going4roses said:

---

This thread contains some good laughs.

To those that don't mind losing 10-7 like we did last night , what is your best assessment of what is wrong and do you have ideas on how to fix things?

---

What do you suggest?. You always ask questions but rarely give your opinion.

StarsDoMatter said:

---

LunchTime said:

---

StarsDoMatter said:

---

BearsWiin said:

---

StarsDoMatter said:

---

71Bear said:

---

StarsDoMatter said:

---

10-7 is much worse.

Losing like we did yesterday, reminded me of my sisters 5th grade CYO B team who lost 4-2 in basketball. Sure the game was close, but they made 3 baskets in 24 mins...

What I witnessed last night was truly a god awful football game. We lost a lot more than a game yesterday. We lost to a team whose QB threw 8 yards and 4 INTs. A QB who was 4th string. The 5th string QB was injured and played a few snaps because they LITERALLY had nobody else. We had a month to prepare.

This was rock bottom.

---

I would take yesterday 's loss over any of the pinball losses in the Dykes era. The reason is simple - Cal had no chance in those Dykes era losses. Whereas, yesterday, the idea was get it to OT and you have got a shot. If you think this was rock bottom, I suggest that you weren't around in '01 or '13. Those were both rock bottom years. Yesterday was a competitive game (for a variety of reasons). That is a far cry from the recent past.

---

Alright... I was 10 in '01 so don't quite remember everything. '13 was terrible. A lost year.

This was just so embarrassing, because TCU was giving us the game. We could have just kicked 2 FG's in the red zone and won. Instead, our JV offense couldn't even muster that.

Beyond frustrating.

---

This explains a lot

---

So you have to old to understand football? All those billionaires in silicon valley sure are old.. Sean Mcvay is 32 bro! He must not know a thing.

---

It is either your age, or you. Either way you dont know what you are talking about.

I'll let you pick.

---

I do know what I'm talking about. I'm 27, but have played football, coached football, .. have you?

My clients, a lot of them OLD BLUES seem to agree with me. Trying to explain to them what they witnessed last night was challenging to say the least.

---

You don't need to have played the game to understand the game. Neither Dykes nor Mike Leach played college football.

Big C said:

---

71Bear said:

---

Big C said:

---

71Bear said:

---

StarsDoMatter said:

---

10-7 is much worse.

Losing like we did yesterday, reminded me of my sisters 5th grade CYO B team who lost 4-2 in basketball. Sure the game was close, but they made 3 baskets in 24 mins...

What I witnessed last night was truly a god awful football game. We lost a lot more than a game yesterday. We lost to a team whose QB threw 8 yards and 4 INTs. A QB who was 4th string. The 5th string QB was injured and played a few snaps because they LITERALLY had nobody else. We had a month to prepare.

This was rock bottom.

---

I would take yesterday 's loss over any of the pinball losses in the Dykes era. The reason is simple - Cal had no chance in those Dykes era losses. Whereas, yesterday, the idea was get it to OT and you have got a shot. If you think this was rock bottom, I suggest that you weren't around in '01 or '13. Those were both rock bottom years. Yesterday was a competitive game (for a variety of reasons). That is a far cry from the recent past.

---

See? You're a "defense guy". I thought, in 2014-15, we ALWAYS had a shot if we were within three TDs and had at least ten minutes left in the game. Yesterday, we were THREE POINTS DOWN and it felt nearly hopeless. My hope in OT was that we'd get a turnover and then be able to kick a field goal. That was about our only chance.

---

Actually, as soon as Cal was down by two scores in the Dykes era, it was very promblematic for the Bears because every time they scored, the opposition would march right back down the field. Those games were hopeless before kickoff.

---

Note that I am not defending the indefensible here (Dykes overall performance), but there were plenty of times back then where we were down by more than two scores and came back to make a game of it. (Yes, those games were often against mediocre opponents... like a 2018 TCU.)

---

I don't believe that Cal won any games under Dykes in which they were trailing by two TD's (an amended comment - I could be wrong I have not looked it up). On the other hand, Cal never trailed yesterday until the last play. My point - in the Dykes era, it was hopeless once Cal fell behind. Yesterday, the Bears were in the hunt the entire game.

I agree. But it gives you a different perspective. Similar to age...

StarsDoMatter said:

---

I agree. But it gives you a different perspective. Similar to age...

---

My kids are a bit older than you and they are always providing me with a different way to see the world. Believe me, I get it....

As have told them many times - our turn is over and we really fuc... up. Now, it is your turn - good luck trying to fix all of our mistakes.

Comparisons with Dykes are pointless. We fired Dykes. We need offense AND defense. Arguing which half a loaf you prefer is pointless. We all like Wilcox, but he needs to make a radical change on O if we are to be strong on both sides. We need a great strategist and great recruiter on that side of the ball.

71Bear said:

---

going4roses said:

---

This thread contains some good laughs.

To those that don't mind losing 10-7 like we did last night , what is your best assessment of what is wrong and do you have ideas on how to fix things?

---

What do you suggest?. You always ask questions but rarely give your opinion.

---

Actually I have tried to assess (from the outside by a mile) what is wrong ...go look my past posts and you will see for yourself.

Let me know what thoughts you agree and or disagree on and we can take from there.

going4roses said:

---

71Bear said:

---

going4roses said:

---

This thread contains some good laughs.

To those that don't mind losing 10-7 like we did last night , what is your best assessment of what is wrong and do you have ideas on how to fix things?

---

What do you suggest?. You always ask questions but rarely give your opinion.

---

Actually I have tried to assess (from the outside by a mile) what is wrong ...go look my past posts and you will see for yourself.

Let me know what thoughts you agree and or disagree on and we can take from there.

---

Your comments must have been posted on the internal board.

KoreAmBear said:

---

Under Wilcox, our D kept us in the game and even provided the leadership to beat elite teams. I count the victory of the Rose Bowl bound UW a nice victory over an elite team.

---

Elite is overstating it. Good would suffice.

StarsDoMatter said:

---

LunchTime said:

---

StarsDoMatter said:

---

BearsWiin said:

---

StarsDoMatter said:

---

71Bear said:

---

StarsDoMatter said:

---

10-7 is much worse.

Losing like we did yesterday, reminded me of my sisters 5th grade CYO B team who lost 4-2 in basketball. Sure the game was close, but they made 3 baskets in 24 mins...

What I witnessed last night was truly a god awful football game. We lost a lot more than a game yesterday. We lost to a team whose QB threw 8 yards and 4 INTs. A QB who was 4th string. The 5th string QB was injured and played a few snaps because they LITERALLY had nobody else. We had a month to prepare.

This was rock bottom.

---

I would take yesterday 's loss over any of the pinball losses in the Dykes era. The reason is simple - Cal had no chance in those Dykes era losses. Whereas, yesterday, the idea was get it to OT and you have got a shot. If you think this was rock bottom, I suggest that you weren't around in '01 or '13. Those were both rock bottom years. Yesterday was a competitive game (for a variety of reasons). That is a far cry from the recent past.

---

Alright... I was 10 in '01 so don't quite remember everything. '13 was terrible. A lost year.

This was just so embarrassing, because TCU was giving us the game. We could have just kicked 2 FG's in the red zone and won. Instead, our JV offense couldn't even muster that.

Beyond frustrating.

---

This explains a lot

---

So you have to old to understand football? All those billionaires in silicon valley sure are old.. Sean Mcvay is 32 bro! He must not know a thing.

---

It is either your age, or you. Either way you dont know what you are talking about.

I'll let you pick.

---

I do know what I'm talking about. I'm 27, but have played football, coached football, .. have you?

My clients, a lot of them OLD BLUES seem to agree with me. Trying to explain to them what they witnessed last night was challenging to say the least.

---

You are pretty young... here is some advice...

When you say or do something absurd like you did saying 7-5 is rock bottom; dont espouse your credentials. It doesnt make you look better. It makes you look more incompetent. Like "Holy cow. This guy has all that experience and still doesnt know..."

If you think 7-5 with a 3 point loss is rock bottom, your experience only makes you look worse.

Seriously? This is a effing blog man... Not really necessary. I don't know you and I don't value your advice.

Looking back at the "rock bottom" comment, it was definitely an exaggeration. Last night "felt" like rock bottom. We just extended our 6-12 pac-12 record head coach who had over a month to prepare for this dumpster fire TCU team, and still can't win.

They were playing the 4th string QB. Injured 5th string guy had to play some too.

We still haven't fired beau or Tui. They should be gone immediately following the game. They are still here.

I found zero silver linings from that terrible game or season.

We are the exact opposite of the dykes era. All D no O. But unlike dykes, we keep congratulating and rewarding Wilcox for mediocrity. That to me is rock bottom, even if the record doesn't indicate it.

StarsDoMatter said:

---

10-7 is much worse.

Losing like we did yesterday, reminded me of my sisters 5th grade CYO B team who lost 4-2 in basketball. Sure the game was close, but they made 3 baskets in 24 mins...

What I witnessed last night was truly a god awful football game. We lost a lot more than a game yesterday. We lost to a team whose QB threw 8 yards and 4 INTs. A QB who was 4th string. The 5th string QB was injured and played a few snaps because they LITERALLY had nobody else. We had a month to prepare.

This was rock bottom.

---

If this was the 2nd football game played this month and there is 5 days left in this month after this game, how did Wilcox have a month to prepare for this particular game?

Dykes got rewarded too

okaydo said:

---

StarsDoMatter said:

---

10-7 is much worse.

Losing like we did yesterday, reminded me of my sisters 5th grade CYO B team who lost 4-2 in basketball. Sure the game was close, but they made 3 baskets in 24 mins...

What I witnessed last night was truly a god awful football game. We lost a lot more than a game yesterday. We lost to a team whose QB threw 8 yards and 4 INTs. A QB who was 4th string. The 5th string QB was injured and played a few snaps because they LITERALLY had nobody else. We had a month to prepare.

This was rock bottom.

---

If this was the 2nd football game played this month and there is 5 days left in this month after this game, how did Wilcox have a month to prepare for this particular game?

---

I'm guessing the answer is that our friend Stars believes that TCU spent December on the beach in Corpus Christi just goofing off. As I said in another post, the Frogs are a great defensive team (their DE's were both All B12 First Team) and have a terrific coach (11-6 in bowl games, including a Rose Bowl win) Based on some of the comments that I have read here, I think some people thought Cal was the only team on the field and could not get out of their own way.

going4roses said:

---

This thread contains some good laughs.

To those that don't mind losing 10-7 like we did last night , what is your best assessment of what is wrong and do you have ideas on how to fix things?

---

Does anybody really not mind losing last night and particularly in the fashion that we lost?

71Bear said:

---

StarsDoMatter said:

---

I do know what I'm talking about. I'm 27, but have played football, coached football, .. have you?

My clients, a lot of them OLD BLUES seem to agree with me. Trying to explain to them what they witnessed last night was challenging to say the least.

---

You don't need to have played the game to understand the game. Neither Dykes nor Mike Leach played college football.

---

And playing or coaching football does not necessarily mean that you understand it either.

Yogi Bear said:

---

going4roses said:

---

This thread contains some good laughs.

To those that don't mind losing 10-7 like we did last night , what is your best assessment of what is wrong and do you have ideas on how to fix things?

---

Does anybody really not mind losing last night and particularly in the fashion that we lost?

---

It was disappointing but not surprising. I had it - TCU 17-13.

Yogi Bear said:

---

71Bear said:

---

StarsDoMatter said:

---

I do know what I'm talking about. I'm 27, but have played football, coached football, .. have you?

My clients, a lot of them OLD BLUES seem to agree with me. Trying to explain to them what they witnessed last night was challenging to say the least.

---

You don't need to have played the game to understand the game. Neither Dykes nor Mike Leach played college football.

---

And playing or coaching football does not necessarily mean that you understand it either.

---

I think Charlie Weis proved that at Kansas.....

Yogi Bear said:

---

going4roses said:

---

This thread contains some good laughs.

To those that don't mind losing 10-7 like we did last night , what is your best assessment of what is wrong and do you have ideas on how to fix things?

---

Does anybody really not mind losing last night and particularly in the fashion that we lost?

---

Maybe to some as long as SD was not the coach?

going4roses said:

---

Yogi Bear said:

---

going4roses said:

---

This thread contains some good laughs.

To those that don't mind losing 10-7 like we did last night , what is your best assessment of what is wrong and do you have ideas on how to fix things?

---

Does anybody really not mind losing last night and particularly in the fashion that we lost?

---

Maybe to some as long as SD was not the coach?

---

Lol funny

Easier to watch a lot of offense. Total ineptitude on either side of the ball by your team is equally frustrating. I stopped buying season tickets at the end of Dykes, bought them the first year of Wilcox, then stopped this year but went to a few games. I'll buy season tickets again when there is hope that we will be decent on both sides of the ball and therefore will have a better than average team. I need hope otherwise what's the point. For the upcoming season hope means I see some new coaches on offense. Baldwin may have been a great HC at EWU but I know a Holmoe OC when I see one. None of Dykes' DCs reminded me of anybody because I never saw Cal play defense that poorly.

BearsWiin said:

---

StarsDoMatter said:

---

71Bear said:

---

StarsDoMatter said:

---

10-7 is much worse.

Losing like we did yesterday, reminded me of my sisters 5th grade CYO B team who lost 4-2 in basketball. Sure the game was close, but they made 3 baskets in 24 mins...

What I witnessed last night was truly a god awful football game. We lost a lot more than a game yesterday. We lost to a team whose QB threw 8 yards and 4 INTs. A QB who was 4th string. The 5th string QB was injured and played a few snaps because they LITERALLY had nobody else. We had a month to prepare.

This was rock bottom.

---

I would take yesterday 's loss over any of the pinball losses in the Dykes era. The reason is simple - Cal had no chance in those Dykes era losses. Whereas, yesterday, the idea was get it to OT and you have got a shot. If you think this was rock bottom, I suggest that you weren't around in '01 or '13. Those were both rock bottom years. Yesterday was a competitive game (for a variety of reasons). That is a far cry from the recent past.

---

Alright... I was 10 in '01 so don't quite remember everything. '13 was terrible. A lost year.

This was just so embarrassing, because TCU was giving us the game. We could have just kicked 2 FG's in the red zone and won. Instead, our JV offense couldn't even muster that.

Beyond frustrating.

---

This explains a lot

---

Well let's be really honest here. The Old Blues are kind of used to lousy football. Many openly prefer it over making a commitment to quality football. This "defense only" team was boring as hell to watch, even during wins.

Old Blues gave us Holmoe and wanted to keep him. Old Blues gave us the "7-win extension contract." Old Blues gave us Coach Kapp, an absolute disaster, and celebrate a fluke play as the cornerstone of the program, when that play says more about the underperforming team under lousy Coach Kapp than it does about good football.

So... as an older Blue, to the Old Blues... maybe try not talking. Because your ideas really have sucked over the years and things need to change.

Uthaithani said:

---

BearsWiin said:

---

StarsDoMatter said:

---

71Bear said:

---

StarsDoMatter said:

---

10-7 is much worse.

Losing like we did yesterday, reminded me of my sisters 5th grade CYO B team who lost 4-2 in basketball. Sure the game was close, but they made 3 baskets in 24 mins...

What I witnessed last night was truly a god awful football game. We lost a lot more than a game yesterday. We lost to a team whose QB threw 8 yards and 4 INTs. A QB who was 4th string. The 5th string QB was injured and played a few snaps because they LITERALLY had nobody else. We had a month to prepare.

This was rock bottom.

---

I would take yesterday 's loss over any of the pinball losses in the Dykes era. The reason is simple - Cal had no chance in those Dykes era losses. Whereas, yesterday, the idea was get it to OT and you have got a shot. If you think this was rock bottom, I suggest that you weren't around in '01 or '13. Those were both rock bottom years. Yesterday was a competitive game (for a variety of reasons). That is a far cry from the recent past.

---

Alright... I was 10 in '01 so don't quite remember everything. '13 was terrible. A lost year.

This was just so embarrassing, because TCU was giving us the game. We could have just kicked 2 FG's in the red zone and won. Instead, our JV offense couldn't even muster that.

Beyond frustrating.

---

This explains a lot

---

Well let's be really honest here. The Old Blues are kind of used to lousy football. Many openly prefer it over making a commitment to quality football. This "defense only" team was boring as hell to watch, even during wins.

Old Blues gave us Holmoe and wanted to keep him. Old Blues gave us the "7-win extension contract." Old Blues gave us Coach Kapp, an absolute disaster, and celebrate a fluke play as the cornerstone of the program, when that play says more about the underperforming team under lousy Coach Kapp than it does about good football.

So... as an older Blue, to the Old Blues... maybe try not talking. Because your ideas really have sucked over the years and things need to change.

---

Every time I think that g4r has lapped the BI field for the title of Dumbest Mother****er In The Room, you have to go put yourself back in the running with a gem like this

BearsWiin said:

---

Uthaithani said:

---

BearsWiin said:

---

StarsDoMatter said:

---

71Bear said:

---

StarsDoMatter said:

---

10-7 is much worse.

Losing like we did yesterday, reminded me of my sisters 5th grade CYO B team who lost 4-2 in basketball. Sure the game was close, but they made 3 baskets in 24 mins...

What I witnessed last night was truly a god awful football game. We lost a lot more than a game yesterday. We lost to a team whose QB threw 8 yards and 4 INTs. A QB who was 4th string. The 5th string QB was injured and played a few snaps because they LITERALLY had nobody else. We had a month to prepare.

This was rock bottom.

---

I would take yesterday 's loss over any of the pinball losses in the Dykes era. The reason is simple - Cal had no chance in those Dykes era losses. Whereas, yesterday, the idea was get it to OT and you have got a shot. If you think this was rock bottom, I suggest that you weren't around in '01 or '13. Those were both rock bottom years. Yesterday was a competitive game (for a variety of reasons). That is a far cry from the recent past.

---

Alright... I was 10 in '01 so don't quite remember everything. '13 was terrible. A lost year.

This was just so embarrassing, because TCU was giving us the game. We could have just kicked 2 FG's in the red zone and won. Instead, our JV offense couldn't even muster that.

Beyond frustrating.

---

This explains a lot

---

Well let's be really honest here. The Old Blues are kind of used to lousy football. Many openly prefer it over making a commitment to quality football. This "defense only" team was boring as hell to watch, even during wins.

Old Blues gave us Holmoe and wanted to keep him. Old Blues gave us the "7-win extension contract." Old Blues gave us Coach Kapp, an absolute disaster, and celebrate a fluke play as the cornerstone of the program, when that play says more about the underperforming team under lousy Coach Kapp than it does about good football.

So... as an older Blue, to the Old Blues... maybe try not talking. Because your ideas really have sucked over the years and things need to change.

---

Every time I think that g4r has lapped the BI field for the title of Dumbest Mother****er In The Room, you have to go put yourself back in the running with a gem like this

---

Aww really geez

It was harder to watch the Goff games for me, since IMO we should have done better with such a talented QB, especially by his third year. I haven't had such expectations for the Wilcox teams yet.

The problem with losing under Dykes was the sheer number of plays and the length of the game.

At least with a low scoring game it's over much quicker (in general).

I'd rather move on with my day.

ColoradoBear said:

---

The problem with losing under Dykes was the sheer number of plays and the length of the game.

At least with a low scoring game it's over much quicker (in general).

I'd rather move on with my day.

---

Another good point.

Huge thing with Dykes was running around with "Toughest Teams Wins" t-shirts, with the softest coaches and group of players in the conference---Goff and a 4-8 of other guys excepted. Teams hate playing Cal now. No one feared a Dykes team.

I hate watching games with huge amounts of offense and zero defense on either side.

At some point the points lose value. Its no longer exciting to see a big play, its expected. I felt this way during Cal games when Dykes was the coach, I felt this way during the Rams/Chiefs game, and I felt this way about the Dodgers/Astros World Series. "Oh well, he hit a homerun...who cares, the other side will just respond with another."

Points are supposed to be precious and hard earned and celebrated when they occur.

I think what made the Cal/TCU game so much worse than normal was that for a lot of it, it WASN'T great defense that we were watching. Don't get me wrong, we were watching great Defenses play...but what really lead to the outcome of the game was just how horrible both offenses were. It was like watching a chess master playing someone who doesn't even know the rules of the game...you don't get to appreciate the brilliance of the master because the competition is so poor.

~MrGPAC

ColoradoBear said:

---

The problem with losing under Dykes was the sheer number of plays and the length of the game.

At least with a low scoring game it's over much quicker (in general).

I'd rather move on with my day.

---

that works for day games, sometimes you just get to bed that much sooner. I find the Wilcox losses linger more given the "coulda, woulda, shoulda" analysis whereas in the Dykes era there were way more blow outs and there wasn't much hope.

cal83dls79 said:

---

ColoradoBear said:

---

The problem with losing under Dykes was the sheer number of plays and the length of the game.

At least with a low scoring game it's over much quicker (in general).

I'd rather move on with my day.

---

that works for day games, sometimes you just get to bed that much sooner. I find the Wilcox losses linger more given the "coulda, woulda, shoulda" analysis whereas in the Dykes era there were way more blow outs and there wasn't much hope.

---

Yes...like...if we would have knelt down on every offensive position in the second half we would have won two more games. A staggeringly true statement.

Exactly

LunchTime said:

---

Big C said:

---

LunchTime said:

---

TLR. The dykes program was chicken***** We consistently had no offense. We almost never showed a defense. If Dykes could score against marginal or better opponents, then sure. But he couldnt. Blow out garbage, then get blown out was Dykes football. Let me show you how Dykes football existed in its "prime" under Goff... Blow out wins with Blow out losses.


Bolding games that could be decided by a 4th quarter score

The games Goff lost in his best season he lost by
6 (Close game, Cal down 3 in the 4th)
16 (Cal was losing 40-16 in the 4th before garbage time)
6 (Cal was losing 27-14 in the 4th before garbage time)
16 (Only 34-21 going into the 4th)
13 (Cal was losing 35-16 before garbage time)

His 2nd year he lost by
4 (Cal Led in the 4th 45-30),
24 (Cal didnt score until the end of the 3rd)
2 (Cal led in the 4th 34-33),
18 (Cal was losing 59-35 before Goff handed off for the last score)
8 (Cal was losing 38-16 in the 4th before garbage time)
21 (Cal was losing 38-10 in the 4th before garbage time)
7 (Tied in the 4th)


In the wins in 2015,
Won by 60
Won by 28
Winning 45-24 in the 4th
Cal led from the second quarter on
Cal came back in the 4th down 8
Cal led 44-24 going into the 4th
Cal came back on a FG down 1

In 2014
Cal was winning 31-7 in the 3rd before they stopped scoring
Cal was winning 45-0 in the 2nd
Cal was tied at the end of regulation
Cal came back on a 51 yard pass from goff down 5
Cal scored the last 3 times to come back


Out of 9 chances to win or lose in the 4th quarter and lost 4, won 5. Pretty good.

OTOH, Cal lost 8 games that were over before the half, and won 6 that were over before the second half.


I get that this team might be more frustrating to watch, but that is because this team has close games. Dykes' games were generally over at the half either way. A half of meaningless football isnt exciting in any way to me. Out of 23 games 14 were settled decisively before the half time show, and we lost 4 of the interesting games.

If your criteria is honestly the ability to win late, Dykes was not your guy. We either blew teams apart to win, or went 5050 late.


What games did you feel Cal was out of it or locked up before the half this year? What games did you stop watching because it was clearly a done deal?

W- UNC (17-0 at the half, 24-3 in the 4th)
W- BYU (14-10 in the 4th)
W- Idaho St (31-9 in the 4th)
L- Oregon (28-10 at the half)
L- Arizona (14-17 in the 4th)
L- UCLA (20-7 in the 4th)
W- OSU (21-0 at the half)
W- Washington (7-12 in the 4th)
L- WSU (13-13 in the 4th)
W- USC (15-14 in the 4th)
W- Colorado (21-27 in the 4th)
L- Stanford (13-6 in the 4th)
L- TCU (7-7 at the end of regulation)

With Wilcox the outcome was not certain in 8 of the 12 games. Of the games that were close in the 4th we won 4, and lost 4. Of the games that were not close at the half, we won all but Oregon.

In other words, Wilcox is at LEAST as capable of winning the close game as Dykes and Goff were. Probably more able, considering the quality of teams we competed with late, vs the epic overtime win vs Colorado when Colorado was attempting to win their second game of the season.

---

Straw man: Overall, it's almost impossible to defend the job Sonny Dykes did here. He was unsuccessful and he was let go. I don't think anybody here is defending Dykes' performance, in general, just saying that "all D / no O" can be as frustrating as "all O / no D". Depending on one's perspective, maybe even more frustrating.

---

That isnt a straw man. The argument was literally that Dykes would give a better shot at winning close games.

This is evidence that it is objectively not true. At worst Wilcox is equal. His opinion is subjective. The reality is that we have an equal shot with no D as we do with no O.

I dont think you know what straw man means.

---

I'm not as dumb as I look! It was a straw man because, if you go back and read the title of this thread, the question is, "Which is harder to watch (all D/no O, or all O/no D)?". It was not "literally that Dykes would give us a better shot at winning close games". You were refuting an argument that was not the original argument, i.e. attacking a straw man.. It happens all the time on this board when anybody mentions anything about the Dykes Regime that didn't suck, or say that Dykes was not the worst coach in our history and they are then accused of arguing Dykes did a good job, overall.

Anyway, my answer, again, to the original question is that it depends on your personal preference for offense or defense, which is also colored by the situation that one is in at that moment (because both are really frustrating).

95bears said:

---

Huge thing with Dykes was running around with "Toughest Teams Wins" t-shirts, with the softest coaches and group of players in the conference---Goff and a 4-8 of other guys excepted. Teams hate playing Cal now. No one feared a Dykes team.

---

The absolute truth! The shirts were an utter embarrassment. If you have the need to tell someone you are tough, you are a marshmallow and Cal was the biggest marshmallow under Dykes.