KoreAmBear;842624780 said:

---

We are a system offense. We should rack up some yards no matter who plays QB or WR. You would think out of Forrest, Bowers, and Gilliam, one guy will be able to at least be a facilitator for his first year.

Plus our o-line gelled in the last few games, and looks to be better next season. Or D is slowly progressing, and we have a decent D-line and finally some athletes (and depth) at the DB spot (which favors us playing 4-2-5). I say we having a winning record and a bowl game.

---

This ... The offensive will have different look personal wise but still Tfs ... Next qb will have pieces around him seasoned in this offense even if not starting

Unknown probable is which Freshman rb/wr/te/dl Will come In with lights on

Sorry Fremont- we know you want to hire Chip Kelly.

I see the program evolving next year. Academics, defense, running attack bigger linemen, better special teams due to more depth, system in place, recruiting on an upward curve, more early enrollee making them possibly available for next year, and I am looking for Dykes to announce some excellent new recruits for the coming year.

Cal8285;842624809 said:

---

Actually, he is wrong, because he says, "Maybe 6th." There is no way that anyone (well, anyone but maybe Wilner) picks Cal 6th behind OSU.

Yeah, Cal finished tied for 4th and 5th this year with UW, it is obvious that, with a new QB, writers (or coaches or other pundits) will pick Cal behind UW, and won't flip Cal ahead of WSU (or Oregon or LSJU). 5th. Correct. Any intelligent, neutral journalist would stop there. No intelligent, neutral journalist would add "maybe 6th," because even if Wilner thinks HE might pick OSU ahead of Cal, he knows the other writers well enough to know that nobody else will pick OSU ahead of Cal.

The funny thing about Wilner is that he'd rather come off as a jerk than a good journalist. He's not a jerk for posting this now, he's just a jerk, and he's a bad journalist for posting something he KNOWS isn't correct. He IS wrong. He could have made himself right by leaving it at the obvious, but since saying Cal will be picked 5th is about as interesting as saying the sky is blue, he just had to add something to make it more interesting, even if it is obviously wrong. That is not good journalism, that is being a jerk.

---

Quoted for accuracy.

moonpod;842624747 said:

---

It's all about getting to the edge they aren't that fast. But somehow teams get caught up trying to play their game. I'm by no means saying we can't stand improvements on the lines. Just saying edge speed is how you beat them. Oregon is a running spread. They should have good rushing #s in general

in terms of next year. If Oregon figures out the QB thing they will be the class of the PAC north. if they don't then who knows. They really struggled this year with Lockie

The furd will do what the furd does. teams will probably be smarter than some coaches about keeping the ball away from mccaffrey on ST, and they turn over a bunch of OL, but their rushing attack will be gnarly. Their D will have to find some DL again, but they figured it out this year on a grad transfer and a shoe string, so maybe next year too

If you believe in Peterson Washington will be on the rise, personally I think it's still jury is out.

Wazoo...you just never know with the Pirate. it's just so damn unpredictable, but yes dangerous.

OSU is soooooo far away. man. was dealing with academics at Wisconsin REALLY that bad?

---

One of Dykes' recruiting shortcomings is in the area of team speed.

moonpod;842624684 said:

---

did you watch the Oregon furd game? that's how you beat the furd. you have fast quick guys on the outside and you don't bother challenging them up the middle. ie you don't try to play their game

back to the OP: wilner is a tool

---

Having been at the Oregon/Furd game, one thing the Ducks did was stop Furd's running game, particularly in the red zone. Oregon completely lost the statistical battle (Hogan had over 300 yards passing and Furd had almost twice as many first downs). Furd traded field goals for Oregon touchdowns. Also, one other factor: 3 Furd turnovers.

We can rag on Wilbur all we want but his track record of predictions is much more accurate than the Sonny sunshine pumpers. Look at the records of the coaches at Oregon and Stanford and look at Sonny's; that might explain why there's not an expected dropoff.

wifeisafurd;842624859 said:

---

Having been at the Oregon/Furd game, one thing the Ducks did was stop Furd's running game, particularly in the red zone. Oregon completely lost the statistical battle (Hogan had over 300 yards passing and Furd had almost twice as many first downs). Furd traded field goals for Oregon touchdowns. Also, one other factor: 3 Furd turnovers.

---

that's what you need to do. bend. don't break. make them start passing. It comes from offensive pressure on them cause their D isn't great on the edges or past the front 7. you gotta go around them. that being said, there aren't a lot of schools with the personnel to do that. in many ways we didn't last year, but with Stovall, maybe echols and some others coming we might. and that's a static picture of THIS year. next year their D may be different, albeit they return most of those guys so you don't really expect guys to get any faster/quicker suddenly and they still have their DL depth problems (weird after the prior 4 years or so and their recruiting). Also we have no idea if a new QB will be better than Hogan and make this unviable

and again. assuming the Montana transfer is all that and a bag of chips Oregon will be the class of the PAC north. Furd will have a bunch of new OL and a new QB. they won't overtake Oregon IF they've got their QB situation settled.

if you believe in Petersen then you might believe that they will be better next year behind Browning. personally I'm not so convinced.

Wazoo is always a rollercoaster

so Cal in my mind could be anywhere in the pac north cause in the end we just don't know if Sonny has indeed established a PROGRAM or if we just peaked and are about to fall

okaydo;842624814 said:

---

II'm going to go out on a limb and predict that BI will have more than 100 mispellings of Chase's name in 2016.

---

Safe prediction since many still struggle with Rogers vs Rodgers :p

okaydo;842624814 said:

---

II'm going to go out on a limb and predict that BI will have more than 100 mispellings of Chase's name in 2016.

---

Who is "II'm" and why does he care if people spell Chase's last name correctly? Also I will predict that people who criticize other people's spelling and grammar will embarrassssss themselves with their own mistakes. Like spelling misspelling incorrectly.

Fremont Bear and Wilner are long lost identical twins.

Looperbear;842624846 said:

---

One of Dykes' recruiting shortcomings is in the area of team speed.

---

The lack of team speed is largely due to Tedford recruits, McClure, Dozier, Nickerson, Broussard, etc. Cal actually picked up quite a bit of speed (especially in the defensive backfield) with the last class, but it won't be on display until next season. Nice try, keep hating.

Way too early. Have to see who leaves early on other teams, recruiting and transfers (e.g., what happens if the Texas A&M QB signs on?), injuries, coaching changes, etc. For example, what if Sonny hires a position coach who brings a bunch of five star talent with him? Or we have key players fail out? Same with other schools. What happens if WSU's QB goes down with an injury? Paying attention to some idiot writer's rants before the bowl games are even over is worthless

operbear;842624904 said:

---

Fremont Bear and Wilner are long lost identical twins.

---

And neither is the Arnold Schwarzenegger twin. Both are Danny Devitos.

Cal8285;842624809 said:

---

Actually, he is wrong, because he says, "Maybe 6th." There is no way that anyone (well, anyone but maybe Wilner) picks Cal 6th behind OSU.

---

I would not pick Cal behind OSU either, but still . . . there is more reason to expect OSU to improve on last year's record than there is for Cal. Granted, they have a LONG way to go, but if you believe in Gary Andersen's ability to coach up his roster, then it's within the realm of possibility.

sycasey;842624922 said:

---

I would not pick Cal behind OSU either, but still . . . there is more reason to expect OSU to improve on last year's record than there is for Cal. Granted, they have a LONG way to go, but if you believe in Gary Andersen's ability to coach up his roster, then it's within the realm of possibility.

---

:rollinglaugh: :rollinglaugh: :rollinglaugh:

It's Wilber's not too veiled opinion of Sonny as a coach. That's all.

sycasey;842624922 said:

---

I would not pick Cal behind OSU either, but still . . . there is more reason to expect OSU to improve on last year's record than there is for Cal. Granted, they have a LONG way to go, but if you believe in Gary Andersen's ability to coach up his roster, then it's within the realm of possibility.

---

They need a new DC ...

NYCGOBEARS;842625190 said:

---

It's Wilber's not too veiled opinion of Sonny as a coach. That's all.

---

Yup, that's basically it. If you don't think Sonny is any good, then you'd expect a BIG dropoff next season, possibly opening the door for OSU to sneak past us (while still being bad).

I predict Wilner falls to the 6th rated college sports columnist in the Bay Area next year. Oh wait, that would be a step up.

MoragaBear;842624629 said:

---

Maybe 6th? That's just a gratuitous dig.

Who in the world would pick OSU over Cal?

---

+1
OSU will be better next year, but that's not saying much. However, Anderson will get them back competitive within a few years, just not next year.

Also, saying Cal will be fifth is misleading.
The 4 teams above them (UW, WSU, UO and furd) could all finish in the top 25 next year.

sycasey;842624741 said:

---

USC and ASU are not in the Pac-12 North, so they are irrelevant to Wilner's prediction.

Stanford and Oregon are established programs with a strong talent pipeline. It's reasonable that pundits would expect them to "reload" quickly. Would anyone pick Cal over those teams, given that we haven't beaten either of them in ages?

WSU finished ahead of us and will be bringing most of their roster back. Washington finished with the same conference record and also brings most of their roster back. Meanwhile, Cal is losing a pretty decent amount of talent. We'll lose our first-round NFL draft pick QB, most of our WRs, and most of our defensive line. It's gonna be tough to improve on this year's record, which already had us tied for 4th place.

Wilner might be a jerk for posting this now, but he's not wrong. I don't see Cal doing better than 5th place next year unless our coaching staff REALLY steps it up and we see a bunch of players make big improvements ahead of schedule.

---

+1
He's also a jerk for the maybe 6th comment. You analyzed the situation well but left out OSU. OSU's roster is at a JC level right now and also next year. The are recruiting nobody of note.

Also he could have worded it differently. He could have said the north division will be a challenge for Cal next year without Goff.

longseeker;842624812 said:

---

Well.... Chase Forest, Luke Rubenzer, Ross Bowers..... hope at least one of them really surprises us. And paired with some of our very decent running backs and a plethora of wide receivers whom we haven't see much of to date makes for a lot of interest for the upcoming Spring practice season. Not sure if we can depend upon any incoming Frosh QB, but would like to be surprised here, too.

But I still wish we had offered QB Johnny Stanton (Santa Margarita HS/Nebraska/Saddleback CC) because I saw him in person play in the California State Community College Championship game at CCSF, and he can make all the throws right now in a similar offense system as Cal's. I think he may have already signed a LOI with UNLV.

---

I've always liked Stanton. I have to believe it is an academic fit issue. Remember it is not enough to qualify. Dykes wants guys that can finish academically.

okaydo;842624814 said:

---

II'm going to go out on a limb and predict that BI will have more than 100 mispellings of Chase's name in 2016.

---

Would that be a limb in a forest?

wifeisafurd;842624906 said:

---

Way too early. Have to see who leaves early on other teams, recruiting and transfers (e.g., what happens if the Texas A&M QB signs on?), injuries, coaching changes, etc. For example, what if Sonny hires a position coach who brings a bunch of five star talent with him? Or we have key players fail out? Same with other schools. What happens if WSU's QB goes down with an injury? Paying attention to some idiot writer's rants before the bowl games are even over is worthless

---

I can always count on you to have a balanced perspective. I try to do the same but it doesn't come off as well. Right now I am doing a very complicated and time consuming spread sheet of each pac-12 team's roster. One of the difficult things about it is that the roster's are more fluid than I thought.

In general the situation with college football teams is much more changeable than it appears to us. When you really get into it in some depth you see how hard it is to make predictions from one year to the next, especially this early.

When I have the spreadsheets done, they will help track 4 major categories that effect roster strength
1. Talent rating coming out of high school.
2. College playing experience from past years
3. Production/Ability-How good is the player?
4. Health-How often is the player injured?

To make a long story short, I am very careful to make sure that the data I use for each of these categories is both reliable and valid.

It is interesting to read people's opinions about team's like Oregon knowing how complicated just Oregon's situation is.

Oregon is a team that has many strengths but they also have many hidden weaknesses.

1) They currently have a cut and paste QB situation which makes that position very vulnerable to depth issues.
2) They have lost several key coaches recently-first Kelley and now Frost.
3) They have several defensive weaknesses especially since next year they will be very young at several positions.
4) The expectations at Oregon have become so unreasonable that they are under constant pressure to succeed, meaning that they will hire and fire coaches more often than they should. That creates instability and recruiting problems.
5) Players tend to leave early for the NFL, although Buckner did come back for his senior year.

In sum, this last year exposed Oregon for what they are, a program that can drop very quickly out of the rankings just because of just 1 of the issues mentioned above. They are a paper lion and expect Cal to upset them in the near future.

moonpod;842624684 said:

---

did you watch the Oregon furd game? that's how you beat the furd. you have fast quick guys on the outside and you don't bother challenging them up the middle. ie you don't try to play their game

back to the OP: wilner is a tool

---

This times 1000

sycasey;842624922 said:

---

I would not pick Cal behind OSU either, but still . . . there is more reason to expect OSU to improve on last year's record than there is for Cal. Granted, they have a LONG way to go, but if you believe in Gary Andersen's ability to coach up his roster, then it's within the realm of possibility.

---

Look, even if OSU somehow uses their 12th man to beat Cal in Corvallis next year, they won't finish above Cal in the overall record.
BTW: The team that is likely to have the biggest drop off is Utah. I know that is the south but I doubt Wilner will ever say that about them because they aren't furd's rivals.

Utah might be able to pull in a few D1 cut and paste's like they already have done with former UW QB Williams. But they can't do that everywhere.

Wilner has been anti-Cal for as long as I can recall. I've had a few responses published over the years ("The Fans Speak Out" section), disagreeing with his positions....

That said, I can see how someone can look at 2016 and think Cal might finish as he stated (5th or last in the North).

In 2015, both Washington schools were quite inexperienced (#86 and #107, according to Phil Steele), with new starting QBs too, one a true freshman. I seem to recall that UW lost several defenders to the NFL, I think in the first round even, yet their D improved, to the best in the Pac-12.

In 2015, both Oregon schools were also quite inexperienced (#89 and #122), both starting new QBs as well, including a RS freshman. Oregon had at one point the worst pass D in FBS, a sputtering offense at times, but improved toward the end of the season. Likely their worst team in a decade though. The Beavs had a 2015 somewhat reminiscent of our 2013 one. New HC and staff, lack of depth and a rash of injuries... They ended up being a horrible team, their worst in like 30 or so years.

I watched a couple of their early games, and while not impressed with their offense, their D looked very well-coached and showed promise. I just checked the stats of their August / September games, four of them (Weber St., Michigan, SJSU and Stanford), and their total D was 37th nationally, which is pretty dang good. Only UW was giving-up fewer yards a game at the end of September...

I thought the Gary Anderson hire might be a good one for OSU, and I don't think otherwise yet. Recruiting at the bottom of the conference (11th currently, average stars) will make the task harder of course...

No, I'm not saying we lose to the Beavs in 2016. I think they'll be vastly improved, particularly on D, and the offense should be too.

With respect to Stanford, they had their worst D in 2015 since 2009. Their offense became juggernaut, thankfully for them. Looks like their D will be improved in 2016, possibly back to their sub 20 ppg allowed. With respect to the offense, they lose at least a couple road-graders, and of course Hogan. And, as I think we all would agree, replacing Hogan, with what was asked of him in that offense, is not exactly a challenging feat...

The North looks to be improved next year, with us possibly the exception.

heartofthebear;842625270 said:

---

I can always count on you to have a balanced perspective. I try to do the same but it doesn't come off as well. Right now I am doing a very complicated and time consuming spread sheet of each pac-12 team's roster. One of the difficult things about it is that the roster's are more fluid than I thought.

In general the situation with college football teams is much more changeable than it appears to us. When you really get into it in some depth you see how hard it is to make predictions from one year to the next, especially this early.

When I have the spreadsheets done, they will help track 4 major categories that effect roster strength
1. Talent rating coming out of high school.
2. College playing experience from past years
3. Production/Ability-How good is the player?
4. Health-How often is the player injured?

To make a long story short, I am very careful to make sure that the data I use for each of these categories is both reliable and valid.

It is interesting to read people's opinions about team's like Oregon knowing how complicated just Oregon's situation is.

Oregon is a team that has many strengths but they also have many hidden weaknesses.

1) They currently have a cut and paste QB situation which makes that position very vulnerable to depth issues.
2) They have lost several key coaches recently-first Kelley and now Frost.
3) They have several defensive weaknesses especially since next year they will be very young at several positions.
4) The expectations at Oregon have become so unreasonable that they are under constant pressure to succeed, meaning that they will hire and fire coaches more often than they should. That creates instability and recruiting problems.
5) Players tend to leave early for the NFL, although Buckner did come back for his senior year.

In sum, this last year exposed Oregon for what they are, a program that can drop very quickly out of the rankings just because of just 1 of the issues mentioned above. They are a paper lion and expect Cal to upset them in the near future.

---

To tell you why guys like Wilner should not get attention when they just make off the cuff remarks, read the thread about the UCLA exodus, which btw includes rumors on Mora and most of the coaching staff leaving. Its way too freaking early for any columnist to be making definitive statements. The best way to assess at this point is your type of analytics, but appreciate a whole lot can happen in the next few months.

MoragaBear;842625212 said:

---

At 2-10, OSU has HUGE ground to make up and Wilner throwing out there that some might pick them over a team that had 6 more wins than them in 2015 is just a silly dig or a stupid statement.

Who would make that vote? Maybe a honk OSU writer? Even if someone does vote that way, it's ridiculous to throw that dig in the tweet.

---

Well, if we are talking about conference record then OSU has 4 games to make up on Cal. That's still kind of a lot in a 9-game conference slate, but if you see a big drop from Cal to correspond with some token improvement from OSU then it's possible.

But you are probably right that the majority of pundits would not vote that way in preseason polls. OSU will be picked last again. Wilner is throwing some of his personal opinion in there, not just sticking with what the group prediction will be.

okaydo;842624814 said:

---

II'm going to go out on a limb and predict that BI will have more than 100 mispellings of Chase's name in 2016.

---

Happy New Year to all and good luck to Chace in 2016!!!

Big C_Cal;842625412 said:

---

Happy New Year to all and good luck to Chace in 2016!!!

---

Do you mean "Chance Forest", an intriguing name for a fantasy novel ... :p

Osu needs a DC will they hire from within?