Agree with both of you - Longshore should never have played in the second half of games after his high ankle injury against Oregon. It was a monumental blunder by Tedford to keep him out there.

CAL6371;842844137 said:

---

Agree with both of you - Longshore should never have played in the second half of games after his high ankle injury against Oregon. It was a monumental blunder by Tedford to keep him out there.

---

I understood trying him against UCLA. After all, the team had a shot at the Rose Bowl that year, and Riley had blown the last game against Oregon State with a mental error.

After watching him fade badly down the stretch of that game (and Cal suffering another heartbreaking loss), I felt he should sit. But there was an argument to be made for trying him again, given that the team was still technically in the hunt for the conference title.

After losing to ASU (with Longshore again fading badly in the second half), there was nothing to be gained from playing an injured QB anymore. Trotting him out against WSU the next week was baffling. If you want to try breaking in the younger guy, that's a prime opportunity to do it, at home against a weaker opponent, pressure off. Playing Nate (who was still clearly hobbled and could not throw deep) sealed our collapse to finish the season.

BearNecessities;842844132 said:

---

No he wasn't. He just played on a better team. Ken Dorsey did all kinds of great things for Miami, but washed out quickly with the pros because he wasn't as good as the rest of his team.

---

Great point. Amazing how in both college and NFL, QBs are over or under rated without context of the supporting cast. Show me a QB who has all day to throw, a great run game and playmaking WRs and I will show you a Heisman winner. Same dude without those three attributes is being booed off the field.

That said, Pawlawski was a superb leader and a winner. With Goff, we can only wonder whether those attributes would have risen to the surface had he played with the caliber of a defense that Paws had. So much harder under pressure when you assume you have to score every time to win because your D is so anemic.

71Bear;842844131 said:

---

Fair enough. 5th out of the group that has been identified is possible given the overall quality of the bunch. With the most exception of Rodgers, this has not been a terrific 15 years for quarterbacks at Cal.

Stats is only one measurement for a QB. As we saw in the Dykes era, pinball numbers do not equate to wins. Goff and Webb produced a lot of stats but were disappointing in pressure situations. For example, Pawlawski was a far better QB than either Goff or a Webb because he produced under fire. OTOH, Mike P.'s stats were not nearly as grandiose. Forrest and Bowers do have a chance to be be guys we remember because they could be guys that can handle pressure. We shall see........

---

71Bear;842844135 said:

---

I never rate how good a guy was at Cal by how he did in the pros. They are two completely different sets of data. Pawlawski was a winner. He had a kick ass attitude that was infectious. Goff and Webb never displayed that same attitude on the field. For example, in Goff's one opportunity on the big stage in Salt Lake, he choked.

---

Agree completely. Pawlawski was a great college QB. He had a great team around him (though not as good as what Rodgers had) and was the first QB at Cal to win two bowl games. He was a lot like Kapp in that he made the team around him even better through his leadership skills.

71Bear;842844135 said:

---

I never rate how good a guy was at Cal by how he did in the pros. They are two completely different sets of data. Pawlawski was a winner. He had a kick ass attitude that was infectious. Goff and Webb never displayed that same attitude on the field. For example, in Goff's one opportunity on the big stage in Salt Lake, he choked.

---

If one adheres to this conclusion(which I do), then can one also whine about how there are so many Cal players are in the NFL yet there is not the concomitant success one would have expected when they were at Cal? Or is that just something that falls on coaching(for the last 50 years with 2 or 3 exceptions)?

CalHoopFan;842844180 said:

---

Great point. Amazing how in both college and NFL, QBs are over or under rated without context of the supporting cast. Show me a QB who has all day to throw, a great run game and playmaking WRs and I will show you a Heisman winner. Same dude without those three attributes is being booed off the field.

That said, Pawlawski was a superb leader and a winner. With Goff, we can only wonder whether those attributes would have risen to the surface had he played with the caliber of a defense that Paws had. So much harder under pressure when you assume you have to score every time to win because your D is so anemic.

---

Goff left after 3 seasons. Who knows how he would have fared last year had he stayed at Cal. It is true that Goff felt like the offense had to score every possession. That is a burden that Webb also played under. I think much of the lack of respect 71Bear is giving Goff and Webb is related to the complete lack of respect he had for Dykes. Every QB seemingly has games where they stink it up. Rodgers had OSU game where he did not even look like a decent college QB. Of course we remember the Utah game where Goff threw 5 picks. Do we also remember the ASU game where he played so superbly down the stretch and showed both ability to pass and make plays with his legs.

Goff had his moments each way, but much more good than bad IMO. When you need to score 50 nearly every game to win there will be some moments you will want back. I only hope either Bowers or Forrest will not face the same pressure to score every possession that Cal's last 2 QBs faced.

6956bear;842844194 said:

---

Goff left after 3 seasons. Who knows how he would have fared last year had he stayed at Cal. It is true that Goff felt like the offense had to score every possession. That is a burden that Webb also played under. I think much of the lack of respect 71Bear is giving Goff and Webb is related to the complete lack of respect he had for Dykes. Every QB seemingly has games where they stink it up. Rodgers had OSU game where he did not even look like a decent college QB. Of course we remember the Utah game where Goff threw 5 picks. Do we also remember the ASU game where he played so superbly down the stretch and showed both ability to pass and make plays with his legs.

Goff had his moments each way, but much more good than bad IMO. When you need to score 50 nearly every game to win there will be some moments you will want back. I only hope either Bowers or Forrest will not face the same pressure to score every possession that Cal's last 2 QBs faced.

---

Webb statistically had a terrible TD/INT ratio in pressure situations. And his accuracy dropped. Goff had some good clutch moments and some not so good. If he had the same OL that Goff had, I think he would have LIT IT UP.

71Bear;842844135 said:

---

I never rate how good a guy was at Cal by how he did in the pros. They are two completely different sets of data. Pawlawski was a winner. He had a kick ass attitude that was infectious. Goff and Webb never displayed that same attitude on the field. For example, in Goff's one opportunity on the big stage in Salt Lake, he choked.

---

Not referring to just you here, but here are some Cal players who. had they not had great pro careers, would not be GENERALLY rated as high by many of us:

Aaron Rodgers
Justin Forsett
Tony Gonzales
Maybe even Marshawn Lynch, to an extent
Kevin Johnson

Maybe it's because most of us DO use that metric as a validator of how good they were. Perhaps also, it's because for years and years after they are at Cal, we keep hearing about their athletic success at the highest level. I'm not including Desean Jackson, though maybe I could, because his punt returns were so electrifying that we all rated him highly as a football player.

Big C_Cal;842844255 said:

---

Not referring to just you here, but here are some Cal players who. had they not had great pro careers, would not be GENERALLY rated as high by many of us:

Aaron Rodgers
Justin Forsett
Tony Gonzales
Maybe even Marshawn Lynch, to an extent
Kevin Johnson

Maybe it's because most of us DO use that metric as a validator of how good they were. Perhaps also, it's because for years and years after they are at Cal, we keep hearing about their athletic success at the highest level. I'm not including Desean Jackson, though maybe I could, because his punt returns were so electrifying that we all rated him highly as a football player.

---

I definitely would have had Aaron Rodgers rated highly even without a great pro career. The only negative would have been that since he was a JC transfer, he didn't play very long (just 1 1/2 seasons, roughly). But he was the QB for one of the best seasons Cal football ever saw.

Marshawn Lynch? Really? He was worshipped at Cal.

Big C_Cal;842844255 said:

---

Not referring to just you here, but here are some Cal players who. had they not had great pro careers, would not be GENERALLY rated as high by many of us:

Aaron Rodgers
Justin Forsett
Tony Gonzales
Maybe even Marshawn Lynch, to an extent
Kevin Johnson

Maybe it's because most of us DO use that metric as a validator of how good they were. Perhaps also, it's because for years and years after they are at Cal, we keep hearing about their athletic success at the highest level. I'm not including Desean Jackson, though maybe I could, because his punt returns were so electrifying that we all rated him highly as a football player.

---

I would rate Arrington above Forest if we're just talking Cal- Ech too

Conversely if Jahvid Best had had an amazing NFL career we'd probably describe him as the greatest player to ever suit up for Cal. He was just amazing for us.

Vic Bottari - the greatest of all Golden Bears. Until another guy leads Cal to a Rose Bowl win, Bottari will retain his title (3rd in the Heisman voting his senior year).

By the way, he was named 1st Team All Century team by the P12 in 2001. And, of course, he is in the College Football and Rose Bowl Hall of Fame.

GB54;842844271 said:

---

I would rate Arrington above Forest if we're just talking Cal- Ech too

---

Tough one since he only got to start for one season, granted it was a great season.

MoragaBear;842844046 said:

---

Are you kidding me? He was horrendous his first three seasons. That's some real selective memory.

Frosh: 100-for-259 (38.5%), 1303 yards, 5.0 ypa, 5 tds, 15 int
Soph: 163-for-349 (46.7%), 2121 yards, 6.1 ypa, 15 tds, 13 int
Junior: 134-for-272 (49.3%), 1741 yards, 6.4 ypa, 12 tds, 10 int

Those first 3 seasons were some of the worst seasons ever for a Cal QB. Yet you rate him #2 and say he wasn't awful, just not achieving his potential?

Even Ayoob had a better season than Boller's first two and pretty comparable to his third, going 125-254 (49.2%), 1707 yards, 6.72 ypa, 15 tds, 14 int.

Heck, even Maynard had better seasons than Boller's first 3:

Jr: 231-for-405 (57.0%), 2990 yards, 7.4 ypa, 17 tds, 12 int
Sr: 180-for-296 (60.8%), 2214 yards, 7.5 ypa, 12 tds, 10 int

Goff's career numbers make Boller's laughable in comparison, regardless of what you think of his Utah game:

Goff: 977-for-1568 (62.3%), 12,195 yards, 7.8 ypa, 96 tds, 30 int

Boller: 622-for-1301 (47.8%), 7,980 yards, 6.1 ypa, 64 tds, 48 int

---

Boller gets a pass from me and from most for having played under Holmoe, one of the all-time least competent coaches at Cal. My quintessential image of his years is Boller, arms outstretched, waiting for the sidelines to make up its mind what play to call, which often resulted in a rushed snap, a delay-of-game penalty or a time out. What Boller was as a senior is what he would have been earlier, with decent coaching.

Boller was like 15 years ago. Today's best QBs connect around 70% of the time. Just a couple years ago the Pac-12 had two or three QBs at 70%. Goff's 64.5% in 2015 wasn't in the top 10 or 20 that year. In 2000 though, that would have tied for 1st (Josh Heupel - Oklahoma)...

No, not saying Boller was better than Goff. Relative to the era in which he played, not as bad as one might think when comparing to QBs today.

MoragaBear;842844592 said:

---

Look, nothing against Boller but there's absolutely no way to rationalize a QB starting for his first 3 seasons and averaging a 44.6% comp rate, I don't care what era or coach he played under, let alone rank him above Goff. That's crazy talk.

His senior season was way better because Tedford taught him how to put a little touch on the ball instead of firing bullets every time but he was still in the low 50's. He at least significantly stepped up his td to int ratio.

---

I remember that the QB that we REALLY wanted was Chris Lewis and the WR entourage that was supposedly going to come with him. When that fell through, I was just ecstatic when we climbed the QB ladder and snaked Jesus in Cleats. I loved Holmoe when that happened.

Spot on.

XXXBEAR;842842419 said:

---

Rubenzer is a veteran. If he says it's better, then I like it.

---

Good on ya...Dykes was a self serving guy....he could care less about Cal. It aint just Luke either....we have a real coach now.....Go Luke...Go Bears!

Goff better than Boller? Yes. Thanks to Dykes? No. Goff was better. Period. To date, Dykes has recruited no HS player who has played a single decent game at quarterback for.Cal. Hope his recruits play well this year, and expect they will. Go Wilcox and Go Bears!!

Well we want this so badly to be our narrative since whatever Sonny did equated to losing. It would be very concerning of the culture wasn't different.

GB54;842844271 said:

---

I would rate Arrington above Forest if we're just talking Cal- Ech too

---

Arrington yes, but Ech? No way. I think Arrington was more of the "Emmitt Smith of college". Not many moves but could hit a hole behind a massive OL and go North/South with the best of them. Let's not forget that Marshawn averaged almost 8 yards per carry behind that line (if i recall) as a Freshman.

Anyways, go back and look at Forsett's stats. That guy was a beast for his size.

matteye;842859032 said:

---

Arrington yes, but Ech? No way. I think Arrington was more of the "Emmitt Smith of college". Not many moves but could hit a hole behind a massive OL and go North/South with the best of them. Let's not forget that Marshawn averaged almost 8 yards per carry behind that line (if i recall) as a Freshman.

Anyways, go back and look at Forsett's stats. That guy was a beast for his size.

---

Forsett was a great back for us, but he had serious enough problems banging his way into the end zone (from inside the five) that I thought he wouldn't make the NFL. Dude surprised me. (It was a pleasant surprise, to be sure, as JF is a great Golden Bear and seems like a great guy.)