On this board there seems to be a surplus of angst and anger over how the program isn't competing for the Rose bowl at this point in this season and that somehow every season should be at worst 9-3 with Cal always ranked. I hate to say, but this expectation is not close to realistic at the moment. The foundation for my reasoning is the foundation of the Cal football team. Right now Cal does not have a real "program" when you compare the team to others in the conference and nation.
What I am talking about is not that Cal doesn't field a team, but rather that the team doesn't have an identity that lingers in the minds of recruits and opposing fans. Think about teams like Ohio State, Notre Dame or even (bleh) USC. These teams have "prestige". Recruits know them because of the rich and often triumphant history of the teams going back decades.
Cal doesn't have that. And from what I can tell, they haven't had a coach that really worked at building the team and job into a "program" for some time. The two that came closest before now were Snyder who was forced out by Bockrath, but who was starting to develop an identity for the team. And Tedford in his early years, but after Longshore got hurt his freshman year Tedford seemed to lose sight of the idea of giving the team an identity as a team.
Building that identity will determine if Cal can finally move up in the conference. Right now however, there are 3 solid "programs" in the conference and 3 other teams with dynamic coaches driving them to success this season. The other coaches could perhaps build something, but it will be interesting to see if they manage.
Let's examine:
[U]Programs:[/U] USC, Oregon, Stanford
USC - Let's face it, they are the face of all football west of the Mississippi as far as New York and the SEC territory is concerned most of the time. Even when they were fighting sanctions they got national attention. This is one of the most prestigious programs in the nation even though they have twice fired a coach midseason in the last decade. There will be a huge fight to get the head coaching job there after the season. Coaches at USC don't have to push their players to try harder, its almost built into the aura around the program and the history of agent and star appearances.
Oregon - Strangely Oregon's progress to program status was very slow. They had Rich Brooks as a coach from 1977 to 1994, and those weren't great years until near the end when Brooks managed to get Oregon to 3 bowl games from 1989 to 1994. However, Brooks near the end started to build an identity. Then Bellotti took over. He had the advantage of taking over a team that had been to the Rose Bowl after the 1994 season and parlayed that into 12 bowl games over 14 seasons. It was during this time that Oregon became a program with an identity around a fast offense, an athletic QB and a usually fierce defense. It did take nearly 20 years to completely gel if you put 1989 as the start of the rise, but they are not considered a premier program. But note, it took YEARS to build during which Oregon had 2 head coaches (Rich Brooks 17 years, Mike Bellotti 14 years). [However, I should note that Bellotti only had 2 conference championships during his time as head coach (2000, 2001)
Stanford - They are the newest member of the trio that seems to dominate talk in the conference every year. And people seem to forget that they really only have 4 great seasons in the last 2 decades before 2015. However, the fact that from 2010-2013 they never had less than 11 wins puts them on the map. This program was definitely put together thanks to Harbaugh. It may be fun to mock him and to point out that he failed at the pro level. (I think his talents as a motivator don't really translate to the pro game). However, its clear he took over at Stanford and immediately started to give the team an identity. Watch any program about football in the Pac-12 and just about every sportscaster talks about Stanford as the "throwback" team that plays "physical football." Honestly, I think it goes back to Harbaugh's arrival. back then Oregon was flying at its highest and he could probably see that with Oregon and USC in the conference it would be almost impossible to out athlete the rest of the conference. Instead he went for brawn and brain rather than speed. He built a team that would win the LOS and wear teams down. For the most part, this has been wildly successful, and Shaw for all his blandness has improved on that success. Stanford is now known as a destination for those who want to play physical football and go to a great university.
[U]Dynamic Coaches[/U]: Utah, UCLA, WSU
Utah - Willingham might be the best coach in the conference and he definitely appears capable of recovering from losing both of his coordinators. However, he does have the advantage of a senior QB and perhaps the best RB in the conference. Arizona just beat them after Booker got injured. It is clear that he is doing very well.
UCLA - After 4 seasons Mora's record is about the same as Jim Harbaugh managed at Stanford. He's even managed a couple wins over USC which definitely has helped put UCLA in the minds of recruits. LA is no longer a one-team city. However, it will take a few more years of success to become a program.
WSU - Leach has his team in a bowl game and looking very good after they managed to defeat UCLA last week. Who would have expected that from one of the least prestigious programs. The only real question is if he can sustain the momentum.
[U][/U]Who knows programs: All the rest
UW - Peterson is definitely struggling this season, but its hard to say if the step up in competition from Boise State is the issue. Either way UW has definitely seen better years and it looks like they'll miss a bowl game in 2015
Colorado - Considering how poor the program was when McIntyre took over, he's doing fairly well. His team is unfortunately the least talented in the South Division and right now they can't compete every week. Its hard to say if they will catch up. They have improved every season, but so has the rest of the conference.
ASU & Arizona - Both teams brought in successful coaches from other conferences. Both teams have remained in the middle of the conference as Utah and UCLA rose and USC fought on through the sanctions. Neither team appears to have a solid identity. It will be interesting to see how that changes next season.
Oregon State - Riley left a very bare cupboard. Anderson has a lot to do. Ask me again in 2017, I don't expect them to turn around the problems in one season.
[U][/U]
And now Cal:
So we come to Cal. Right now Cal doesn't have a real team identity. We've talked mockingly about the "Bear Raid" offense, but then all noticed that the offense seemed to change when we came to the death ride section of the schedule. The team does appear to be more of a family/team than we had years ago, but that hasn't become something that translates completely to on the field play.
But this isn't where this began. If you really study Cal football and the history of the program, you can see that Andy Smith did put a program in place. One that lingered from the 1920's into the late 1940's and the tenure of Pappy Waldorf, although it fell off in the 1950's while Pappy was still coaching. Unfortunately after that you see year after year of futility and losing seasons and any semblance of a "program" vanishes. Cal also had a history of short coach tenures. Pappy lasted 10 seasons at Cal. No other coach would reach that total until Tedford. Most lasted 5 years or less.
This meant that a coach for Cal would have to create the identity. As I said I think Snyder tried and would have succeeded with more time. Tedford appeared to start, but then the effort vanishes.
And now we have a program with no real identity, being coaches during a period where the Pac-12 has a lot of good coaches and 3 already firmly established "programs". Its a bit of a challenge for any coach.
Can a coach succeed? I am sure the right one can.
Will it be overnight or even in one season? I am convinced that with the current restrictions regarding academic performance of recruits the answer here isn't just no, but a snowflake in hell has a better chance. Any coach is going to have to build from the ground up. Much like Harbaugh did at Stanford. (note, Harbaugh didn't get a bowl game until his 3rd season, although his first season wasn't the train wreck that Dykes had.)
What does this mean? Honestly, I'm not sure. I am sick of seeing negabears bash the program and the progress because they want instant victories when right now the conference is just too strong for a team to jump to the top overnight. Any flaws in a team will have to be addressed before you can rise up. WE can see that with the losses teams have had in the last few weeks as injuries built up. Cal lost too many DT to injury and Oregon's offense exploded. Stanford had speed issues on defense and Oregon destroyed the defense with big plays, pulling out a win despite almost never having the ball. Utah loses Booker to injury and Zona steals the game. Falk at WSU comes back on the field in the 4th quarter and leads his team against the depleted UCLA pass defense, pulling out a win. All wins partly due to flaws in the losing team being exposed.
I'd request that posters here be patient, but I know that patience is difficult. However, I will say that comparing the current situation with any past situation in the conference or any situation in another conference is unfair to the team. The best comparison would be with Colorado which changed coaches at the same time as Cal and is another Pac-12 conference team. Cal appears to be ahead of them on developing the program. It might not be where you want it, but is it a complete disaster?
What I am talking about is not that Cal doesn't field a team, but rather that the team doesn't have an identity that lingers in the minds of recruits and opposing fans. Think about teams like Ohio State, Notre Dame or even (bleh) USC. These teams have "prestige". Recruits know them because of the rich and often triumphant history of the teams going back decades.
Cal doesn't have that. And from what I can tell, they haven't had a coach that really worked at building the team and job into a "program" for some time. The two that came closest before now were Snyder who was forced out by Bockrath, but who was starting to develop an identity for the team. And Tedford in his early years, but after Longshore got hurt his freshman year Tedford seemed to lose sight of the idea of giving the team an identity as a team.
Building that identity will determine if Cal can finally move up in the conference. Right now however, there are 3 solid "programs" in the conference and 3 other teams with dynamic coaches driving them to success this season. The other coaches could perhaps build something, but it will be interesting to see if they manage.
Let's examine:
[U]Programs:[/U] USC, Oregon, Stanford
USC - Let's face it, they are the face of all football west of the Mississippi as far as New York and the SEC territory is concerned most of the time. Even when they were fighting sanctions they got national attention. This is one of the most prestigious programs in the nation even though they have twice fired a coach midseason in the last decade. There will be a huge fight to get the head coaching job there after the season. Coaches at USC don't have to push their players to try harder, its almost built into the aura around the program and the history of agent and star appearances.
Oregon - Strangely Oregon's progress to program status was very slow. They had Rich Brooks as a coach from 1977 to 1994, and those weren't great years until near the end when Brooks managed to get Oregon to 3 bowl games from 1989 to 1994. However, Brooks near the end started to build an identity. Then Bellotti took over. He had the advantage of taking over a team that had been to the Rose Bowl after the 1994 season and parlayed that into 12 bowl games over 14 seasons. It was during this time that Oregon became a program with an identity around a fast offense, an athletic QB and a usually fierce defense. It did take nearly 20 years to completely gel if you put 1989 as the start of the rise, but they are not considered a premier program. But note, it took YEARS to build during which Oregon had 2 head coaches (Rich Brooks 17 years, Mike Bellotti 14 years). [However, I should note that Bellotti only had 2 conference championships during his time as head coach (2000, 2001)
Stanford - They are the newest member of the trio that seems to dominate talk in the conference every year. And people seem to forget that they really only have 4 great seasons in the last 2 decades before 2015. However, the fact that from 2010-2013 they never had less than 11 wins puts them on the map. This program was definitely put together thanks to Harbaugh. It may be fun to mock him and to point out that he failed at the pro level. (I think his talents as a motivator don't really translate to the pro game). However, its clear he took over at Stanford and immediately started to give the team an identity. Watch any program about football in the Pac-12 and just about every sportscaster talks about Stanford as the "throwback" team that plays "physical football." Honestly, I think it goes back to Harbaugh's arrival. back then Oregon was flying at its highest and he could probably see that with Oregon and USC in the conference it would be almost impossible to out athlete the rest of the conference. Instead he went for brawn and brain rather than speed. He built a team that would win the LOS and wear teams down. For the most part, this has been wildly successful, and Shaw for all his blandness has improved on that success. Stanford is now known as a destination for those who want to play physical football and go to a great university.
[U]Dynamic Coaches[/U]: Utah, UCLA, WSU
Utah - Willingham might be the best coach in the conference and he definitely appears capable of recovering from losing both of his coordinators. However, he does have the advantage of a senior QB and perhaps the best RB in the conference. Arizona just beat them after Booker got injured. It is clear that he is doing very well.
UCLA - After 4 seasons Mora's record is about the same as Jim Harbaugh managed at Stanford. He's even managed a couple wins over USC which definitely has helped put UCLA in the minds of recruits. LA is no longer a one-team city. However, it will take a few more years of success to become a program.
WSU - Leach has his team in a bowl game and looking very good after they managed to defeat UCLA last week. Who would have expected that from one of the least prestigious programs. The only real question is if he can sustain the momentum.
[U][/U]Who knows programs: All the rest
UW - Peterson is definitely struggling this season, but its hard to say if the step up in competition from Boise State is the issue. Either way UW has definitely seen better years and it looks like they'll miss a bowl game in 2015
Colorado - Considering how poor the program was when McIntyre took over, he's doing fairly well. His team is unfortunately the least talented in the South Division and right now they can't compete every week. Its hard to say if they will catch up. They have improved every season, but so has the rest of the conference.
ASU & Arizona - Both teams brought in successful coaches from other conferences. Both teams have remained in the middle of the conference as Utah and UCLA rose and USC fought on through the sanctions. Neither team appears to have a solid identity. It will be interesting to see how that changes next season.
Oregon State - Riley left a very bare cupboard. Anderson has a lot to do. Ask me again in 2017, I don't expect them to turn around the problems in one season.
[U][/U]
And now Cal:
So we come to Cal. Right now Cal doesn't have a real team identity. We've talked mockingly about the "Bear Raid" offense, but then all noticed that the offense seemed to change when we came to the death ride section of the schedule. The team does appear to be more of a family/team than we had years ago, but that hasn't become something that translates completely to on the field play.
But this isn't where this began. If you really study Cal football and the history of the program, you can see that Andy Smith did put a program in place. One that lingered from the 1920's into the late 1940's and the tenure of Pappy Waldorf, although it fell off in the 1950's while Pappy was still coaching. Unfortunately after that you see year after year of futility and losing seasons and any semblance of a "program" vanishes. Cal also had a history of short coach tenures. Pappy lasted 10 seasons at Cal. No other coach would reach that total until Tedford. Most lasted 5 years or less.
This meant that a coach for Cal would have to create the identity. As I said I think Snyder tried and would have succeeded with more time. Tedford appeared to start, but then the effort vanishes.
And now we have a program with no real identity, being coaches during a period where the Pac-12 has a lot of good coaches and 3 already firmly established "programs". Its a bit of a challenge for any coach.
Can a coach succeed? I am sure the right one can.
Will it be overnight or even in one season? I am convinced that with the current restrictions regarding academic performance of recruits the answer here isn't just no, but a snowflake in hell has a better chance. Any coach is going to have to build from the ground up. Much like Harbaugh did at Stanford. (note, Harbaugh didn't get a bowl game until his 3rd season, although his first season wasn't the train wreck that Dykes had.)
What does this mean? Honestly, I'm not sure. I am sick of seeing negabears bash the program and the progress because they want instant victories when right now the conference is just too strong for a team to jump to the top overnight. Any flaws in a team will have to be addressed before you can rise up. WE can see that with the losses teams have had in the last few weeks as injuries built up. Cal lost too many DT to injury and Oregon's offense exploded. Stanford had speed issues on defense and Oregon destroyed the defense with big plays, pulling out a win despite almost never having the ball. Utah loses Booker to injury and Zona steals the game. Falk at WSU comes back on the field in the 4th quarter and leads his team against the depleted UCLA pass defense, pulling out a win. All wins partly due to flaws in the losing team being exposed.
I'd request that posters here be patient, but I know that patience is difficult. However, I will say that comparing the current situation with any past situation in the conference or any situation in another conference is unfair to the team. The best comparison would be with Colorado which changed coaches at the same time as Cal and is another Pac-12 conference team. Cal appears to be ahead of them on developing the program. It might not be where you want it, but is it a complete disaster?