sometimes learns, 
And many a failure turns about, 
When he might have won had he stuck it out; 
Don't give up though the pace seems slow 
You may succeed with another blow.
Often the goal is nearer than 
It seems to a faint and faltering man, 
Often the struggler has given up, 
When he might have captured the victor's cup, 
And he learned too late when the night slipped down, 
How close he was to the golden crown.
Success is failure turned inside out 
The silver tint of the clouds of doubt, 
And you never can tell how close you are, 
It may be near when it seems so far, 
So stick to the fight when you're hardest hit 
It's when things seem worst that you mustn't quit.

- Author unknown

SonOfCalVa;842316882 said:

---

You spend time researching the number of posts by other people ????
:woohoo
That's the best you can do with your time and your life ????
:facepalm

Helluva combination of funny and pathetic.

Continue on with your circle jerk. :rollinglaugh:

---

I don't need to research. You click on their name on the left and it gives you options including bringing up all the posts by that poster. It took me about 30 seconds to find out how many football posts Smellin had. How much of your life have you spent following around posters who disagree with you and calling them pathetic? And don't get me started on circle jerks.

going4roses;842316823 said:

---

once again where to you get these ideas from ..

saying trigga is not aka NOT an YAC guy ... is a bit much too me .. is he going to run over DB's nope but if db are worried about a run game i can see him getting around or away from a cb or safety .. as it stands with lil to no wr blocking hell no ..

you said not a YAC guy mean NO YAC .. None ? he will get some if the offense is working together everyone doing their job .. treggs will get some YAC .. perhaps not as much a 6'4 220 wr but he will get some

do you know how many YAC yards trigga had last season ?

---

Not a YAC guy... Which is Yards After Catch (not Contact) doesn't mean he will get none. It means that he isn't a big YAC guy and he isn't. Harper is a good YAC guy. Sammy Watkins, De'Anthony Thomas, Keenan Allen, etc. those are a few examples of guys that are good after the catch guys. Players that are sudden and make you miss or physically power through you. Treggs is a great route runner with great speed and great hands, but he doesn't make things happen when he has the ball like a Chris Harper or Keenan Allen.

OaktownBear;842316910 said:

---

I don't need to research. You click on their name on the left and it gives you options including bringing up all the posts by that poster. It took me about 30 seconds to find out how many football posts Smellin had. How much of your life have you spent following around posters who disagree with you and calling them pathetic? And don't get me started on circle jerks.

---

:rollinglaugh: :rollinglaugh: :rollinglaugh: :rollinglaugh: :rollinglaugh:
Thanks for the laughs
:rollinglaugh: :rollinglaugh: :rollinglaugh: :rollinglaugh: :rollinglaugh:

OaktownBear;842316844 said:

---

Regarding the 98 underclassmen - so that is fewer than 1 per team on average. And 36 is fewer than 1/3 per team. How many did we have in each category?

---

The number of CAL underclassmen departures is on par with several other teams including Southern California, LSU, Alabama, Florida State and Notre Dame, who like CAL tend to put a lot of players into the draft. Not all programs historically do. An average across the NCAA FBS does not accurately characterize the dynamics behind the numbers. Interestingly, there appears to be a strong connection in this draft between head coaching changes and players leaving early for the NFL. Roughly 25% of the 98 (101 by some lists) underclassmen left after a head coaching change in their program. I think one has to get at the underlying dynamics that influence a player to leave to understand the numbers. We have all read reasons on why our players have left including receiving favorable draft grades, projections for going in early rounds, academic issues, greed, discipline issues, coaching changes and new systems etc..

OaktownBear;842316844 said:

---

Here is the problem I have with your general opinion. You have set up criteria where essentially there was nothing Dykes could have done that would have been unacceptable. We not only went 1-11, we got decimated in almost every game. We are a passing team that was last in conference in pass efficiency. We are an offense oriented team that was last in conference in scoring. (Hiring Buh was the best thing he could have done for himself. Buh's performance distracted from the offense's total failure). We did not have many injuries on offense and our offensive personnel was not bad. We were last or near the bottom of conference in almost every category (unless it was a negative stat where we were 1st or near the top) Our play was undisciplined and mistake prone. We'll have to agree to disagree on quitting. You don't lose by 50 without quitting and there was video evidence of obvious half-assing.

---

Criteria. What criteria? What I gave was situational context. Trust me, I am neither happy about the 1-11 season nor am I content with that sort of performance. My opinion is simply that any new coach deserves some [U]time[/U] to put in place their system. What your opinion sounds like to me is that the coach must win now or he should be shown the door. I think what we differ on is not that the season was abysmal, it was, but how long we should give the coach to show acceptable improvement before we make a change. There is also this issue of how to pay in order to show him the door, which doesn't seem be considered by some on this board.

OaktownBear;842316844 said:

---

The problem is that I can tell you that 1-11 is not what has me thinking Dykes isn't the guy. I can tell you all the things I observed beyond the score, and you are just going to pin everything on injuries and youth. That is fine, [U]you aren't ready yet[/U], but I'd like you to ask yourself what Dykes could have possibly done to make you think - okay, that did suck.

---

I'm not ready yet? Not sure how you intended that to come across, but you aren't my Yoda.

Injuries and youth are contextual and do play a role, however, what I pin this on is how long we need to give the coach before we can determine his ability to make us a winner. The season sucking and giving the coach time to right the ship given the context doesn't strike me as all that radical of an approach. What strikes me as radical is hiring and firing several coaches (Tedford, Buh and Dykes) all within 18 months or so. To me that adds to the instability of the program and what you seem to want to get away from in Dykes. I think Dykes deserves a bit longer before anybody can determine whether his skills and leadership are substandard.

OaktownBear;842316844 said:

---

I was not expecting big things. I was here before the season saying people were getting carried away and needed to temper expectations. A couple of wins and being competitive would have placated me.

---

Why wouldn't some wins placate you now? How many wins would it take to make you forget last season? My preference is to look at Dykes' body of work similar to the 4-year rolling academic APR average. Give him 2-3 seasons to average a certain number of wins, but as soon as the fourth season kicks in the average bar will go up, no excuses. At some point you drop the first season from the average and move forward.

OaktownBear;842316844 said:

---

I'll challenge you as I've challenged this board twice before. Instead of telling me all the reasons he had to fail, tell me one thing he did that was football related (I'm happy APR has improved) that was a positive. One reason from last year that makes you think he will succeed. One thing he accomplished. Not a bunch of yapping at alumni functions. One thing he accomplished. No matter what the obstacles, there has to be SOMETHING positive. Something that progresses. For instance, CU sucked - got tragically beat down in every Pac-12 game other than us. But they played us like they believed and the they took us down easily. I don't think they had a ton of positives, but they had SOME. The last two times I did this I got nothing from anyone other than several admissions that no, there were no positives. Basically, it was a lost year. Good coaches don't have lost years.

---

I think Dykes has shown a willingness to make changes based on how things went for the better and worse last year. Addition by subtraction. Buh is gone and Kaufman appears to have the entire defense headed in the right direction. This may turn out to be one of the more significant positive things Dykes has done, but I can't show the improvement until we play some games this year, and Dykes didn't have the luxury to fire Buh halfway through the season with few options to replace him. So I think your request for a positive from last year, once again, will require some [U]time[/U].

going4roses;842316823 said:

---

once again where to you get these ideas from ..

saying trigga is not aka NOT an YAC guy ... is a bit much too me .. is he going to run over DB's nope but if db are worried about a run game i can see him getting around or away from a cb or safety .. as it stands with lil to no wr blocking hell no ..

you said not a YAC guy mean NO YAC .. None ? he will get some if the offense is working together everyone doing their job .. treggs will get some YAC .. perhaps not as much a 6'4 220 wr but he will get some

do you know how many YAC yards trigga had last season ?

---

anything that says a Cal player isn't phenomenal in every aspect is "a bit much" for you. if i didn't know any better, i'd say you were related to the players, or were one of their GFs the way you blindly defend anything said about them, whether harmless observations, or otherwise.

saying he is "not a YAC guy" is an observation, not an insult. Treggs is what he is. and a YAC guy, he is not. just like Sofele was never a short-yardage back no matter how much weight he put on over his 2 seasons.

how about actually debating the merits of what was said? that we should draw up better plays--reliant on OL pass protect--to suit their skills?

jamonit;842316911 said:

---

Not a YAC guy... Which is Yards After Catch (not Contact) doesn't mean he will get none. It means that he isn't a big YAC guy and he isn't. Harper is a good YAC guy. Sammy Watkins, De'Anthony Thomas, Keenan Allen, etc. those are a few examples of guys that are good after the catch guys. Players that are sudden and make you miss or physically power through you. Treggs is a great route runner with great speed and great hands, but he doesn't make things happen when he has the ball like a Chris Harper or Keenan Allen.

---

thanks. i should've just said that to begin with...

MinotStateBeav;842316881 said:

---

That was funny. The thing that actually makes me squeal a bit is that if this 'TFS' offense doesn't work, we're so screwed on our next coach. Dykes is recruiting for this 'TFS' system and if we go back to any kind of pro-style..it will take years to recover again. I'm gonna go watch youtube highlights again of our early 2000s football teams..

---

I will defer to your expertise, but weren't we already recruiting for similar schemes under Tedford? We only had two TEs and one was a converted WR? At one point both were hurt? Dykes has actually increased the number of linemen (especially OL) we are bringing in. If we had brought in a "pro style coach" our problems on the OL that we have had over the last 5 years (our last three starting QBs all with season ending injuries on sacks) would have remained.

Bottom line is, even in the worst case scenario you guys are painting, the position we will be in will be similar. Maybe even better since the key to any offensive scheme is going to be building the OL and that starts with bringing in enough bodies, which we are finally starting to do.

calumnus;842316934 said:

---

I will defer to your expertise, but weren't we already recruiting for similar schemes under Tedford? We only had two TEs and one was a converted WR? At one point both were hurt? Dykes has actually increased the number of linemen (especially OL) we are bringing in. If we had brought in a "pro style coach" our problems on the OL that we have had over the last 5 years (our last three starting QBs all with season ending injuries on sacks) would have remained.

Bottom line is, even in the worst case scenario you guys are painting, the position we will be in will be similar. Maybe even better since the key to any offensive scheme is going to be building the OL and that starts with bringing in enough bodies, which we are finally starting to do.

---

It is true Dykes has brought in more OL, but I think that's b/c of 2 reasons
a) we lack OL bodies, and that's something any coach would've immediately recognized. guys like Matt Williams were never going to contribute (moved to DL this year)

b) he recognized that the OL we do have weren't ideal


Will we be in a better, similar position? It depends. Next staff may want less WRs on scholarship though. They may want bigger, bulkier OL instead of our supposed "athletic" and "rangy" guys. Some guys have the ability to bulk and cut and keep most of their skills, but others don't.

Not all guys are "plug-and-play" when switching systems. I think the elite coaches are much better at transitioning between the old and the new, and finding out how to adequately use the old guys in between.

Something to keep in mind.

imo, Trigga isn't a YAC guy. He is an excellent route runner and has good hands. Through hard work, he has basically made himself into a solid D1 player, he has squeeze every ounce of his potential. But his size, speed and agility aren't at the same level as D1 stars or shoe-in NFL guys. I see him as the #4 best WR we have, behind Lawler, Harper and T. Davis, who are all more physically gifted, whether it be speed, size, or agility.

NYCGOBEARS;842316763 said:

---

I suggest you guys use my mantra - "I will not freak out again this year". Repeat 5x





It may not work but it may save your marriage or keep you from breaking furniture.

---

What if you're divorced and she took all the furniture??

Vandalus;842316946 said:

---

What if you're divorced and she took all the furniture??

---

Then following Cal football right now would not be conducive to your emotional well being.

GoBears58;842316645 said:

---

Harbaugh won more than 1 game his first year. So did Mora and Graham.

This was a botched hire from the start.

---

Dykes didn't inherit the same players as Mora and Graham. Tedford inherited a lot of very good players, as well:Asomugha, Boller, Igber,Ryan Ocallahan,Merz, Jameel Powell,Wendell Hunter, Lashaun Ward, Chase Lyman,Geoff Mcarthur,Mark Wison, Lorenzo Alexander, Tull Banta-cain, Marvin Phillip and Matt Nixon to name a few. Dykes is changing systems drastically as well. I'm not sold on Dykes either, but let's not ignore the circumstances.