Bill Connelly's 2019 Cal Preview

11,427 Views | 63 Replies | Last: 4 yr ago by 71Bear
packawana
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
3:09p, 6/11/19
https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2019/6/11/18650696/california-football-2019-preview-schedule-roster

He chalks up 2018 largely due to a failure of execution rather than scheme. Mostly he points to lack of individual performances on the players, which basically means lack of talent.
Reply Quote
1 edit
Big C
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to packawana • 4:34p, 6/11/19
Wow, sports has gone analytics-crazy, in what seems like just the last few years.
Reply Quote
KoreAmBear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to packawana • 4:41p, 6/11/19
packawana said:
https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2019/6/11/18650696/california-football-2019-preview-schedule-roster

He chalks up 2018 largely due to a failure of execution rather than scheme. Mostly he points to lack of individual performances on the players, which basically means lack of talent.
Which is wrong. Being stubborn about constantly putting back BM into games where we know he's going to take further beatings, hits, fumbles and picks -- that's called coach decision making. Throwing the ball in a game where all you need to do is run the ball, esp. in the red zone, is also called coach decision making. It wasn't just execution. It wasn't about talent. See we know what's up. These magazines are just guessing what happened.
Reply Quote
7
1 edit
82gradDLSdad
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to KoreAmBear • 8:19p, 6/11/19
KoreAmBear said:
packawana said:
https://www.sbnation.com/college-football/2019/6/11/18650696/california-football-2019-preview-schedule-roster

He chalks up 2018 largely due to a failure of execution rather than scheme. Mostly he points to lack of individual performances on the players, which basically means lack of talent.
Which is wrong. Being stubborn about constantly putting back BM into games where we know he's going to take further beatings, hits, fumbles and picks -- that's called coach decision making. Throwing the ball in a game where all you need to do is run the ball, esp. in the red zone, is also called coach decision making. It wasn't just execution. It wasn't about talent. See we know what's up. These magazines are just guessing what happened.


Yep. I agree.
Reply Quote
chazzed
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to KoreAmBear • 6:44p, 6/13/19
... and not using the best fullback in CFB way more often (especially when our best weapons are injured)? Am I close here, or do I need to take more crazy pills?
Reply Quote
3
KoreAmBear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to chazzed • 6:55p, 6/13/19
chazzed said:
... and not using the best fullback in CFB way more often (especially when our best weapons are injured)? Am I close here, or do I need to take more crazy pills?
Which is why I am extremely skeptical about Baldwin being the QB coach as the fix to our offense. It wasn't his lack of time with a QB that had any nexus to his bizarre and curious personnel and play calling decisions.
Reply Quote
3
1 edit
chazzed
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to KoreAmBear • 5:58p, 6/14/19
Like you, I'm skeptical. I do hope I'm wrong, and there is a decent chance that I am.
Reply Quote
NVBear78
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
6:38p, 6/14/19
I get criticism of Baldwin and last years offense but the theory that our FB should have had 15 touches a game makes no sense to me. How many touches did he get in High School? I love the young man and thought he had a good chance as a free agent but as far as I know no team has picked him up. Maybe that will still happen and he seems to have a bright future no matter what...
Reply Quote
1
chazzed
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to NVBear78 • 9:02p, 6/14/19
I'm not asking for 15 touches a game, but how about 3 or 4? This would be enough to establish a threat and take some heat off of Laird and Garbers. Also, it makes little sense to me that one's high school career should dictate exactly how we utilize him. Finally, McMorris didn't get drafted because he's a fullback, and there is no demand for that by NFL teams anymore.
Reply Quote
3
1 edit
Bear19
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:28a, 6/15/19
Posters here just can't get past the fact that talent, or lack of talent, largely determines results in Power 5 football programs.
Reply Quote
3
Strykur
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to KoreAmBear • 1:07a, 6/15/19
KoreAmBear said:
chazzed said:
... and not using the best fullback in CFB way more often (especially when our best weapons are injured)? Am I close here, or do I need to take more crazy pills?
Which is why I am extremely skeptical about Baldwin being the QB coach as the fix to our offense. It wasn't his lack of time with a QB that had any nexus to his bizarre and curious personnel and play calling decisions.
Wilcox is basically telling Baldwin that he has to go all-in and prove he can develop talent and not just be a coach that can call plays, or he is going to be gone.
Reply Quote
Cal84
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Strykur • 7:50p, 6/16/19
>Wilcox is basically telling Baldwin that he has to go all-in and prove he can develop talent and not just be a coach that can call plays, or he is going to be gone.

I think there is some truth here. We didn't have good talent on that side of the ball and we had less after injuries. But we also had some of our talent flee after the season and that lands solely on the coaches responsibility. So yeah, I tend to think this is make or break time for Baldwin. It may not be fair if we suffer a bunch of injuries there early in the season, but heads must roll if the results on offense are unchanged.
Reply Quote
MoragaBear
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
9:39p, 6/16/19
Staff
I agree changes should be made if the offense is really poor again but I expect them to be significantly better on all levels.
Reply Quote Next Staff
71Bear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to MoragaBear • 9:59p, 6/16/19
MoragaBear said:
I agree changes should be made if the offense is really poor again but I expect them to be significantly better on all levels.
That makes two of us who have posted that we expect the Bears to be significantly better on O. Anyone else care to join us?
Reply Quote
6
FuzzyWuzzy
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to 71Bear • 11:36p, 6/16/19
71Bear said:
MoragaBear said:
I agree changes should be made if the offense is really poor again but I expect them to be significantly better on all levels.
That makes two of us who have posted that we expect the Bears to be significantly better on O. Anyone else care to join us?
I wish I could be as optimistic as you two but I see some serious question marks at pretty much every position group. I'm probably the most optimistic about our running backs. But that should tell you something since we just lost probably our most productive offensive player over the last two seasons from that position group. As for the rest of the offense, QB is still a big question mark. OL is a big question mark. WR is a really big question mark.

One of our biggest problems was the inability to complete passes down the field, even 15 yards. And the only positive change in that regard is the recruitment of Modster, who is promising but somewhat of an unknown commodity. IOW the passing game is still a big question mark at this point. Production in spring practice just doesn't mean all that much.

I am also perplexed by Baldwin. I really liked his offenses at EWU, and I do firmly believe you don't just forget how to coach overnight. I am at a loss to explain why we were so bad last year. True, we had below average P12 talent on offense but it was better-regarded talent than his FCS EWU teams, who seemed to regularly slice and dice P12 defenses.

If we are "significantly better" on O I will be pleasantly surprised. If it happens I guess that it would likely be a result of great improvement at the QB position, whether because Chase figures it out or Modster is a revelation. I have my fingers crossed. So why are you so optimistic?

Reply Quote
2
Blueblood
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
1:45a, 6/17/19
Well put FW. I think that Baldwin will be gone after next season.

I figure that Baldwin was so good at EWU because he got some pretty good playground football players
that went up against some very weak defenses in their conference, including those involving wins over P12 teams like Oregon State.

Baldwin is now coaching in the so-called "big time" now. Cal's offensive recruiting to me is more in line with what he was used to at EWU. Like some Premium Board members believe that we're all supposed to get light headed every time Cal brings in a *** offensive player. Such recruiting has a limited talent value in my estimation. Although his offensive units may be good in match ups with EWU conference teams, they are only average at best in the P12 due to better defenses, like Cal's for instance.

What I'm getting at is that you don't have to listen to me (I don't want to offend you), instead look at the offensive recruiting which to me is proof that the stellar talented recruits are getting the message about Baldwin's style of coaching. (Maybe such message underlies Cal's transfer exodus too?)


Reply Quote
1
2 edits
Rushinbear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to 71Bear • 6:07a, 6/17/19
71Bear said:
MoragaBear said:
I agree changes should be made if the offense is really poor again but I expect them to be significantly better on all levels.
That makes two of us who have posted that we expect the Bears to be significantly better on O. Anyone else care to join us?
qb - can a player go from fr to soph and not improve? Better.
rb - can more, faster and healthier rbs not be an improvement? Better.
wr - can more, faster and healthier wrs not be an improvement? Better.
te - can more and more talented tes not be an improvement? Better.
ol - the $64 question. Expected better last year (granted 2 injured). Same.

Overall, better. Significantly? Enough for one more win.

8 wins.
Reply Quote
71Bear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Rushinbear • 8:17a, 6/17/19
Rushinbear said:
71Bear said:
MoragaBear said:
I agree changes should be made if the offense is really poor again but I expect them to be significantly better on all levels.
That makes two of us who have posted that we expect the Bears to be significantly better on O. Anyone else care to join us?
qb - can a player go from fr to soph and not improve? Better.
rb - can more, faster and healthier rbs not be an improvement? Better.
wr - can more, faster and healthier wrs not be an improvement? Better.
te - can more and more talented tes not be an improvement? Better.
ol - the $64 question. Expected better last year (granted 2 injured). Same.

Overall, better. Significantly? Enough for one more win.

8 wins.
To win 8 games against the odd year schedule, Cal will have to be more than significantly better on O.
Reply Quote
2
OdontoBear66
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to 71Bear • 8:35a, 6/17/19
71Bear said:
Rushinbear said:
71Bear said:
MoragaBear said:
I agree changes should be made if the offense is really poor again but I expect them to be significantly better on all levels.
That makes two of us who have posted that we expect the Bears to be significantly better on O. Anyone else care to join us?
qb - can a player go from fr to soph and not improve? Better.
rb - can more, faster and healthier rbs not be an improvement? Better.
wr - can more, faster and healthier wrs not be an improvement? Better.
te - can more and more talented tes not be an improvement? Better.
ol - the $64 question. Expected better last year (granted 2 injured). Same.

Overall, better. Significantly? Enough for one more win.

8 wins.
To win 8 games against the odd year schedule, Cal will have to be more than significantly better on O.
Granted the odd year schedule is more difficult but to rule out anything because of it short sighted. If you disagree then explain how with the even year schedule we beat UWashington at home and USC on the road. Stuff happens within a schedule that goes way beyond "odd" or "even" year. That's like saying with stocks go away in May. Yes, more often than not you could be right but often enough you are wrong. There are a lot more variables than odd and even.
Reply Quote
1 edit
71Bear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to FuzzyWuzzy • 9:59a, 6/17/19
FuzzyWuzzy said:
71Bear said:
MoragaBear said:
I agree changes should be made if the offense is really poor again but I expect them to be significantly better on all levels.
That makes two of us who have posted that we expect the Bears to be significantly better on O. Anyone else care to join us?
I wish I could be as optimistic as you two but I see some serious question marks at pretty much every position group. I'm probably the most optimistic about our running backs. But that should tell you something since we just lost probably our most productive offensive player over the last two seasons from that position group. As for the rest of the offense, QB is still a big question mark. OL is a big question mark. WR is a really big question mark.

One of our biggest problems was the inability to complete passes down the field, even 15 yards. And the only positive change in that regard is the recruitment of Modster, who is promising but somewhat of an unknown commodity. IOW the passing game is still a big question mark at this point. Production in spring practice just doesn't mean all that much.

I am also perplexed by Baldwin. I really liked his offenses at EWU, and I do firmly believe you don't just forget how to coach overnight. I am at a loss to explain why we were so bad last year. True, we had below average P12 talent on offense but it was better-regarded talent than his FCS EWU teams, who seemed to regularly slice and dice P12 defenses.

If we are "significantly better" on O I will be pleasantly surprised. If it happens I guess that it would likely be a result of great improvement at the QB position, whether because Chase figures it out or Modster is a revelation. I have my fingers crossed. So why are you so optimistic?

Some thoughts...

1. "significantly better" than last year doesn't mean top of the conference, it does mean somewhere in the third quartile. That would be quite a jump from 2018's dead last finish.

2. Today, football is more quarterback-driven than at any point in its history. I believe that Garbers will make a huge leap from his first year to his second season.

3. Unlike many here, I have a lot of confidence in Baldwin. He didn't take a stupid pill on his way to Berkeley. He is a well-qualified OC.

Having said that, my prognostication record is not 100% (just ask Oaktown). Please do not run to your bookie. Instead, enjoy the season and watch an acolyte blossom into a leader.

Reply Quote
1
GBear4Life
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to MoragaBear • 11:19a, 6/17/19
MoragaBear said:
I agree changes should be made if the offense is really poor again but I expect them to be significantly better on all levels.
based on what
Reply Quote
GBear4Life
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
11:24a, 6/17/19
So HC picks a coordinator, gives them basically full autonomy because they don't know jack about offense, provides him with mediocre players and mediocre QBs; the offense then fails, and people want the HC to fire the OC? If the HC is letting this scenario happen, he's not a HC.

I love that Wilcox won't fire Beau. That attitude is partly why coaches respect Wilcox and like working with him. Maybe Wilcox is doing it out of irrational loyalty or because he truly feels it's the right move. But if I'm a HC I don't fire coordinators unless for cause or insubordination. Because if a unit is struggling, it's on my as the HC to fix.
Reply Quote
chazzed
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to 71Bear • 11:41a, 6/17/19
He may not have taken a stupid pill, but his start here has been very sobering. I know he is up against Pac defenses weekly, now, but his first 2 seasons at Cal have been way below the standard he set at EWU. Was he even making all of the decisions on offense at EWU?
Reply Quote
1
2 edits
MoragaBear
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
12:14p, 6/17/19
Staff
If Garbers carries over his development since the season or Modster plays good enough to beat him out, I believe we'll see a lot less interceptions and QB fumbles, more balls completed downfield and a higher completion percentage. Garbers was far better in the spring than he was last season, even with a lot of receivers out. He was more poised and in control and hit balls downfield he didn't hit last season. Keep in mind, he wouldn't even have played last season as a rs freshman if Bowers didn't have his injury and McIlwain wasn't a turnover machine.

Laird was not the same player in 2018 as he was in '17 after coming back from knee surgery right before the season. I expect Brown, Dancy, Collins and Netherda to be a very effective group, with more rotation to keep guys fresher and healthier. Brown made a nice step up this spring and Dancy and Collins bring explosiveness, ability to pick up consistent yardage as receiving weapons and are hard to bring down. Much like Laird, Netherda's a lot better than a lot of people think.

The WR corps will be a lot deeper. Noa, Wharton and Duncan missed a bunch of games and played hurt a lot. I expect Duncan, Hawkins, Remigio, Clark, Crawford, Polk and walk-ons -Walker and Skinner plus hopefully Taariq to give them a wide-range of skillsets and ways to move the chains.

The TE position should become an offensive weapon again with Castles and Reinwald plus receiving TE's, though the power running game could suffer a bit with their lack of bulk.

The OL should be much better. Expect OT's Curhan and Craig to make nice steps up based on their springs and additional experience. Saffell missed much of last year and he'll bring an aggressive streak to center. The light's come on for Williams at OG and Daltoso will be back from injuries with 2 seasons of starting. I think Cindric's good enough to replace either of them sooner than later and brings a tough and nasty streak and technical ability to the field.

Toler seems to be at home at WR coach and did a nice job with a depleted group in the spring.
The RB's are responding really well to Edwards at RB coach and are running with toughness and ball security.
Baldwin coaching QB's is a big step up from Tui.

Bottom line: I think the offense could be better at virtually every position. Feel free to save this and quote me.
Reply Quote Next Staff
71Bear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to MoragaBear • 1:08p, 6/17/19
MoragaBear said:
HIf Garbers carries over his development since the season or Modster plays good enough to beat him out, I believe we'll see a lot less interceptions and QB fumbles, more balls completed downfield and a higher completion percentage. Garbers was far better in the spring than he was last season, even with a lot of receivers out. He was more poised and in control and hit balls downfield he didn't hit last season. Keep in mind, he wouldn't even have played last season as a rs freshman if Bowers didn't have his injury and McIlwain wasn't a turnover machine.

Laird was not the same player in 2018 as he was in '17 after coming back from knee surgery right before the season. I expect Brown, Dancy, Collins and Netherda to be a very effective group, with more rotation to keep guys fresher and healthier. Brown made a nice step up this spring and Dancy and Collins bring explosiveness, ability to pick up consistent yardage as receiving weapons and are hard to bring down. Much like Laird, Netherda's a lot better than a lot of people think.

The WR corps will be a lot deeper. Noa, Wharton and Duncan missed a bunch of games and played hurt a lot. I expect Duncan, Hawkins, Remigio, Clark, Crawford, Polk and walk-ons -Walker and Skinner plus hopefully Taariq to give them a wide-range of skillsets and ways to move the chains.

The TE position should become an offensive weapon again with Castles and Reinwald plus receiving TE's, though the power running game could suffer a bit with their lack of bulk.

The OL should be much better. Expect OT's Curhan and Craig to make nice steps up based on their springs and additional experience. Saffell missed much of last year and he'll bring an aggressive streak to center. The light's come on for Williams at OG and Daltoso will be back from injuries with 2 seasons of starting. I think Cindric's good enough to replace either of them sooner than later and brings a tough and nasty streak and technical ability to the field.

Toler seems to be at home at WR coach and did a nice job with a depleted group in the spring.
The RB's are responding really well to Edwards at RB coach and are running with toughness and ball security.
Baldwin coaching QB's is a big step up from Tui.

Bottom line: I think the offense could be better at virtually every position. Feel free to save this and quote me.
Heck, save the entire thread. It will either make us look like Nostradamus or the guy who sits on a barstool every Saturday with no clue about what he is watching.
Reply Quote
Yogi58
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to 71Bear • 1:39p, 6/17/19
71Bear said:
MoragaBear said:
I agree changes should be made if the offense is really poor again but I expect them to be significantly better on all levels.
That makes two of us who have posted that we expect the Bears to be significantly better on O. Anyone else care to join us?
Why can't you just admit that you hate everything?
Reply Quote
1
Yogi58
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Rushinbear • 1:41p, 6/17/19
Rushinbear said:

wr - can more, faster and healthier wrs not be an improvement? Better.
You're taking it on faith that they are faster and their health remains to be seen. A lot of the guys that were injured last year weren't injured at all the previous year.
Reply Quote
Yogi58
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to GBear4Life • 1:43p, 6/17/19
GBear4Life said:
MoragaBear said:
I agree changes should be made if the offense is really poor again but I expect them to be significantly better on all levels.
based on what
Reply Quote
FloriDreaming
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to KoreAmBear • 4:33p, 6/17/19
KoreAmBear said:
chazzed said:
... and not using the best fullback in CFB way more often (especially when our best weapons are injured)? Am I close here, or do I need to take more crazy pills?
Which is why I am extremely skeptical about Baldwin being the QB coach as the fix to our offense. It wasn't his lack of time with a QB that had any nexus to his bizarre and curious personnel and play calling decisions.
Yep. And up until this year, his overall poor recruiting for the offense. Baldwin has been a total-package bad coach, not just bad in a couple easily-correctable areas.
Reply Quote
hanky1
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to 71Bear • 5:37p, 6/17/19
71Bear said:
FuzzyWuzzy said:
71Bear said:
MoragaBear said:
I agree changes should be made if the offense is really poor again but I expect them to be significantly better on all levels.
That makes two of us who have posted that we expect the Bears to be significantly better on O. Anyone else care to join us?
I wish I could be as optimistic as you two but I see some serious question marks at pretty much every position group. I'm probably the most optimistic about our running backs. But that should tell you something since we just lost probably our most productive offensive player over the last two seasons from that position group. As for the rest of the offense, QB is still a big question mark. OL is a big question mark. WR is a really big question mark.

One of our biggest problems was the inability to complete passes down the field, even 15 yards. And the only positive change in that regard is the recruitment of Modster, who is promising but somewhat of an unknown commodity. IOW the passing game is still a big question mark at this point. Production in spring practice just doesn't mean all that much.

I am also perplexed by Baldwin. I really liked his offenses at EWU, and I do firmly believe you don't just forget how to coach overnight. I am at a loss to explain why we were so bad last year. True, we had below average P12 talent on offense but it was better-regarded talent than his FCS EWU teams, who seemed to regularly slice and dice P12 defenses.

If we are "significantly better" on O I will be pleasantly surprised. If it happens I guess that it would likely be a result of great improvement at the QB position, whether because Chase figures it out or Modster is a revelation. I have my fingers crossed. So why are you so optimistic?

Some thoughts...

1. "significantly better" than last year doesn't mean top of the conference, it does mean somewhere in the third quartile. That would be quite a jump from 2018's dead last finish.

2. Today, football is more quarterback-driven than at any point in its history. I believe that Garbers will make a huge leap from his first year to his second season.

3. Unlike many here, I have a lot of confidence in Baldwin. He didn't take a stupid pill on his way to Berkeley. He is a well-qualified OC.

Having said that, my prognostication record is not 100% (just ask Oaktown). Please do not run to your bookie. Instead, enjoy the season and watch an acolyte blossom into a leader.



If our offense is in the top 3rd of the conference I'll do a freakin backflip.

At this point, I'd settle for slightly below average (8-9th best in conference). That would be a significant upgrade.
Reply Quote
1
71Bear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to hanky1 • 5:52p, 6/17/19
hanky1 said:
71Bear said:
FuzzyWuzzy said:
71Bear said:
MoragaBear said:
I agree changes should be made if the offense is really poor again but I expect them to be significantly better on all levels.
That makes two of us who have posted that we expect the Bears to be significantly better on O. Anyone else care to join us?
I wish I could be as optimistic as you two but I see some serious question marks at pretty much every position group. I'm probably the most optimistic about our running backs. But that should tell you something since we just lost probably our most productive offensive player over the last two seasons from that position group. As for the rest of the offense, QB is still a big question mark. OL is a big question mark. WR is a really big question mark.

One of our biggest problems was the inability to complete passes down the field, even 15 yards. And the only positive change in that regard is the recruitment of Modster, who is promising but somewhat of an unknown commodity. IOW the passing game is still a big question mark at this point. Production in spring practice just doesn't mean all that much.

I am also perplexed by Baldwin. I really liked his offenses at EWU, and I do firmly believe you don't just forget how to coach overnight. I am at a loss to explain why we were so bad last year. True, we had below average P12 talent on offense but it was better-regarded talent than his FCS EWU teams, who seemed to regularly slice and dice P12 defenses.

If we are "significantly better" on O I will be pleasantly surprised. If it happens I guess that it would likely be a result of great improvement at the QB position, whether because Chase figures it out or Modster is a revelation. I have my fingers crossed. So why are you so optimistic?

Some thoughts...

1. "significantly better" than last year doesn't mean top of the conference, it does mean somewhere in the third quartile. That would be quite a jump from 2018's dead last finish.

2. Today, football is more quarterback-driven than at any point in its history. I believe that Garbers will make a huge leap from his first year to his second season.

3. Unlike many here, I have a lot of confidence in Baldwin. He didn't take a stupid pill on his way to Berkeley. He is a well-qualified OC.

Having said that, my prognostication record is not 100% (just ask Oaktown). Please do not run to your bookie. Instead, enjoy the season and watch an acolyte blossom into a leader.



If our offense is in the top 3rd of the conference I'll do a freakin backflip.

At this point, I'd settle for slightly below average (8-9th best in conference). That would be a significant upgrade.
Given the third quartile is 7/8/9, I guess we agree!
Reply Quote
hanky1
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to 71Bear • 8:05p, 6/17/19
71Bear said:
hanky1 said:
71Bear said:
FuzzyWuzzy said:
71Bear said:
MoragaBear said:
I agree changes should be made if the offense is really poor again but I expect them to be significantly better on all levels.
That makes two of us who have posted that we expect the Bears to be significantly better on O. Anyone else care to join us?
I wish I could be as optimistic as you two but I see some serious question marks at pretty much every position group. I'm probably the most optimistic about our running backs. But that should tell you something since we just lost probably our most productive offensive player over the last two seasons from that position group. As for the rest of the offense, QB is still a big question mark. OL is a big question mark. WR is a really big question mark.

One of our biggest problems was the inability to complete passes down the field, even 15 yards. And the only positive change in that regard is the recruitment of Modster, who is promising but somewhat of an unknown commodity. IOW the passing game is still a big question mark at this point. Production in spring practice just doesn't mean all that much.

I am also perplexed by Baldwin. I really liked his offenses at EWU, and I do firmly believe you don't just forget how to coach overnight. I am at a loss to explain why we were so bad last year. True, we had below average P12 talent on offense but it was better-regarded talent than his FCS EWU teams, who seemed to regularly slice and dice P12 defenses.

If we are "significantly better" on O I will be pleasantly surprised. If it happens I guess that it would likely be a result of great improvement at the QB position, whether because Chase figures it out or Modster is a revelation. I have my fingers crossed. So why are you so optimistic?

Some thoughts...

1. "significantly better" than last year doesn't mean top of the conference, it does mean somewhere in the third quartile. That would be quite a jump from 2018's dead last finish.

2. Today, football is more quarterback-driven than at any point in its history. I believe that Garbers will make a huge leap from his first year to his second season.

3. Unlike many here, I have a lot of confidence in Baldwin. He didn't take a stupid pill on his way to Berkeley. He is a well-qualified OC.

Having said that, my prognostication record is not 100% (just ask Oaktown). Please do not run to your bookie. Instead, enjoy the season and watch an acolyte blossom into a leader.



If our offense is in the top 3rd of the conference I'll do a freakin backflip.

At this point, I'd settle for slightly below average (8-9th best in conference). That would be a significant upgrade.
Given the third quartile is 7/8/9, I guess we agree!


ha quick read your message and thought it said top quarter. That would be miraculous and frankly probably unrealistic.
Reply Quote
Blueblood
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to hanky1 • 1:23a, 6/18/19
hanky1 said:
71Bear said:
hanky1 said:
71Bear said:
FuzzyWuzzy said:
71Bear said:
MoragaBear said:
I agree changes should be made if the offense is really poor again but I expect them to be significantly better on all levels.
That makes two of us who have posted that we expect the Bears to be significantly better on O. Anyone else care to join us?
I wish I could be as optimistic as you two but I see some serious question marks at pretty much every position group. I'm probably the most optimistic about our running backs. But that should tell you something since we just lost probably our most productive offensive player over the last two seasons from that position group. As for the rest of the offense, QB is still a big question mark. OL is a big question mark. WR is a really big question mark.

One of our biggest problems was the inability to complete passes down the field, even 15 yards. And the only positive change in that regard is the recruitment of Modster, who is promising but somewhat of an unknown commodity. IOW the passing game is still a big question mark at this point. Production in spring practice just doesn't mean all that much.

I am also perplexed by Baldwin. I really liked his offenses at EWU, and I do firmly believe you don't just forget how to coach overnight. I am at a loss to explain why we were so bad last year. True, we had below average P12 talent on offense but it was better-regarded talent than his FCS EWU teams, who seemed to regularly slice and dice P12 defenses.

If we are "significantly better" on O I will be pleasantly surprised. If it happens I guess that it would likely be a result of great improvement at the QB position, whether because Chase figures it out or Modster is a revelation. I have my fingers crossed. So why are you so optimistic?

Some thoughts...

1. "significantly better" than last year doesn't mean top of the conference, it does mean somewhere in the third quartile. That would be quite a jump from 2018's dead last finish.

2. Today, football is more quarterback-driven than at any point in its history. I believe that Garbers will make a huge leap from his first year to his second season.

3. Unlike many here, I have a lot of confidence in Baldwin. He didn't take a stupid pill on his way to Berkeley. He is a well-qualified OC.

Having said that, my prognostication record is not 100% (just ask Oaktown). Please do not run to your bookie. Instead, enjoy the season and watch an acolyte blossom into a leader.



If our offense is in the top 3rd of the conference I'll do a freakin backflip.

At this point, I'd settle for slightly below average (8-9th best in conference). That would be a significant upgrade.
Given the third quartile is 7/8/9, I guess we agree!


ha quick read your message and thought it said top quarter. That would be miraculous and frankly probably unrealistic.


aaaAAAAHHHHH! See, we're really one big happy creepy family afterall!
Reply Quote
2 edits
Rushinbear
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Yogi58 • 4:16a, 6/18/19
Yogi Bear said:
Rushinbear said:

wr - can more, faster and healthier wrs not be an improvement? Better.
You're taking it on faith that they are faster and their health remains to be seen. A lot of the guys that were injured last year weren't injured at all the previous year.
Remigio faster. Hawkins adds a year. Duncan stays healthy because there are enough wrs now to rotate and stay fresh. If the rumors about Taariq are true, he just makes a good corps better.

Noa was always getting dinged. Wharton was not himself. The UM guy had trouble with routes and catching.
Reply Quote
calumnus
User Profile
Private Message
Ignore User Stop Ignoring
How long do you want to ignore this user?
24 hours One week Permanently Cancel
In reply to Rushinbear • 6:07a, 6/18/19
Rushinbear said:
Yogi Bear said:
Rushinbear said:

wr - can more, faster and healthier wrs not be an improvement? Better.
You're taking it on faith that they are faster and their health remains to be seen. A lot of the guys that were injured last year weren't injured at all the previous year.
Remigio faster. Hawkins adds a year. Duncan stays healthy because there are enough wrs now to rotate and stay fresh. If the rumors about Taariq are true, he just makes a good corps better.

Noa was always getting dinged. Wharton was not himself. The UM guy had trouble with routes and catching.


In 2016, we were the number 1 offense in the PAC-12.

In 2017 we had plenty of fast, highly rated WRs: Robertson, Stoval, Wharton, Duncan, Noa....and were 11th in the PAC-12 on offense.

Baldwin barely used McMorris, probably our biggest difference maker on offense. His playcalling was abysmal.

McIlwain had an issue with interceptions but was our leading rusher. So what does Baldwin do? Starts Mcillwain and has him sit in the pocket and throw 50 times and not run at all with predictable results. Our offense got worse and worse, culminating in the Cheezit Bowl embarrassment. Baldwin just kept changing QBs, but when the offense sucks under 5 highly rated QBs, maybe it isn't the QB? Look at Chase Forrest's good stats as a freshman verses his horrible stats as a senior.

I want the offense to be great, but I've seen nothing from Baldwin it give me any confidence. Oh, last year EWU's offense was #2 in all of college football, so those who cite his impressive wins over OSU....
Reply Quote
4
Page 1 of 2 ▼
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.