Quite a few people here are suggesting Cal will inevitably extend Dykes and that there's no point in debating other scenarios.

So - suppose our AD makes it official and gives Dykes a long enough extension to end the talk, either after ASU or our bowl game.

What would you suggest Dykes needs to do in terms of changing up our strategy, our coaching personnel, our recruiting approach, and "miscellaneous"?

NOTE: There's no point in rehashing whether Dykes should get that extension - there are many other threads in which to do that. This is about what the best-case scenario is if we go all in on keeping our current coach for the long(-ish) haul.

510Bear;842600114 said:

---

Quite a few people here are suggesting Cal will inevitably extend Dykes and that there's no point in debating other scenarios.

So - suppose our AD makes it official and gives Dykes a long enough extension to end the talk, either after ASU or our bowl game.

What would you suggest Dykes needs to do in terms of changing up our strategy, our coaching personnel, our recruiting approach, and "miscellaneous"?

NOTE: There's no point in rehashing whether Dykes should get that extension - there are many other threads in which to do that. This is about what the best-case scenario is if we go all in on keeping our current coach for the long(-ish) haul.

---

If Dykes gets an extension, there is nothing he can do deliver a successful football program. He just doesn't have what it takes. We should expect nothing but continued mediocrity and irrelevance.

My 5 year plan is to take up Yoga and binge drink.turn it into a new sport.

5 year plan: become a basketball school.

In all seriousness, though, the best bet is for Dykes to hire some assistant who is great at recruiting and coaching up linemen. Offensive linemen in particular. Build out from the lines. This might fly in the face of the Tony Franklin System, so maybe that means we need to lose him as well. (Hey, you asked for best-case scenario.)

MinotStateBeav;842600142 said:

---

My 5 year plan is to take up Yoga and binge drink.turn it into a new sport.

---

OC staff reviewing result of furd game-planning .. and the final score.
Tony was taking a toke on Telegraph.

Eliminate the vertical set so that we can recruit decent OL and so that we can run the ball in the red zone.

Let's not live up to the Kal stereotype and come up with any 5 year plans, please.

NYCGOBEARS;842600155 said:

---

Let's not live up to the Kal stereotype and come up with any 5 year plans, please.

---

Let's go straight to the purges.

BearsWiin;842600160 said:

---

Let's go straight to the purges.

---

McNeese State could be our Siberian Gulag.

We need about a year to form a committee, then another year for them to draw up 15 point plan. So really, we need like 7 years.

socaliganbear;842600166 said:

---

We need about a year to form a committee, then another year for them to draw up 15 point plan. So really, we need like 7 years.

---

Franz Kafka's "The Castle" was inspired by Cal's bureaucracy.

Robocheme;842600154 said:

---

Eliminate the vertical set so that we can recruit decent OL and so that we can run the ball in the red zone.

---

Put in student body right (left, center) from 3 point stance at whatever ref is closest.

The safeties take a hit out on the ref?

"Blow it up and start all over again"

In all seriousness:

Year 1 (2016): If Goff comes back, we need to seriously contend for the PAC-12 North next year. Otherwise, at least 7-8 wins. Dykes would have gotten a break for next year with Goff gone if 2015 was decent, but the hype train has derailed. If we have a losing season next year, he should be gone, unless we pull off a few huge upsets. If we do not have a win against an in-state school, he should be gone.
Year 2 (2017): Year 5 of the Dykes era. With a full class in, we should have 1-2 wins against California schools, and one or several of the streaks against Oregon, USC or Furd should be over. If we are still no better than 7-8 wins, consider 2018 do or die.
Year 3 (2018): By this point, we should have the Axe, and beaten USC or Oregon. Less than 9 wins is unacceptable.
Year 4 (2019): By now a PAC-12 Championship Game appearance, and 10 wins, or close to it. The streaks are over.
Year 5 (2020): At least 1 or multiple PAC-12 North titles, and perhaps a conference championship.

I could see us getting 8 wins this year, and maybe Goff coming back, but if he leaves I do not imagine 2016 being nice.

Robocheme;842600154 said:

---

Eliminate the vertical set so that we can recruit decent OL and so that we can run the ball in the red zone.

---

He will not elim the vert set. SD=TF=Vert Set. So, forget it. You need to remember that TF sells his system to high schools and the vert set is part of it. Eliminating the vert set makes it a tacit admission by TF that his system is flawed. Can't have that.

This means we need dual threat qbs - 3 of 'em. The qb is going to have to sprint out and run or pass. Starter will be hurt by game 4, 2nd guy by game 7, 3rd guy game 11, but by that time the starter will be back to finish the season - 6 to 7 wins, as usual.

Can Forrest run? Bowers? Neither looks particularly robust. Luke, we know, but passing?

I know, what I be smokin'?

We will need the glove

To actually try to answer your question, either modify the TFS to get rid of the vertical blocking scheme, or dump it, and Tony Franklin. There's no evidence this scheme works against the most athletic teams, and I don't think quality linemen are going to come here to be taught a system that won't help them get to the NFL. Then, focus recruiting on the offensive and defensive lines, and go back to the power football approach that worked under Tedford. We're now back to the historical Cal problem, IMHO, decent skill players, but not enough support in the trenches to enable them to be successful.

Remember, the question was what Dykes should do. If he's not willing to do this, then there's no reason to keep him, since there's no evidence that this system is effective. This should be Williams' primary focus in determining whether to give Dykes an extension. What I'm worried about is that Dykes will convince Williams that he's recruiting players who can make the system work where it hasn't to date. Evidence for that is lacking, based on recruiting ratings to date.

The jury is still out on Dykes. Don't extend. Let's see what he can do next season.

My suggestion isn't much different from everyone else, but I liken it to baseball and to some extent basketball. Strength should be up the middle. In baseball, you have a better chance at winning with pitching, catching and center field, (nothing wrong with a great SS and 2nd baseman either). In basketball, you need a center and a point guard to play off one another. If you follow that theme in football:
We need stellar centers, QB and guards. On D, we need stellar defensive tackles to close down the run game; we need a stellar MLB as the quarterback of the defense; we need stellar safeties with speed, strength and for coverage purposes.

To ask for five years hence is asking too much. For now, I think SD, TF and AK all agree to beef up the OL and DL. We have ten commits in those two areas at the moment. We could use at least one more on each side of the ball. The game is in the trenches. Stanford proved as much last Saturday. Power football is where it's at, but strength emanating from the middle outward should work.

One day there was a fire, and the contract extension burned up. Nobody could remember if there even was one. The decision was made to move forward with a new coach and a new AD.

To Pappy's Ghost: You're two total posts ahead of me (now it's one). I spend too much time on this stuff.

Realistically I don't know. But I know if I were Williams I would be DEMANDING a 5 year plan that would in exacting detail provide a pathway forward. Ultimately the inability to lay out a plan (to improve academics) was a reason that Sandy said she canned Tedford.

That's funny. We're all crazy.

BearsWiin;842600160 said:

---

Let's go straight to the purges.

---

Not enough! Not enough!

NYCGOBEARS;842600170 said:

---

Franz Kafka's "The Castle" was inspired by Cal's bureaucracy.

---

Me loves Kafka reference on a sports message board!

Robocheme;842600154 said:

---

Eliminate the vertical set so that we can recruit decent OL and so that we can run the ball in the red zone.

---

I have found some video evidence that the vertical set works.

https://vimeo.com/28039090

There appear to be some conditions for the vertical set to be successful, though:

1. Technique can only be applied during practices or scrimmaging drills
2. The defensive lineman needs to allow the offensive lineman some time for a "head start" - standing a bit off to the side and coming in at an angle also is helpful, as is being somewhat slow in the rush and not particularly agressive
3. Under no circumstances is the defensive lineman allowed to line up head to head and bull rush the offensive lineman as he retreats

Day 1: buy more alcohol. Oh wait, you meant 5 year plan for the program...

Great suggestions (even the funny ones) but my 2 cents: add schemes for a H-back, fullback and a stud Tight End. For example, the Gus Malzahn offense uses a lot of 2-RB sets and has a great run/pass balance for a "spread" offense.

I can't believe that Dykes and TF sit around eating candy bars and haven't realized that, historically speaking, offenses such as theirs (air raids, run-and-shoot, spread-variants) have all moved the ball well between the 20s but stall in the redzone. If they are sitting around eating candy bars and think they have something foolproof then they have to realize that those who don't know history are doomed to repeat it.

The defense and linemen on either sides are a different story, others have good ideas for those areas but the one thing that stands out to me over the last several years is the sloppy tackling. Someone has to clean that mess up. The Citadel tackled better than Cal last weekend.

(PS Sorry for any typos when I post, I'm usually on phone)

Here's my suggestion (again, if multiple posters are right and we need to quit being silly little children and stop all this talk about replacing Dykes, and settle in for a long stretch with him and Tony calling the shots)....

Eliminate the conflicts of interest.

We have an OC who has a side business selling DVDs to high school coaches. There's been plenty of talk about how this leads him to padding stats and other goals that run counter to "help Cal win, both short- and long-term".

It would be nice if our AD could lay down the law and tell him to knock it off, or get fired. (It might help if said AD increased the budget for assistant salaries so our OC wouldn't have as much need to pursue a side business, but a tough-guy approach may also be warranted too.)

Bump.....we'll all be having this discussion perhaps as early as tomorrow. (sigh)

510Bear;842609361 said:

---

Bump.....we'll all be having this discussion perhaps as early as tomorrow. (sigh)

---

Yikes, that sounds ominous. Is the word on the street that Dykes is getting a better extension offer and/or deciding to stay after all? At this point, it would be painful to see Sonny come back at all, extension or not.

Here's how I think things roll...Dykes comes back. Extension is signed or not..and he's fired some time during next season after a horrible start.