EWU is currently #2 in FCS with 553.2 ypg. 7.58 ypp.

It is 2 years after Baldwin's departure and the EWU offense does not seem to miss him (or Troy Taylor for that matter) at all.

oskirules said:

---

Bring in Paul Johnson and run the option with the guys we have. We'd probably do better than 1 yard and a cloud of dust. I bet he could do it without the right players for his system.

---

You may have stumbled upon the only option that would make me prefer Dykes' return.

tequila4kapp said:

---

oskirules said:

---

Bring in Paul Johnson and run the option with the guys we have. We'd probably do better than 1 yard and a cloud of dust. I bet he could do it without the right players for his system.

---

You may have stumbled upon the only option that would make me prefer Dykes' return.

---

Oh say you're not missing some Sonny ball.

tequila4kapp said:

---

oskirules said:

---

Bring in Paul Johnson and run the option with the guys we have. We'd probably do better than 1 yard and a cloud of dust. I bet he could do it without the right players for his system.

---

You may have stumbled upon the only option that would make me prefer Dykes' return.

---

Can you imagine the horror of going 82-59 with 8 bowl games in 10 seasons at the P5 level? I shudder at the thought.

01Bear said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

I think Baldwin is trying to run the offense he knows, and that may not be a fit to Cal's existing talent, starting with inexperienced QBs being asked to do too much. Also, at the D1 level, you need to recruit players to your system and I don't think that has happened yet at Cal on offense.

---

This is an astute point. SD's offense was unique and left us in a precarious situation relative to transitioning to a different system.

---

Wouldn't that then raise the question of why not hire an OC whose system was similar enough to the Bear (Air) Raid in order to minimize the learning curve during the transition? IIRC, some folks on here suggested that Baldwin's offense was similar to the Bear Raid, and Baldwin never fully refuted that, though he insisted his system was "multiple" and not a true Air Raid.

If the OC can't tailor his offense to the talent he has and can't coach up the players he has to match the offense he wants to run, why should Cal keep him? Merely because of the hope that he will be able to pull in recruits whose talents match his offense? What offensive skilled players has he recruited successfully to suggest he'll have any sort of success at that going forward?

Honestly, Baldwin is looking more and more like the offensive equivalent of Kaufman.

---

I think the answer to this question is pretty obvious. Wilcox didn't think Cal could win Rose Bowls with a Bear Raid offense. I think he was proven correct by the Dykes experience. Wilcox is a defensive coach and he realized the tremendous stress a bear raid offense puts on the defense.

In order to win consistently with that type of offense (i.e., conference championships), you need to have defensive depth. Look at Oregon during the Kelly years - they weren't successful (i.e., elite) until they figured that out AND were able to recruit enough defensive players. That is hard, even more so at Cal. As an aside, USC is probably one of the few schools that could pull this off - if Kingsbury goes there it could be scary.

Baldwin was brought in because he was "multiple" which I understood meant he would incorporate bear raid type of concepts. I saw him speak after he was hired and he spoke about designing schemes/plays to maximize the talents of his players.

I think he tried all of that, but the reality was Cal was not very talented and then most of the elite talent left. His response was a combination of panic (McIlvain) and overly conservative play calling - not sure how much of that is put on Wilcox.

BearGoggles said:

---

noI think the answer to this question is pretty obvious. Wilcox didn't think Cal could win Rose Bowls with a Bear Raid offense.

---

Cal won't be winning any Rose Bowls with the offense they have now either.

Quote:

---

Baldwin was brought in because he was "multiple" which I understood meant he would incorporate bear raid type of concepts. I saw him speak after he was hired and he spoke about designing schemes/plays to maximize the talents of his players.

---

Bah. When offensive coaches say they're multiple, all that means to me is that they don't have much of a system in the first place. The more "multiple" Tedford tried to get, the worse his offenses got.

The notion that Baldwin has done anything this year that maximized the talents of his players is poppycock. When he had McIlwain start an entire game, he passed the ball a lot despite the fact that McIlwain's one special talent is running with the ball. He had an appalling lack of creativity in putting together deceptive packages for McIlwain that would maximize his threat as a runner while making it hard to predict what the play was going to do presnap. I said flat-out before McIlwain ever got more than a few plays at a time that if they tried to run QB draws for a whole game with him that it had absolutely no chance to work. Certain people who thought we needed his "explosiveness" were confident it would work. However, despite the fact that I can't even write a practice plan and have no experience of playing organized football, I knew that Baldwin (who has both advantages on me) could never possibly succeed running QB draws all day with McIlwain, let alone trying to make him play like a normal QB.

I don't doubt that if you stuck Cal's 2004 offensive talent on the field that Baldwin would be able to do a much better job moving the ball and scoring points than he can now. Hell, I even think he might have been smart enough to keep running the ball against Texas Tech, since he's been stubborn as hell with it on this team. But would he have called imaginative plays that would maximize those guys' talents? Hell no. There's nothing about his offense that suggests that he is any good at designing plays, calling plays, or developing talent.

I've seen plenty of bad teams with talent issues that have offensive creativity, even if the talent wasn't great. That isn't what's going on here. It's poor talent coached poorly.

Yogi Bear said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

noI think the answer to this question is pretty obvious. Wilcox didn't think Cal could win Rose Bowls with a Bear Raid offense.

---

Cal won't be winning any Rose Bowls with the offense they have now either.

Quote:

---

Baldwin was brought in because he was "multiple" which I understood meant he would incorporate bear raid type of concepts. I saw him speak after he was hired and he spoke about designing schemes/plays to maximize the talents of his players.

---

Bah. When offensive coaches say they're multiple, all that means to me is that they don't have much of a system in the first place. The more "multiple" Tedford tried to get, the worse his offenses got.

The notion that Baldwin has done anything this year that maximized the talents of his players is poppycock. When he had McIlwain start an entire game, he passed the ball a lot despite the fact that McIlwain's one special talent is running with the ball. He had an appalling lack of creativity in putting together deceptive packages for McIlwain that would maximize his threat as a runner while making it hard to predict what the play was going to do presnap. I said flat-out before McIlwain ever got more than a few plays at a time that if they tried to run QB draws for a whole game with him that it had absolutely no chance to work. Certain people who thought we needed his "explosiveness" were confident it would work. However, despite the fact that I can't evepon write a practice plan and have no experience of playing organized football, I knew that Baldwin (who has both advantages on me) could never possibly succeed running QB draws all day with McIlwain, let alone trying to make him play like a normal QB.

I don't doubt that if you stuck Cal's 2004 offensive talent on the field that Baldwin would be able to do a much better job moving the ball and scoring points than he can now. Hell, I even think he might have been smart enough to keep running the ball against Texas Tech, since he's been stubborn as hell with it on this team. But would he have called imaginative plays that would maxmize those guys' talents? Hell no. There's nothing about his offense that suggests that he is any good at designing plays, calling plays, or developing talent.

I've seen plenty of bad teams with talent issues that have offensive creativity, even if the talent wasn't great. That isn't what's going on here. It's poor talent coached poorly.

---

Yogi, you nailed it.

With one exception: I think Garbers is accually pretty good. I'd love to see him with a good OC and a few other weapons.

calgo430 said:

---

can beau baldwin recruit to get us out of the talent deficency or is he another art kaufman.

---

C'mon! At least please make a reasonable argument! I would LOVE for BB'a offensive staff to recruit the way Kaufman did. Nearly 100% of all defensive plays made by Cal these past two years are recruits from Sonny's tenure. Now, obviously, they sure as hell couldn't coach or train kids - but they sure could recruit excellent student Athletes on the defensive side of the ball. I would dream of BB picking up the kind of 4-star and high 3-star athletes that Sonny and Kaufman picked up on D.

Get your story straight.

The best offensive talent Beau Baldwin had at Cal transferred away and he has not replaced them with recruiting so the lack of talent argument falls on Baldwin as well.

Time for him to go.

TheSouseFamily said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

oskirules said:

---

Bring in Paul Johnson and run the option with the guys we have. We'd probably do better than 1 yard and a cloud of dust. I bet he could do it without the right players for his system.

---

You may have stumbled upon the only option that would make me prefer Dykes' return.

---

Can you imagine the horror of going 82-59 with 8 bowl games in 10 seasons at the P5 level? I shudder at the thought.

---

Fair point. But nobody wants to return to the 1950s and the triple option.

Yogi Bear said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

noI think the answer to this question is pretty obvious. Wilcox didn't think Cal could win Rose Bowls with a Bear Raid offense.

---

Cal won't be winning any Rose Bowls with the offense they have now either.

Quote:

---

Baldwin was brought in because he was "multiple" which I understood meant he would incorporate bear raid type of concepts. I saw him speak after he was hired and he spoke about designing schemes/plays to maximize the talents of his players.

---

Bah. When offensive coaches say they're multiple, all that means to me is that they don't have much of a system in the first place. The more "multiple" Tedford tried to get, the worse his offenses got.

The notion that Baldwin has done anything this year that maximized the talents of his players is poppycock. When he had McIlwain start an entire game, he passed the ball a lot despite the fact that McIlwain's one special talent is running with the ball. He had an appalling lack of creativity in putting together deceptive packages for McIlwain that would maximize his threat as a runner while making it hard to predict what the play was going to do presnap. I said flat-out before McIlwain ever got more than a few plays at a time that if they tried to run QB draws for a whole game with him that it had absolutely no chance to work. Certain people who thought we needed his "explosiveness" were confident it would work. However, despite the fact that I can't evepon write a practice plan and have no experience of playing organized football, I knew that Baldwin (who has both advantages on me) could never possibly succeed running QB draws all day with McIlwain, let alone trying to make him play like a normal QB.

I don't doubt that if you stuck Cal's 2004 offensive talent on the field that Baldwin would be able to do a much better job moving the ball and scoring points than he can now. Hell, I even think he might have been smart enough to keep running the ball against Texas Tech, since he's been stubborn as hell with it on this team. But would he have called imaginative plays that would maxmize those guys' talents? Hell no. There's nothing about his offense that suggests that he is any good at designing plays, calling plays, or developing talent.

I've seen plenty of bad teams with talent issues that have offensive creativity, even if the talent wasn't great. That isn't what's going on here. It's poor talent coached poorly.

---

I understand what you are saying. Except his EWU offense wasn't this way. There's something bigger at play than Baldwin is dumb and unimaginative.

txwharfrat said:

---

calgo430 said:

---

can beau baldwin recruit to get us out of the talent deficency or is he another art kaufman.

---

C'mon! At least please make a reasonable argument! I would LOVE for BB'a offensive staff to recruit the way Kaufman did. Nearly 100% of all defensive plays made by Cal these past two years are recruits from Sonny's tenure. Now, obviously, they sure as hell couldn't coach or train kids - but they sure could recruit excellent student Athletes on the defensive side of the ball. I would dream of BB picking up the kind of 4-star and high 3-star athletes that Sonny and Kaufman picked up on D.

Get your story straight.

---

Dykes had a single 4 star D recruit and 3 star recruits at the end who were recruited by other P5 schools (at the beginning it was 2 and 3 stars getting recruited by MWC schools). Virtually every single one of Wilcox and Baldwin's O recruits fits or exceeds the 3 star recruit's profiles; per this site Wilcox has 3 4 star recruits (Garbers and two WRs). The facts do not appear to fit your narrative.

BearGoggles said:

---

01Bear said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

I think Baldwin is trying to run the offense he knows, and that may not be a fit to Cal's existing talent, starting with inexperienced QBs being asked to do too much. Also, at the D1 level, you need to recruit players to your system and I don't think that has happened yet at Cal on offense.

---

This is an astute point. SD's offense was unique and left us in a precarious situation relative to transitioning to a different system.

---

Wouldn't that then raise the question of why not hire an OC whose system was similar enough to the Bear (Air) Raid in order to minimize the learning curve during the transition? IIRC, some folks on here suggested that Baldwin's offense was similar to the Bear Raid, and Baldwin never fully refuted that, though he insisted his system was "multiple" and not a true Air Raid.

If the OC can't tailor his offense to the talent he has and can't coach up the players he has to match the offense he wants to run, why should Cal keep him? Merely because of the hope that he will be able to pull in recruits whose talents match his offense? What offensive skilled players has he recruited successfully to suggest he'll have any sort of success at that going forward?

Honestly, Baldwin is looking more and more like the offensive equivalent of Kaufman.

---

I think the answer to this question is pretty obvious. Wilcox didn't think Cal could win Rose Bowls with a Bear Raid offense. I think he was proven correct by the Dykes experience. Wilcox is a defensive coach and he realized the tremendous stress a bear raid offense puts on the defense.

In order to win consistently with that type of offense (i.e., conference championships), you need to have defensive depth. Look at Oregon during the Kelly years - they weren't successful (i.e., elite) until they figured that out AND were able to recruit enough defensive players. That is hard, even more so at Cal. As an aside, USC is probably one of the few schools that could pull this off - if Kingsbury goes there it could be scary.

Baldwin was brought in because he was "multiple" which I understood meant he would incorporate bear raid type of concepts. I saw him speak after he was hired and he spoke about designing schemes/plays to maximize the talents of his players.

I think he tried all of that, but the reality was Cal was not very talented and then most of the elite talent left. His response was a combination of panic (McIlvain) and overly conservative play calling - not sure how much of that is put on Wilcox.

---

Kelly was successful from the start at Oregon:

"Kelly coached the Oregon Ducks to BCS games in each of his four seasons as head coach; the 2010 Rose Bowl, 2011 BCS National Championship Game, 2012 Rose Bowl and 2013 Fiesta Bowl."

BearGoggles said:

---

01Bear said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

I think Baldwin is trying to run the offense he knows, and that may not be a fit to Cal's existing talent, starting with inexperienced QBs being asked to do too much. Also, at the D1 level, you need to recruit players to your system and I don't think that has happened yet at Cal on offense.

---

This is an astute point. SD's offense was unique and left us in a precarious situation relative to transitioning to a different system.

---

Wouldn't that then raise the question of why not hire an OC whose system was similar enough to the Bear (Air) Raid in order to minimize the learning curve during the transition? IIRC, some folks on here suggested that Baldwin's offense was similar to the Bear Raid, and Baldwin never fully refuted that, though he insisted his system was "multiple" and not a true Air Raid.

If the OC can't tailor his offense to the talent he has and can't coach up the players he has to match the offense he wants to run, why should Cal keep him? Merely because of the hope that he will be able to pull in recruits whose talents match his offense? What offensive skilled players has he recruited successfully to suggest he'll have any sort of success at that going forward?

Honestly, Baldwin is looking more and more like the offensive equivalent of Kaufman.

---

I think the answer to this question is pretty obvious. Wilcox didn't think Cal could win Rose Bowls with a Bear Raid offense. I think he was proven correct by the Dykes experience. Wilcox is a defensive coach and he realized the tremendous stress a bear raid offense puts on the defense.

In order to win consistently with that type of offense (i.e., conference championships), you need to have defensive depth. Look at Oregon during the Kelly years - they weren't successful (i.e., elite) until they figured that out AND were able to recruit enough defensive players. That is hard, even more so at Cal. As an aside, USC is probably one of the few schools that could pull this off - if Kingsbury goes there it could be scary.

Baldwin was brought in because he was "multiple" which I understood meant he would incorporate bear raid type of concepts. I saw him speak after he was hired and he spoke about designing schemes/plays to maximize the talents of his players.

I think he tried all of that, but the reality was Cal was not very talented and then most of the elite talent left. His response was a combination of panic (McIlvain) and overly conservative play calling - not sure how much of that is put on Wilcox.

---

I agree that an Air Raid offense probably wasn't ideal for what Wilcox wanted. But at the very least, even a West Coast offense would've been closer to better utilizing Cal's players than the Baldwin 1 Yard and a Cloud of Dust offense.

I also understand that when he used the term "multiple" to describe his offense, Baldwin was trying to convince people that he would be able to play to the strengths of the Cal student athletes. However, that has proven to be either a flat-out lie or hopeful embellishment (or as they say in the world of law, mere "puffery"). I tend to agree with Yogi when he suggests that Baldwin's "multiple" offense remarks really reflected a lack of any real principle (or plays) that ties his offense together. While that can be a good thing, in that it would allow for optimizing players' skillsets, with Baldwin, this has not proven to be the case. Rather, it seems that for Baldwin, "multiple" has come to mean wasting his players and putting them in positions where success is less than likely.

I admit that when Wilcox first announced the Baldwin hire, I was ecstatic. Baldwin led some pretty effective offenses as the HC at EWU. That those offenses also defeated some P5 teams, including Oregon gave me reason to hope we would not see a drop off in Cal's offensive firepower. But these past two years have eroded any of that initial optimism.

I'm usually one of the last guys to say it's time to part ways with a coach (this uncludes both Tedford and Dykes) out of a sense of loyalty and gratitude for what they have done for Cal (notwithstanding the extensive compensation packages they received in return for their services). Yet, with Baldwin, I really do not see him being able to bring the Cal offense out of the depths to which he's sunk it. I'm sure he's a highly intelligent and capable offensive genius, unfortunately, his genius has not taken root here and seems unlikely to do so any time soon.

Which brings us to the main reason I think it's time Cal thanked Baldwin for his service then shut the door behind him. Time is growing short. Wilcox has proven to be a capable HC. He, DeRuyter, and Alexander have turned around Cal's previously much maligned (for good reason!) defense. It's unlikely that they will remain together at Cal for much longer as at least one of the three will be offered more money (and possibly a promotion) elsewhere soon. If Cal does not manage to keep all three, I fear Cal's defense will regress. If we do keep all three, Cal's defense is likely to remain strong enough to get us to the Rose Bowl with a decent offense. Yet, if we keep Baldwin, Cal's offense is unlikely to be up to even that minimal task. That would extend Cal's 60 year drought, an idea, which would grieve most Cal fans.

For purely selfish reasons (i.e., my desire to see Cal in the Rose Bowl), I think it's time to end the Baldwin experience and move on to another OC, preferably one who will be able to recruit top student-athletes, maximize their potential, teach them, and help get them to the Rose Bowl.

82gradDLSdad said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

01Bear said:

---

tequila4kapp said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

I think Baldwin is trying to run the offense he knows, and that may not be a fit to Cal's existing talent, starting with inexperienced QBs being asked to do too much. Also, at the D1 level, you need to recruit players to your system and I don't think that has happened yet at Cal on offense.

---

This is an astute point. SD's offense was unique and left us in a precarious situation relative to transitioning to a different system.

---

Wouldn't that then raise the question of why not hire an OC whose system was similar enough to the Bear (Air) Raid in order to minimize the learning curve during the transition? IIRC, some folks on here suggested that Baldwin's offense was similar to the Bear Raid, and Baldwin never fully refuted that, though he insisted his system was "multiple" and not a true Air Raid.

If the OC can't tailor his offense to the talent he has and can't coach up the players he has to match the offense he wants to run, why should Cal keep him? Merely because of the hope that he will be able to pull in recruits whose talents match his offense? What offensive skilled players has he recruited successfully to suggest he'll have any sort of success at that going forward?

Honestly, Baldwin is looking more and more like the offensive equivalent of Kaufman.

---

I think the answer to this question is pretty obvious. Wilcox didn't think Cal could win Rose Bowls with a Bear Raid offense. I think he was proven correct by the Dykes experience. Wilcox is a defensive coach and he realized the tremendous stress a bear raid offense puts on the defense.

In order to win consistently with that type of offense (i.e., conference championships), you need to have defensive depth. Look at Oregon during the Kelly years - they weren't successful (i.e., elite) until they figured that out AND were able to recruit enough defensive players. That is hard, even more so at Cal. As an aside, USC is probably one of the few schools that could pull this off - if Kingsbury goes there it could be scary.

Baldwin was brought in because he was "multiple" which I understood meant he would incorporate bear raid type of concepts. I saw him speak after he was hired and he spoke about designing schemes/plays to maximize the talents of his players.

I think he tried all of that, but the reality was Cal was not very talented and then most of the elite talent left. His response was a combination of panic (McIlvain) and overly conservative play calling - not sure how much of that is put on Wilcox.

---

Kelly was successful from the start at Oregon:

"Kelly coached the Oregon Ducks to BCS games in each of his four seasons as head coach; the 2010 Rose Bowl, 2011 BCS National Championship Game, 2012 Rose Bowl and 2013 Fiesta Bowl."

---

I was including the years where Bellotti was the head coach and Kelly the OC (2007-08). They ran incredibly high powered offenses and finished 9-4 and 10-3, exciting teams that went to mid-level bowls because they had bad defenses. After that, they improved their defense (lots more substitutions) and went to better bowls. They also lost a lot of high scoring games that they lost. I'll stand by what I said. Those offenses are tough to win with unless you have a ton of depth (current Alabama team comes to mind).

I am hopeful that with the OLine classes we can become a power running offense with a stifling defense. To me, that seems our best bet from here.

txwharfrat said:

---

calgo430 said:

---

can beau baldwin recruit to get us out of the talent deficency or is he another art kaufman.

---

C'mon! At least please make a reasonable argument! I would LOVE for BB'a offensive staff to recruit the way Kaufman did. Nearly 100% of all defensive plays made by Cal these past two years are recruits from Sonny's tenure. Now, obviously, they sure as hell couldn't coach or train kids - but they sure could recruit excellent student Athletes on the defensive side of the ball. I would dream of BB picking up the kind of 4-star and high 3-star athletes that Sonny and Kaufman picked up on D.

Get your story straight.

---

The myth that Dykes recruited well refuses to die, but my continuing to kill that myth won't.
https://bearinsider.com/forums/2/topics/85015/replies/1547794

01Bear said:

---

Which brings us to the main reason I think it's time Cal thanked Baldwin for his service then shut the door behind him. Time is growing short. Wilcox has proven to be a capable HC. He, DeRuyter, and Alexander have turned around Cal's previously much maligned (for good reason!) defense. It's unlikely that they will remain together at Cal for much longer as at least one of the three will be offered more money (and possibly a promotion) elsewhere soon. If Cal does not manage to keep all three, I fear Cal's defense will regress.

---

I wouldn't worry too much about the defense. We have enough brainpower on that side of the ball that I think we'll always be able to build a good staff if guys leave for bigger and better things.

Yogi Bear said:

---

01Bear said:

---

Which brings us to the main reason I think it's time Cal thanked Baldwin for his service then shut the door behind him. Time is growing short. Wilcox has proven to be a capable HC. He, DeRuyter, and Alexander have turned around Cal's previously much maligned (for good reason!) defense. It's unlikely that they will remain together at Cal for much longer as at least one of the three will be offered more money (and possibly a promotion) elsewhere soon. If Cal does not manage to keep all three, I fear Cal's defense will regress.

---

I wouldn't worry too much about the defense. We have enough brainpower on that side of the ball that I think we'll always be able to build a good staff if guys leave for bigger and better things.

---

I'm concerned Cal's defense ends up like Cal's offense during the later Tedford years. During the early and middle years, most people also thought Cal had enough offensive brainpower to produce strong offenses regardless of coaching turnover on that side of the game. Yet, the later Tedford years showed the error of that kind of thinking. I fear the same may hold true now, but for the defensive side.

Yogi Bear said:

---

txwharfrat said:

---

calgo430 said:

---

can beau baldwin recruit to get us out of the talent deficency or is he another art kaufman.

---

C'mon! At least please make a reasonable argument! I would LOVE for BB'a offensive staff to recruit the way Kaufman did. Nearly 100% of all defensive plays made by Cal these past two years are recruits from Sonny's tenure. Now, obviously, they sure as hell couldn't coach or train kids - but they sure could recruit excellent student Athletes on the defensive side of the ball. I would dream of BB picking up the kind of 4-star and high 3-star athletes that Sonny and Kaufman picked up on D.

Get your story straight.

---

The myth that Dykes recruited well refuses to die, but my continuing to kill that myth won't.
https://bearinsider.com/forums/2/topics/85015/replies/1547794

---

Can't say Dykes was a GOOD recruiter, but I think he was okay, especially considering the constraints he faced. To put it another way, his recruiting wasn't his biggest liability... not even close.

Speaking generally, I'm not sure why it's not okay to say that there were some things he didn't suck at (besides the academic turnaround). His offense was pretty good. His recruiting was halfway decent. Obviously, his defenses were a total disaster and, ultimately, he was unsuccessful here.

Would a dedicated practice field help keep us from only being good at one side of the ball?

tequila4kapp said:

---

txwharfrat said:

---

calgo430 said:

---

can beau baldwin recruit to get us out of the talent deficency or is he another art kaufman.

---

C'mon! At least please make a reasonable argument! I would LOVE for BB'a offensive staff to recruit the way Kaufman did. Nearly 100% of all defensive plays made by Cal these past two years are recruits from Sonny's tenure. Now, obviously, they sure as hell couldn't coach or train kids - but they sure could recruit excellent student Athletes on the defensive side of the ball. I would dream of BB picking up the kind of 4-star and high 3-star athletes that Sonny and Kaufman picked up on D.

Get your story straight.

---

Dykes had a single 4 star D recruit and 3 star recruits at the end who were recruited by other P5 schools (at the beginning it was 2 and 3 stars getting recruited by MWC schools). Virtually every single one of Wilcox and Baldwin's O recruits fits or exceeds the 3 star recruit's profiles; per this site Wilcox has 3 4 star recruits (Garbers and two WRs). The facts do not appear to fit your narrative.

---

I'll do some research but are you saying that Hawkins was the only 4-stay D recruit? This may be true, but his staff recruit high 3-star guys very well. Beck, Bynum, Weaver, Kunashyk, Funchea, Rambo, etc. and even his 2-star recruits have flourished under the amazing Defensive coaches we have.

dajo9 said:

---

I am hopeful that with the OLine classes we can become a power running offense with a stifling defense. To me, that seems our best bet from here.

---

Maybe Greg Roman as OC? Plays with 6 or 7 OLs on the field or 3 TEs and a FB? If so, wish we had Malik McMorris coming back.

Not sure why they got offended by an innocent question. Weird.

I liked that part. WE R FAM GRRRRR. Lol. They are actually heartbroken about losing BB. They should sync up with hardcore husky to create the ultimate tough guy fam board.