Lots of guys suspended...

However, some have been conveniently staggered. But still a handful (eleven in total, including some big names) will miss the Cal game.

https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2018/8/6/17597834/north-carolina-football-suspensions-players

I have to go to a damn wedding that day, shame I can't miss the opening blowout, I mean opener.

This is why Cal winning its first three games is really no big deal on the NCAA front. UNC
is shooting itself in its on foot and tar heel. BYU has no talent and is coming off 3-9 season, and
Idaho State....well...whoopi-dooo! We'll see how Cal does against Oregon.......

Blueblood said:

---

This is why Cal winning its first three games is really no big deal on the NCAA front. UNC
is shooting itself in its on foot and tar heel. BYU has no talent and is coming off 3-9 season, and
Idaho State....well...whoopi-dooo! We'll see how Cal does against Oregon.......

---

I would vehemently disagree. Getting to at least 6, 7 or more wins is important for the growth of the program. The extra practice time that comes with a bowl game is crucial to the development of the team. Being able to recruit as a 7 wins or more bowl bound team is also important. At this stage, every win is a "big deal."

If this was a deep team gearing for a championship run I would like to have some good matchups to start the year off since those will be factors for determining rankings, Playoff, etc. but as far as this season, I don't mind a soft start since we are only in year 2 and 3-0 plus a bye to set up for Oregon, going to Tucson then UCLA will be good. As far as the first half of the season, Arizona will be a first major challenge, probably not Oregon.

Strykur said:

---

If this was a deep team gearing for a championship run I would like to have some good matchups to start the year off since those will be factors for determining rankings, Playoff, etc. but as far as this season, I don't mind a soft start since we are only in year 2 and 3-0 plus a bye to set up for Oregon, going to Tucson then UCLA will be good. As far as the first half of the season, Arizona will be a first major challenge, probably not Oregon.

---

I actually think Oregon, with a healthy Herbert, will be the toughest test on that stretch followed by Tate and AZ then UCLA with some major questions.

Need as many early wins as possible, then go in hard winning games we lost last year in conference play.

I dont understand what the big deal about students selling gears that were given to them.

LACalFan said:

---

Strykur said:

---

If this was a deep team gearing for a championship run I would like to have some good matchups to start the year off since those will be factors for determining rankings, Playoff, etc. but as far as this season, I don't mind a soft start since we are only in year 2 and 3-0 plus a bye to set up for Oregon, going to Tucson then UCLA will be good. As far as the first half of the season, Arizona will be a first major challenge, probably not Oregon.

---

I actually think Oregon, with a healthy Herbert, will be the toughest test on that stretch followed by Tate and AZ then UCLA with some major questions.

---

I don't think a Oregon v Arizona pac 12 championship game is far fetched. Oregon is stacked with talent and Tate is probably the best qb in the league

ducky23 said:

---

LACalFan said:

---

Strykur said:

---

If this was a deep team gearing for a championship run I would like to have some good matchups to start the year off since those will be factors for determining rankings, Playoff, etc. but as far as this season, I don't mind a soft start since we are only in year 2 and 3-0 plus a bye to set up for Oregon, going to Tucson then UCLA will be good. As far as the first half of the season, Arizona will be a first major challenge, probably not Oregon.

---

I actually think Oregon, with a healthy Herbert, will be the toughest test on that stretch followed by Tate and AZ then UCLA with some major questions.

---

I don't think a Oregon v Arizona pac 12 championship game is far fetched. Oregon is stacked with talent and Tate is probably the best qb in the league

---

Agreed. Those are the two best QBs, imo

TheSouseFamily said:

---

Lots of guys suspended...

However, some have been conveniently staggered. But still a handful (eleven in total, including some big names) will miss the Cal game.

https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2018/8/6/17597834/north-carolina-football-suspensions-players

---

Looks as if most of those expected to sit vs Cal are projected to be backups (other than Surratt).

We need to play teams that will get us ready to play in Pac-12 play. Let's really see where our offense is. We all would like automatic wins. Cal needs to go out and kick their tales with whoever they have playing against us. No excuses just win!

I believe we will beat them at home if our defense can put masssive pressure up front on them. Recruits need to see us beat people up too.

Quote:

---

I dont understand what the big deal about students selling gears that were given to them.

---

Been an ncaa no-no for a long time. (Guys are not supposed to 'profit' beyond than their full ride and approved spending money.)

HungryCalBear said:

---

I dont understand what the big deal about students selling gears that were given to them.

---

Well, for one it's against the rules, and a pretty obvious and traceable violation... not the smartest thing to do given that the gear was not publicly issued.

Larger picture, if it were OK according to the rules, then you'd have everyone doing it. EVERYOEN. So then at least it's not cheating the system, but at the same time, you'd have the rich schools gifting MORE gear than poor schools, essentially providing a ton of $$$ for players based on where they played and their ability. Maybe Ohio State lets players sell their own game used jerseys after every game. For a huge profit. I mean if I'm a rich supporter, I just skip the university donation and pay $5-10K for a game used jersey of a star player. Put it right in their pockets. Every game, every year... sell that gear. Cool, right?

So this would not just be a 'salary', but a differing 'salary' depending on the institution. Well if that were the outcome we wanted, why not just pay players in the first place and not make a farce out of it?

Honestly I don't have a moral issue with people selling their gear. But it would have to be open for everyone to do, not just the system cheaters. And there would be profound consequences.

The fact that Fox and Carney are suspended but not for our game reeks of insider dealing. I know the NCAA rule is that you can't totally deplete one area for safety reasons, but neither is suspended for the opener? How does that make sense? I've never heard of a situation like this. Also Michael Carter was rumored to be one of the shoe sellers but he's nowhere on this list (there were two folks who sold for less than $200 apparently and got no sanctions against them at all as a result). He would have been a major loss.

But whatever. We beat them last year on their home turf at full strength and nothing indicates they'll be better now than then. Our returning offensive and defensive production, by contrast, definitely outstrips theirs. They also lost Surratt at QB, who regardless of how you spin it was one of the guys in the hunt for the starting QB role - plus one of their team leaders. And depth just took a hit on the substitution side.

Look for us to take this one and will be highly disappointed if we don't.

I wish every team we play is less than 100% strength, just win.

Strykur said:

---

If this was a deep team gearing for a championship run I would like to have some good matchups to start the year off since those will be factors for determining rankings, Playoff, etc. but as far as this season, I don't mind a soft start since we are only in year 2 and 3-0 plus a bye to set up for Oregon, going to Tucson then UCLA will be good. As far as the first half of the season, Arizona will be a first major challenge, probably not Oregon.

---

I don't think North Carolina is making it that soft. Outside of the QB, who may have been losing his starting job in any event, the other guys in the likely two deeps facing suspensions are making the Cal game and missing another game. Cal has to just pay attention to its game and execute.

The most important question is ....

How does this affect the betting line??


Full disclosure ... I was in Reno and just put in a wager on Cal -6

Bad news for the Tar Heels.

The Cal Pain Train is coming.

The site I look at has the betting line for Cal-UNC taken off for the moment. It was Cal favored (-6.5) when I looked a couple days back.

I think the Bears just have to beat UNC just as we were hoping they would before this news. The Tarheels won't be much different. And by the end of camp, more players on both sides may be dinged up.

That being said, I think some of the 11 UNC players suspended for the opener, while not starters, may be backups on UNC's 2-deep. Google is dangerous here - the hit I got for depth chart was ourlads.com. Interesting site. Fair warning, their July 2-deep chart for Cal still includes Demetris Robertson and Taariq Johnson. So it's very likely some of the info below is wrong.

With that caveat, here are the players suspended on the Cal game who are also listed by ourlads in UNC's 2-deep as of July:
1. QB Chazz Surratt - actually listed as a starter by ourlads, though as stated, sounds like Nathan Elliott was going to win the job... but then Surratt would still be in the 2-deep.
2. OL Brian Anderson
3. WR Beau Corrales
4. DE Tyrone Hopper
5. LB Malik Robinson
6. OL Jordan Tucker
7. S Tre Shaw
8. OL Jonah Melton

But still, all Tarheel projected starters will be playing (assuming Surratt would have been a backup). The Bears better come prepared.

Agree with OneKeg. Don't underestimate them.

calgldnbear said:

---

The most important question is ....

How does this affect the betting line??


Full disclosure ... I was in Reno and just put in a wager on Cal -6

---

It dropped to Cal -1...

Sebastabear said:

---

The fact that Fox and Carney are suspended but not for our game reeks of insider dealing. I know the NCAA rule is that you can't totally deplete one area for safety reasons, but neither is suspended for the opener? How does that make sense? I've never heard of a situation like this. Also Michael Carter was rumored to be one of the shoe sellers but he's nowhere on this list (there were two folks who sold for less than $200 apparently and got no sanctions against them at all as a result). He would have been a major loss.

But whatever. We beat them last year on their home turf at full strength and nothing indicates they'll be better now than then. Our returning offensive and defensive production, by contrast, definitely outstrips theirs. They also lost Surratt at QB, who regardless of how you spin it was one of the guys in the hunt for the starting QB role - plus one of their team leaders. And depth just took a hit on the substitution side.

Look for us to take this one and will be highly disappointed if we don't.

---

This has been procedure for mass suspensions. It has been the rule for many years. As you noted, It is all about safety. Only a Cal fan would see something sinister at play. Typical..........

71Bear said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

The fact that Fox and Carney are suspended but not for our game reeks of insider dealing. I know the NCAA rule is that you can't totally deplete one area for safety reasons, but neither is suspended for the opener? How does that make sense? I've never heard of a situation like this. Also Michael Carter was rumored to be one of the shoe sellers but he's nowhere on this list (there were two folks who sold for less than $200 apparently and got no sanctions against them at all as a result). He would have been a major loss.

But whatever. We beat them last year on their home turf at full strength and nothing indicates they'll be better now than then. Our returning offensive and defensive production, by contrast, definitely outstrips theirs. They also lost Surratt at QB, who regardless of how you spin it was one of the guys in the hunt for the starting QB role - plus one of their team leaders. And depth just took a hit on the substitution side.

Look for us to take this one and will be highly disappointed if we don't.

---

This has been procedure for mass suspensions. It has been the rule for many years. As you noted, It is all about safety. Only a Cal fan would see something sinister at play. Typical..........

---

Don't you have some muppets to heckle from a balcony somewhere?

Sebastabear said:

---

71Bear said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

The fact that Fox and Carney are suspended but not for our game reeks of insider dealing. I know the NCAA rule is that you can't totally deplete one area for safety reasons, but neither is suspended for the opener? How does that make sense? I've never heard of a situation like this. Also Michael Carter was rumored to be one of the shoe sellers but he's nowhere on this list (there were two folks who sold for less than $200 apparently and got no sanctions against them at all as a result). He would have been a major loss.

But whatever. We beat them last year on their home turf at full strength and nothing indicates they'll be better now than then. Our returning offensive and defensive production, by contrast, definitely outstrips theirs. They also lost Surratt at QB, who regardless of how you spin it was one of the guys in the hunt for the starting QB role - plus one of their team leaders. And depth just took a hit on the substitution side.

Look for us to take this one and will be highly disappointed if we don't.

---

This has been procedure for mass suspensions. It has been the rule for many years. As you noted, It is all about safety. Only a Cal fan would see something sinister at play. Typical..........

---

Don't you have some muppets to heckle from a balcony somewhere?

---

That's genius. Lololol

NYCGOBEARS said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

71Bear said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

The fact that Fox and Carney are suspended but not for our game reeks of insider dealing. I know the NCAA rule is that you can't totally deplete one area for safety reasons, but neither is suspended for the opener? How does that make sense? I've never heard of a situation like this. Also Michael Carter was rumored to be one of the shoe sellers but he's nowhere on this list (there were two folks who sold for less than $200 apparently and got no sanctions against them at all as a result). He would have been a major loss.

But whatever. We beat them last year on their home turf at full strength and nothing indicates they'll be better now than then. Our returning offensive and defensive production, by contrast, definitely outstrips theirs. They also lost Surratt at QB, who regardless of how you spin it was one of the guys in the hunt for the starting QB role - plus one of their team leaders. And depth just took a hit on the substitution side.

Look for us to take this one and will be highly disappointed if we don't.

---

This has been procedure for mass suspensions. It has been the rule for many years. As you noted, It is all about safety. Only a Cal fan would see something sinister at play. Typical..........

---

Don't you have some muppets to heckle from a balcony somewhere?

---

That's genius. Lololol

---

Exactly, the only thing "typical" is the tone of 71B.
Bitter much?

panoramicknob said:

---

calgldnbear said:

---

The most important question is ....

How does this affect the betting line??


Full disclosure ... I was in Reno and just put in a wager on Cal -6

---

It dropped to Cal -1...

---

It definitely did not drop to Cal -1.

Cal will beat Oregon this year. The Ducks rarely win on the road -- 2-10 in the past two years and that includes a road win against Wyoming.

Herbert is the best qb in the conference.

The Holes got away with murder for their academic fraud. At least they got a slap on the wrist here.

Strykur said:

---

If this was a deep team gearing for a championship run I would like to have some good matchups to start the year off since those will be factors for determining rankings, Playoff, etc. but as far as this season, I don't mind a soft start since we are only in year 2 and 3-0 plus a bye to set up for Oregon, going to Tucson then UCLA will be good. As far as the first half of the season, Arizona will be a first major challenge, probably not Oregon.

---

I don't know how you see Oregon not being a challenge. They will likely beat Cal by 2+ TDs. They beat Cal handily last year with key injuries including QB -at full-strength, forget it. Unless you mean not a good test because the teams are not on par, in which case I'd agree UofA is more at Cal's level, though they still have a clear advantage.

Cal went 3-0 last season against a tougher schedule and ended up with 5 wins. A repeat of last season is a likely outcome, though 6 wins is possible if WSU takes a big enough step back and CU doesn't improve from last season.

People who think 6 or 7 wins will somehow supercharge the recruiting should look at 7-win teams around the nation. There's no measurable recruiting advantage between 5, 6 or 7 wins, unless there's an established track record of winning seasons. CU couldn't do anything with their one good season. WSU got some traction, but only after stringing together winning seasons (plus Leach has a coaching legacy to fall back on).

Whether the team ends up with 5 wins or 6 means nothing in the grand scheme of things. Now, if the Bears could manage a winning Pac 12 record, THAT would matter a lot, because those are the schools Cal competes against for recruits year in and year out. A 5-4 Pac 12 season with 7 wins or 8, that means something (doesn't matter if it's 7 or 8 wins, the 5 conference wins are what matters). But a 3-6 Pac 12 season with 6 wins vs 5, doesn't mean anything.

If Cal is going to have any relevance in CFB and the Pac 12, they need to stop settling for being the second-worst team in the Pac 12 North and actually compete in their division. Period. Bending over for the top teams and praying schools like WSU have off years doesn't build anything.

Uthaithani said:

---

Strykur said:

---

If this was a deep team gearing for a championship run I would like to have some good matchups to start the year off since those will be factors for determining rankings, Playoff, etc. but as far as this season, I don't mind a soft start since we are only in year 2 and 3-0 plus a bye to set up for Oregon, going to Tucson then UCLA will be good. As far as the first half of the season, Arizona will be a first major challenge, probably not Oregon.

---

I don't know how you see Oregon not being a challenge. They will likely beat Cal by 2+ TDs. They beat Cal handily last year with key injuries including QB -at full-strength, forget it. Unless you mean not a good test because the teams are not on par, in which case I'd agree UofA is more at Cal's level, though they still have a clear advantage.

Cal went 3-0 last season against a tougher schedule and ended up with 5 wins. A repeat of last season is a likely outcome, though 6 wins is possible if WSU takes a big enough step back and CU doesn't improve from last season.

People who think 6 or 7 wins will somehow supercharge the recruiting should look at 7-win teams around the nation. There's no measurable recruiting advantage between 5, 6 or 7 wins, unless there's an established track record of winning seasons. CU couldn't do anything with their one good season. WSU got some traction, but only after stringing together winning seasons (plus Leach has a coaching legacy to fall back on).

Whether the team ends up with 5 wins or 6 means nothing in the grand scheme of things. Now, if the Bears could manage a winning Pac 12 record, THAT would matter a lot, because those are the schools Cal competes against for recruits year in and year out. A 5-4 Pac 12 season with 7 wins or 8, that means something (doesn't matter if it's 7 or 8 wins, the 5 conference wins are what matters). But a 3-6 Pac 12 season with 6 wins vs 5, doesn't mean anything.

If Cal is going to have any relevance in CFB and the Pac 12, they need to stop settling for being the second-worst team in the Pac 12 North and actually compete in their division. Period. Bending over for the top teams and praying schools like WSU have off years doesn't build anything.

---

A 6 win season is predicted on a 3-0 start (like last year) and...

Big favorite - OSU
Toss-up - WSU, UCLA, CU
Underdog - AZ, LSJU, UO
Big underdog - UW, USC

Win the big favorite game plus two out of three toss-ups and you have six wins. Add an upset in one of the underdog games and you have a winning season.

6 wins - yes; 7 wins is possible if Bowers can produce consistent results.

Uthaithani said:

---

Strykur said:

---

If this was a deep team gearing for a championship run I would like to have some good matchups to start the year off since those will be factors for determining rankings, Playoff, etc. but as far as this season, I don't mind a soft start since we are only in year 2 and 3-0 plus a bye to set up for Oregon, going to Tucson then UCLA will be good. As far as the first half of the season, Arizona will be a first major challenge, probably not Oregon.

---

I don't know how you see Oregon not being a challenge. They will likely beat Cal by 2+ TDs. They beat Cal handily last year with key injuries including QB -at full-strength, forget it. Unless you mean not a good test because the teams are not on par, in which case I'd agree UofA is more at Cal's level, though they still have a clear advantage.

---

Arizona and Oregon both finished 7-6 last year and both have new coaching staffs to work in, Arizona in Tucson will be much tougher than Oregon at home, all else considered, we will have a bye to get ready for the latter and they will be coming off the conference opener versus Furd.

Somebody definitely doesn't understand how wagering lines work .... Since the UNC team is depleted (somewhat), they would NOT get less points against another D1 team on the road ....