SonOfCalVa;842619091 said:

---

nah ... the doomers and gloomers predominate with their "stats" that make them :cry: :cry: :cry: :cry:
It's a game against a respectable team ...
if we win, few negas seem capable of giving credit to the coaches for a victory and eight (8) wins
but, like you, some are saying 'no sweat' and let's get ready to "indict" the coaches if we lose.

---

I'm not a doomer or a negabear or anything like that but if we lose I'll be critical of the coaches. We have plenty of time to prepare for the Air Force offense. Our offense should score many points against them. This is a game we should win.

Sunshine pumpers can't have it both ways. You can't lose games we should win and still have full, faith and support of these coaches. One positive about these coaches is we tend to win games we should win (same can't be said of the old Tedford regime).

Cal 45, Air Force 17

dajo9;842619093 said:

---

I'm not a doomer or a negabear or anything like that but if we lose I'll be critical of the coaches. We have plenty of time to prepare for the Air Force offense. Our offense should score many points against them. This is a game we should win.

Sunshine pumpers can't have it both ways. You can't lose games we should win and still have full, faith and support of these coaches. One positive about these coaches is we tend to win games we should win (same can't be said of the old Tedford regime).

---

It's a "unique" offense and Kaufman sez that he has coached against it long ago. He's trying to simplify the keys, teaching assignments and discipline, telling them to keep their eyes focused on their men ... TF talks about how their "service" makes them more focused and aggressive (like harassment of female cadets, yeah, Taliban "patriotism" :p).
It's a learning experience with few or no precedents, according to AK and TF. Their O moves fast; our O can move fast in a different way.

The burden is also on AFA ... Cal has played against stiff Pac12 competition; AFA has not.

As far as I'm concerned, it's a tossup and "breaks" will most likely determine the outcome.
One break for us is that Lawler seems to be back and healthy. Can our OL create openings for RBs, and can Tre and Khalfani get into open space on passes, also. We have speed also.

They're a worthy opponent as they consistently go to bowl games. This is our first in a long time.

heartofthebear;842618904 said:

---

There is probably only 1 way Cal beats Air Force and that is if they score into the 40s. I expect the game to be similar to the ASU game.

Here's why based on a look at the team stats. at the NCAA site:http://www.ncaa.com/stats/football/fbs/current/team/21

Cal is ranked 109th out of 127 FBS teams in total defense, giving up 455 yards/game. There are several teams ranked similarly that Air Force has played.

Air Force scored 58 points against #106 ranked Hawaii.
They also scored 35 against #97 ranked New Mexico.

It's true that those teams don't have great offenses and Cal does. But Cal's D is suffering from several key injuries at LB. Downs, Barton and Hamilton Anoi won't be playing. In addition some of the DLs are coming off injury and won't be 100%. That is a serious problem when facing a triple option team.

On the offensive side, Cal is ranked #8 in total offense, with 524 yards/gm. but Air Force is not far off, ranked #32 at 452 yards/gm. Boise St. is ranked #18 in the nation and Air Force held them to 30 points. That is because Air Force has the #23 ranked total defense in the nation, holding teams to 337 yards/gm.

The good news is that the Cal offense is healthy and reports are that they look good in practice.

One final statistical note (scoring offense and scoring defense):

Scoring offense for Cal is 36 points/gm. vs. Air Force at 33.6. However, scoring defense for Cal is 30 points per game vs. Air Force's 23.

The point is that both teams have good offenses but only one team has a good defense.

Is Cal's offense so good that it can overcome both a bad Cal D and a good Air Force D? That will be answered on Dec. 29.

Keep in mind that Cal came back to beat Air Force in 2007. However, the turning point in that game was not only the job Riley and his receivers did once he came in the game for Cal, it was also the fact that Air Force lost their QB late in the 3rd Q. Air Force did lose their starting QB earlier this year. But the replacement, Karson Roberts has had over 3 months to grow into the job. For example, his passer rating is 150.1, which would be ranked #26 if he had enough attempts (he has only 134 in 11 games and you need 15/gm to be listed ). Goff is #12 at 156.4

I'm not saying Cal can't or won't win. But I think some are disappointed that Cal isn't playing a better team. Well, Cal is playing about as tough a team as it gets match-up wise.

The good news is that Air Force is not particularly good in the turnover and special teams areas.

I think Cal needs to manage the clock and time-of-possession better than in the past. That means a heavy dosage of Watson, Enwere and Muhammed. But we'll see what happens.

---

I think its a tough match-up but the National stats mean nothing. You can't make the comparison when the level of competition Cal played is so much higher.
National stats are all about who you played. It works in the NFL with commonality among 32 teams, and even if you compare conference stats among conference teams, but not when you are talking apples and oranges.

heartofthebear;842619054 said:

---

The injury problems we have on defense have nothing to do with either the stats or the SOS. We have 4 serviceable LBs available for the game. How is that going to work to stop the triple option? In addition several of our DLs are coming off injury. That is what I mean by a match-up problem. Our areas of injuries do not match up well against their team strengths.

---

I didn't see anything like this in your OP. I don't disagree with this, I disagree with your take on comparative team stats which ignores SOS.

Sagarin has us as the 34th best team and AFA at 75 and gives us an 8 point edge. People can spin this however they want but we should be the better team, have far more talent and if we aren't outcoached we will win the game. They lost to a New Mexico team that Arizona just beat and of course SDSU in their last two games. So it's not like they are rolling going into this game.

The only reason to predict a loss is if you think our coaches suck. The only reason to excuse a loss is if you have an irrational attachment to our coaching staff. I don't fall into either of those categories.

How does having plenty of time to preparee magically generate players we won't have?
BTW: I think it is already pretty clear that some defensive coaches should be replaced.
But breakdowns in this game will mostly have to do with lack of personnel and talent on our front 7. Although that lack of talent and depth is squarely due to the lack of recruiting on defense at those positions, a problem that persists even now. And that is on the coaches.

Interesting that now I'm a negabear because I made a point that it is not a good match up for us because of our injuries on defense.

I also said that Cal should do well on offense and should win.

Tell me something I don't already know. Of course we will have to score in the forties, that's been pretty much the way things have been for the past two years. While the defense is improved we cannot depend on it to win the game. Same formula for success, score a lot of points and hold on.

Unit2Sucks;842619128 said:

---

I didn't see anything like this in your OP. I don't disagree with this, I disagree with your take on comparative team stats which ignores SOS.

Sagarin has us as the 34th best team and AFA at 75 and gives us an 8 point edge. People can spin this however they want but we should be the better team, have far more talent and if we aren't outcoached we will win the game. They lost to a New Mexico team that Arizona just beat and of course SDSU in their last two games. So it's not like they are rolling going into this game.

The only reason to predict a loss is if you think our coaches suck. The only reason to excuse a loss is if you have an irrational attachment to our coaching staff. I don't fall into either of those categories.

---

I really don't think about our coaching when looking at match-ups.
But no I don't have much confidence in our coaching of our defensive front 7 and it won't matter what happens in this game because primarily the problem is with personnel.

heartofthebear;842619131 said:

---

How does having plenty of time to preparee magically generate players we won't have?
BTW: I think it is already pretty clear that some defensive coaches should be replaced.
But breakdowns in this game will mostly have to do with lack of personnel and talent on our front 7. Although that lack of talent and depth is squarely due to the lack of recruiting on defense at those positions, a problem that persists even now. And that is on the coaches.

Interesting that now I'm a negabear because I made a point that it is not a good match up for us because of our injuries on defense.

I also said that Cal should do well on offense and should win.

---

You are not being a negabear. Negabears downplay opponents so that, win or lose, it sucks.

Fred Clerici;842619132 said:

---

Tell me something I don't already know. Of course we will have to score in the forties, that's been pretty much the way things have been for the past two years. While the defense is improved we cannot depend on it to win the game. Same formula for success, score a lot of points and hold on.

---

We won 7 games this year and in only 2 of them did they have to score 40 points to win. In 3 of their 5 losses they did not need 40 points to win.

Cal has averaged less than 40 points per game on offense this year.

Name one team outside of Michigan State that played AFA and wouldn't trade linebackers with us. I'm not saying it's not cause for concern, everything is always a cause for concern when you have a mediocre team, but we should have some confidence in our guys and our staff. We have far more talent across the board and 3 weeks to prepare for this.

And heart, you are completely ignoring the other big matchup. How are they going to match up with Goff? Who on their team can run with Treggs, Davis, Hansen? What are they going to do when Khalfani gets outside in space? We could score 50.

Given the qualifier that our team is mediocre, why would they be concerned with our "mediocre" backup runningback and two of our non-top receivers?

Almost any team is a match up problem for our defense but I would much rather match up against a running team than a passing team. Byu, for example, would be a real problem. They torched Utah yesterday. They just couldn't overcome all those early turnovers. Historically we've been very vulnerable to good passing teams. Air Force runs an offense we don't see that often but it's a lot less scary than the teams we see in our own conference. They don't have the powerful offensive line Stanford has. They don't have the speed Oregon has. And we've spent most of out time talking about their offense vs. our defense. This will be the best offense Air Force has faced and it's not even close. They will have problems matching up across the board. I expect a high scoring game.

The other problem, for BOTH teams is just being in a bowl game with the long delay - Holiday eating, sleeping, socializing, being home, is common with college teams in all bowl games. Look at the injuries and lack of fitness already displayed in the first games (turnovers, big comebacks) and it seems to me that the "best" team (statistically, SOS, historically) may not win this bowl game. Go Bears!

Cal is going to have trouble against AFA's TOO, at least for the first half. No one can prepare for it so they're going to run amok. I see 28 pts in the first half but then Cal adjusts on D and starts throwing. Goff has a break out game - 7 TD throws. Cal has to out gun these guys and can. It will just look ugly for the first half.

We have bigger, better athletes and a lot of time to prepare. We should win this one handily. 45-27.

The

Unit2Sucks;842619147 said:

---

Name one team outside of Michigan State that played AFA and wouldn't trade linebackers with us. I'm not saying it's not cause for concern, everything is always a cause for concern when you have a mediocre team, but we should have some confidence in our guys and our staff. We have far more talent across the board and 3 weeks to prepare for this.

And heart, you are completely ignoring the other big matchup. How are they going to match up with Goff? Who on their team can run with Treggs, Davis, Hansen? What are they going to do when Khalfani gets outside in space? We could score 50.

---

That's what I think, too. AFA only has one chance to win- control the clock.Looking forward to 8 wins!

Unit2Sucks;842619147 said:

---

Name one team outside of Michigan State that played AFA and wouldn't trade linebackers with us. I'm not saying it's not cause for concern, everything is always a cause for concern when you have a mediocre team, but we should have some confidence in our guys and our staff. We have far more talent across the board and 3 weeks to prepare for this.

And heart, you are completely ignoring the other big matchup. How are they going to match up with Goff? Who on their team can run with Treggs, Davis, Hansen? What are they going to do when Khalfani gets outside in space? We could score 50.

---

First of all Air Force has a decent pass defense with 2 DBs amongst leaders but I guess I can't say that because those are stats that don't take into consideration the holy SOS. They also have a decent overall defense.

I would say both Navy and SDS would not trade their group of LBs for our depleted group of LBs.

Consider this: Our SOS does not necessarily make us better prepared for the game. The SOS is part of why we are beat up on D. When you play in the pac-12, you are beat up at the end of the season. Air Force is much healthier.

Also: We keep expecting Cal to drop 50, but it's only happened once versus FBS opponent this year and pretty much everybody dropped 50 on OSU this year.

I get it. We suck and have no chance. Duly noted.

I think Cal wins...it just won't be as easy as everyone seems to think.

HOTB - my point is that stats in and of themselves are not meaningful, context in interpretation is key. I think your interpretation in the OP was a misleading take on the stats, so that's what I've been addressing. I'm fine if you want to ignore SOS in evaluating the teams, but you can't do that and rely on season-long statistics because it's apples and oranges. When I look at the schedules, I don't see a single win on AFA's schedule that would be comparable to them beating us. Their "best" win is probably Boise and Boise lost to UW (who we beat), BYU (who Utah just beat) and UNM (who AZ just beat). AFA also lost to UNM and SD State. Other than Grambling, I'm not sure if there's a single win on our schedule which AFA would have had. To me that's meaningful.

AFA is not some MWC juggernaut, they played in a weak conference which made their stats look better than they would have looked had they played a decent schedule, and ours was more than decent. If they beat us it's likely for the reasons you mention, but I think even with those weaknesses, we have no excuse not winning this game, unless you count getting outcoached an excuse.

Vandalus;842619238 said:

---

I get it. We suck and have no chance. Duly noted.

---

That's not the point.
I was raising an issue that I thought was relevant and I kept getting pressed on my points. So now it seems that I'm down on our chances and on the team. I'm not. It's just that I had to make my points more emphatic in order to address certain questions.

I see that it is impossible to raise a point without being forced into one extreme or another.
I think Cal should win but I don't think it will be that easy because of our LB injuries.

Unit2Sucks;842619246 said:

---

HOTB - my point is that stats in and of themselves are not meaningful, context in interpretation is key. I think your interpretation in the OP was a misleading take on the stats, so that's what I've been addressing. I'm fine if you want to ignore SOS in evaluating the teams, but you can't do that and rely on season-long statistics because it's apples and oranges. When I look at the schedules, I don't see a single win on AFA's schedule that would be comparable to them beating us. Their "best" win is probably Boise and Boise lost to UW (who we beat), BYU (who Utah just beat) and UNM (who AZ just beat). AFA also lost to UNM and SD State. Other than Grambling, I'm not sure if there's a single win on our schedule which AFA would have had. To me that's meaningful.

AFA is not some MWC juggernaut, they played in a weak conference which made their stats look better than they would have looked had they played a decent schedule, and ours was more than decent. If they beat us it's likely for the reasons you mention, but I think even with those weaknesses, we have no excuse not winning this game, unless you count getting outcoached an excuse.

---

I agree and acknowledge that my OP was misleading.
But I am not trying to come up with excuses for losing or bail out our coaches.

My point is that it creates a match-up problem when your weakness is the other teams strength. We can compensate for that with our offensive strength and we will have to.
That's really all I was saying.

beelzebear;842619194 said:

---

No one can prepare for it so they're going to run amok. .

---

I like what AK said - you won't see the ball being handed off or not, so don't try to see it. Just play your position and tackle your guy.

Especially for the fb - tackle him every time. Then, it's 3 against their 2 (qb and pitch man). Who's got the qb? Tackle him every time. Trust your teammates to handle the pitch man.

If our guys can keep their concentration, we'll stop them.

I think our defensive stats are meaningless vs triple option
AF will score
We need to score more
Do they blitz?

MoragaBear;842619292 said:

---

There's no reason why Cal's safeties can't play significant roles in run support vs. Air Force and they certainly have no shortage of them

---

Well they will have to do that and open themselves up to pass plays. Air Force is not one dimensional.

Look, I'm not saying Cal will lose. I just don't think that Air Force is a good match-up for our D and so we will have to win with offense and probably score into the 40s. We may be playing from behind as well.

MoragaBear;842619297 said:

---

They're definitely a one-dimensional offense. They're almost last in the country in passing offense: #123 Air Force 80-155, 51.6%, 1698 yds, 13 tds, 11 int.

Playing their usual 4-2-5 would allow Cal to use 1-2 safeties in run support most plays and they have several safeties that do well in run support.

---

I believe that they are #123 in yards/gm. but that is because they don't throw much. They are fairly successful when they do throw. They are second in the nation is yards per completion. And they are #14 in the nation in passing efficiency. It is true that they only complete 50% of their passes.

Their QB has over 10 yards/pass attempt.
Goff is at 8.64

I am not trying to be a butt about this but if you are going to challenge me I am going to provide the information to back up what I say.

heartofthebear;842619295 said:

---

Well they will have to do that and open themselves up to pass plays. Air Force is not one dimensional.

Look, I'm not saying Cal will lose. I just don't think that Air Force is a good match-up for our D and so we will have to win with offense and probably score into the 40s. We may be playing from behind as well.

---

These posts are so entertaining. No matter the matchup, someone here would start a thread about how bad things were for the Bears!!
I can't wait for the thread on the weather!! If clouds come in, then the impending rain will doom the Bears as AF is a running team.
Same with the wind thread that will be coming.
There is bound to be a thread about how much more motivated AF is for the game playing a power 5 conference team.

Rushinbear;842619289 said:

---

I like what AK said - you won't see the ball being handed off or not, so don't try to see it. Just play your position and tackle your guy.

Especially for the fb - tackle him every time. Then, it's 3 against their 2 (qb and pitch man). Who's got the qb? Tackle him every time. Trust your teammates to handle the pitch man.

If our guys can keep their concentration, we'll stop them.

---

I'd have more faith in this if: a) Cal had a better D and better LBs and b) Cal had seen the TOO before...like in the past 3 years.

p.s. at least it will be an interesting match up...crazy TOO vs. a supposedly high flying passing offense. I would like to see Goff completely uncork it and toss 7 TDs.

heartofthebear;842619300 said:

---

I believe that they are #123 in yards/gm. but that is because they don't throw much. They are fairly successful when they do throw. They are second in the nation is yards per completion. And they are #14 in the nation in passing efficiency. It is true that they only complete 50% of their passes.

Their QB has over 10 yards/pass attempt.
Goff is at 8.64

I am not trying to be a butt about this but if you are going to challenge me I am going to provide the information to back up what I say.

---

51% completion percentage.
TD to int almost even.

How is that good????

Can't sugarcoat that. That's crap!!!

Those are numbers to challenge your assertion about their passing ability.

That's also playing some crap teams.

heartofthebear;842619300 said:

---

I believe that they are #123 in yards/gm. but that is because they don't throw much. They are fairly successful when they do throw. They are second in the nation is yards per completion. And they are #14 in the nation in passing efficiency. It is true that they only complete 50% of their passes.

Their QB has over 10 yards/pass attempt.
Goff is at 8.64

I am not trying to be a butt about this but if you are going to challenge me I am going to provide the information to back up what I say.

---

HOTB, it's just a difference of opinion, no big deal. As far as passing efficiency goes, I can't look at these stats - Air Force 80-155, 51.6%, 1698 yds, 13 tds, 11 int. and think we are looking at an efficient pass attack. Yes, I get the YPA are high - but they are clearly beating MWC teams over the top when those teams cheat to stop the run. They are still getting 13-11 on TD / Int. The strategy is sound and we should have the personnel to make it work. Make Air Force beat you in the air, adjust at the half if it isn't working.

89Bear;842619304 said:

---

These posts are so entertaining. No matter the matchup, someone here would start a thread about how bad things were for the Bears!!
I can't wait for the thread on the weather!! If clouds come in, then the impending rain will doom the Bears as AF is a running team.
Same with the wind thread that will be coming.
There is bound to be a thread about how much more motivated AF is for the game playing a power 5 conference team.

---

You know, I don't make things up for the sake of causing alarm. I actually make an effort to know what I am talking about first. That doesn't mean I am always right, but I am often enough to deserve a bit more respect than your post implies.

dajo9;842619308 said:

---

HOTB, it's just a difference of opinion, no big deal. As far as passing efficiency goes, I can't look at these stats - Air Force 80-155, 51.6%, 1698 yds, 13 tds, 11 int. and think we are looking at an efficient pass attack. Yes, I get the YPA are high - but they are clearly beating MWC teams over the top when those teams cheat to stop the run. They are still getting 13-11 on TD / Int. The strategy is sound and we should have the personnel to make it work. Make Air Force beat you in the air, adjust at the half if it isn't working.

---

Yes I brought that up specifically because Moragabear was suggesting that Cal could just cheat with the safeties in the box since our LB situation isn't good. But the stats show that Air Force can throw for 20 yards a completion in situations like that. So I don't think that is necessarily the answer either.

I don't think that Air Force is a passing threat, but, like Utah, they can burn you downfield if you don't stay honest.

It will be interesting to see how Kaufman handles it.