Garbers came through when it mattered most

2,173 Views | 22 Replies | Last: 2 mo ago by GBear4Life
adujan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I live in Texas and fell asleep right around the restart of the game, so I missed what sounds like an awful first half. I happened to wake up around the 3 minutes remaining mark of the 4th quarter, two plays before Washington kicked a 50 yarder to take the lead.

I watched the final drive and Garbers truly stepped up big time. His first two passes were almost perfectly placed. This wide receiver screen/quick hit that got us down inside the 5 was a crisply thrown ball.

While I didn't like the play call on 2nd and goal, Garbers centered the ball and didn't panic or fumble.

Garbers and our offensive personnel don't seem like they're capable of carrying this team in a shoot-out, but he showed last night he can execute a 2 minute drive with excellence. Really proud of the entire team - offense, defense and special teams for pulling off such a big upset on the road.

Go Bears!
bonsallbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
And all done without any help from Baldwin
Big C
How long do you want to ignore this user?
If we keep winning, EVERYBODY gets credit. I'd sure love to be able to post here, three months from now, "I'm surprised, but Baldwin is the best damn Offensive Coordinator in the land!"
jay4e
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Agreed. I'm usually on the fire Beau Baldwin train but he called one hell of an offense in the second half out there.
GivemTheAxe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
jay4e said:

Agreed. I'm usually on the fire Beau Baldwin train but he called one hell of an offense in the second half out there.

The play calling was not much different the rest of the game. The only difference was the lack of execution by the Cal Offense. This was due to : 1. bad blocking by the O-line and a failure to pick up blitzes 2. Poor passing by the QB. And 3. Great plays by the UW defense
Robocheme
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GivemTheAxe said:

jay4e said:

Agreed. I'm usually on the fire Beau Baldwin train but he called one hell of an offense in the second half out there.

The play calling was not much different the rest of the game. The only difference was the lack of execution by the Cal Offense. This was due to : 1. bad blocking by the O-line and a failure to pick up blitzes 2. Poor passing by the QB. And 3. Great plays by the UW defense
4. Penalties
Cal89
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Overall, after two games, the passing game is not where we want it to be of course. BUT, the potential is becoming more evident by simply looking at the production over the course of the games.

Our 2nd half passing has been quite good, completing passes 70% of the time, good for the top 1/3 in FBS. Also top 1/3 in QBR, again for second half performance. Improved performance from 3rd to 4th quarters too...

Yards per attempted pass is at 7.6, not quarter or half specific, but overall for these two games. That's comfortably in the top half of FBS.

The much less maligned running game is averaging 4.78 yards a carry, also in the top half of FBS. For the 2nd half of games, 5.0. The Cal offense is clearly showing signs of life.

Should this continue, and ideally improve, like becoming more effective earlier in games, we are apt to have a pretty damn good football team, one with a legit shot at the conference title. Predicated upon the D doing what it does so consistently well...

No one here should be shocked with us at 5-0 going into Eugene. Of note, they have a bye week before to prepare for us, and heal-up. Our bye is after that game.

Cal football is once again relevant in the conference, and on the brink of doing so nationally!
GivemTheAxe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Robocheme said:

GivemTheAxe said:

jay4e said:

Agreed. I'm usually on the fire Beau Baldwin train but he called one hell of an offense in the second half out there.

The play calling was not much different the rest of the game. The only difference was the lack of execution by the Cal Offense. This was due to : 1. bad blocking by the O-line and a failure to pick up blitzes 2. Poor passing by the QB. And 3. Great plays by the UW defense
4. Penalties

OK, OK
4. Penalties
chazzed
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I'm definitely enthusiastic about our program, but I wouldn't yet call us relevant in the conference. We've been a thorn in UW's side (which is very cool -- eat it, Fuskies!), but you have to finish over .500 in conference to be relevant, in my estimation.
oskidunker
How long do you want to ignore this user?
As a friend reminded me, we beat Washington last year and then lost to Oregon State. We do look better this year. Alot of Washington receivers dropped balls, which may have been lack of focus caused by the delay. Who knows but I will take it.
Last year is over,” Fox said. “Today we start to fight forward. We build for greater days.”
chazzed
How long do you want to ignore this user?
We beat OSU last year.
BearGoggles
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GivemTheAxe said:

jay4e said:

Agreed. I'm usually on the fire Beau Baldwin train but he called one hell of an offense in the second half out there.

The play calling was not much different the rest of the game. The only difference was the lack of execution by the Cal Offense. This was due to : 1. bad blocking by the O-line and a failure to pick up blitzes 2. Poor passing by the QB. And 3. Great plays by the UW defense
I don't think this is correct. Re-watched the game and Cal came out in the second have with noticeably different formations and personnel groups (particularly tighter formations with one or two tight ends).
oski003
How long do you want to ignore this user?
They may have also dropped those balls because, on every single one of them, the receiver was about to get trucked by a db
SmellinRoses
How long do you want to ignore this user?
oski003 said:

They may have also dropped those balls because, on every single one of them, the receiver was about to get trucked by a db


Thank you - they dropped balls in part because our DBs lay wood and certainly had a reputation coming in. There were a couple of big hits from our DBs early - setting the tone. Even the commentator (former RB) said Davis was "head-hunting."
Cal89
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cal is no longer a conference cupcake, a team noted as a likely win on the Pac-12 schedules. That to me means we are relevant, formidable for once. I have long echoed that what matters most in conference wins, a winning record otherwise (overall) can be quite misleading. I now firmly believe JW can do so for us. Ten or so years is way too long...

It is not inconceivable that we win the Pac-12 North now. It's not like we had no chance in that game against Oregon in 2018.

If we crack the Top 25 and live there more often than not, keep beating out-of-conference teams as we have in the JW era (only one loss), we become relevant in the eyes of many outside the Pac-12. Ole Miss again in a couple weeks! in 2017 they had a veteran star QB, this year I believe a first year guy. Their new DC, we know... Looks like a 9am game for us, west coast time.
Calcoholic
How long do you want to ignore this user?
adujan said:

...Garbers centered the ball and didn't panic or fumble.
I agree with your post and starred it but this made me chuckle. We're setting a miiiighty low bar if our QBs are now getting credit for not panicking or fumbling on a play where their only job is to carry the ball 5 feet to the left and kneel down. lol. Just ribbin ya.
Goobear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
oskidunker said:

As a friend reminded me, we beat Washington last year and then lost to Oregon State. We do look better this year. Alot of Washington receivers dropped balls, which may have been lack of focus caused by the delay. Who knows but I will take it.
Your friend was mistaken. We beat the Beavers. Perhaps you meant the Ducks?
Cal89
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Goobear said:

oskidunker said:

As a friend reminded me, we beat Washington last year and then lost to Oregon State. We do look better this year. Alot of Washington receivers dropped balls, which may have been lack of focus caused by the delay. Who knows but I will take it.
Your friend was mistaken. We beat the Beavers. Perhaps you meant the Ducks?
And if he meant the Ducks, they were a darn good team and the score delta was deceptive. It was quite a competitive game, as the stats reveal.
Another Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
With Weaver and the DBs, and reasonable offensive production (like on Sat.), Cal can take Oregon. Won't be easy, don't match as well as UW but they can be had. Gonna need a little luck and a lot of take-aways.
mikecohen
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Another Bear said:

With Weaver and the DBs, and reasonable offensive production (like on Sat.), Cal can take Oregon. Won't be easy, don't match as well as UW but they can be had. Gonna need a little luck and a lot of take-aways.
Against Auburn, Oregon running out of gas at the end of the game (and so losing it on the last play, after pretty much controlling the game the rest of the way and being substantially ahead pretty late in the game) was the most extreme I have ever seen. Of course, it could be that they were 3,000 miles from Eugene; but it also could possibly reflect a lack of depth or a deficit in conditioning.
Strykur
How long do you want to ignore this user?
mikecohen said:

Another Bear said:

With Weaver and the DBs, and reasonable offensive production (like on Sat.), Cal can take Oregon. Won't be easy, don't match as well as UW but they can be had. Gonna need a little luck and a lot of take-aways.
Against Auburn, Oregon running out of gas at the end of the game (and so losing it on the last play, after pretty much controlling the game the rest of the way and being substantially ahead pretty late in the game) was the most extreme I have ever seen. Of course, it could be that they were 3,000 miles from Eugene; but it also could possibly reflect a lack of depth or a deficit in conditioning.
Auburn also had horrible QB play for 3 quarters before coming back, from perusing the Oregon boards there are some deficiencies at WR that they are hoping to get sorted out before they play us because if we can lock down Herbert and get the game into the 4th quarter everybody in Eugene is going to tighten up and that could be game for us.
adujan
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Unfortunately, the bar is that low. A well executed centering of the ball, without a fumble, counts as success. For those of us who remember Cal in the 90s, we lost a game at home to Washington because of a fumble on the 1 or 2 yard line.

In all seriousness, the three passes Garbers threw on that final drive were all excellent. The first pass was perfectly thrown and caught. The second drew a PI but was also placed well. The third gave the receiver a chance to run after the catch. I am not ready to put Garbers on the Heisman list, but we need 3-4 quality drives per game to win more often than not with behind our stout defense. That last drive gave me hope that we have the talent to deliver enough offense to win.
GBear4Life
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Man, when offense succeeds, it's all players. When it fails, it's all Baldwin.

Sound logic as far as I can tell.
Page 1 of 1
 
×
Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.