drizzlybears brother said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

drizzlybears brother said:

---

For those who want Baldwin gone

Do we know why Baldwin was retained last year?

Hypothetically, how long should it take to build an offense from scratch?

In what order would you prioritize the different offensive groups?

Have you found any occasions of success for the offense under Baldwin?

If so, what factors contributed, and were those factors in place during the periods in which you disapprove?

---

No, but many think that it was smarter to wait until his contract expired, which is this year not last year.

Tedford built an offense from scratch in about 1 year but that was because his personnel stuck around. Many offensive players left when Baldwin came on, a symptom that is parallel to the way several defensive players left after Dykes came on. I think it can take around 3 or 4 years for a head coach to build a program to the point where 4 and 5 star players are attracted and you are competing for conference championships but there should be clear signs of progress along the way. And individual units should be competent at the start of the 2nd or 3rd year.

I think the offensive line and QB are by far the most important and I would put the OL at the top. personally, I think Greatwood is a bit over-rated. I give him a C. But it is also possible that Greatwood and Baldwin are not a good match. There are too many breakdowns and key penalties on the OL at key point in the game and key locations on the field.

I think that Baldwin's offenses are more successful when he is throwing downfield as a part of the offense. He recently, finally, started doing that more.

The factors that contributed to Baldwin throwing downfield more recently are unclear to me. It may be because Garbers was healthy. But Garbers was also healthy a good portion of last year, although last year we didn't have the receivers to do that.

In conclusion, I understand that Baldwin's success has been affected by limitations in personnel. But some of those limitations were created by, in my opinion, the Baldwin presence as OC. For example, when we had a QB shortage last season after Bowers went down with injury, we did not have Gilliam to step in because he had left. When Garbers came on late, we didn't have receivers because several had left. The combination of the folks leaving and a sluggish process of recruiting replacements for them has cost us.

I realize that the reasons for these problems are assumptions on my part, but after seeing the exact same thing happen on defense under Dykes with the same results, only to have those problems corrected almost immediately once Dykes left gives me the same sense of deductive reasoning that Sherlock Holmes used.

As fans, we are always disadvantaged with a lack of information. So we are often forced to use the limited chances we have to observe the team and combine that with our past experience and our analytic abilities to be able to educated assumptions based on deductive reasoning.

I'll say that, when I had the chance to observe Cal in person this season, I saw Cal running run plays right at the very part of our OL that was injured and they did it repeatedly. The result was only 17 points scored against a very poor Oregon St. defense. That resulted in a loss that could have kept us out of a bowl. I also saw them use the hand off too many times when Modster could have faked the hand off and run for miles. I know they were concerned about Modster getting injured but it was more dangerous to Modster that we ran a vanilla offense and Modster ended up getting injured anyway. It's possible that Wilcox is forcing Baldwin to be conservative or vanilla for fear of injuries etc. If that is the case, Wilcox will not be successful here either.

I hope I have answered your questions. I have been watching Cal football for nearly 50 years. I have been deeply involved in analyzing problems at Cal for a very long time. It took me a while, but recently I have concluded that coaching and administrative commitment are the 2 main problems that chronically plague the Cal football program. I do not feel I have the ability and insight to make specific comments on the administrative problems, but it is much cleared to me what goes on with the coaching.

I would like to see more passes/slants in short yardage situations. I'd like to see the run set up play action. I'd like to see more misdirection and more sophisticated blocking schemes with our OL. But all of that requires a well coordinated offense, something Cal has had before but does not now. Cal's offense is limited. They run a limited number of plays. Remember when the Cal defense would rarely blitz or do stunts or anything else creative under Dykes? Remember the result? Do you see how the Cal defense plays now? That is because they are well coordinated. When you listen to DeRuyter talk in interviews, he has specific ideas about how to approach each team. Baldwin says the same general things each time he's interviewed. It's the same damn interview no matter what. It's because the guy has no idea how to coach his team.

---

Thanks for those great answers

---

heartofthebear said:

---

drizzlybears brother said:

---

Thanks for those great answers

---

I am grateful that I was able to address some of your issues.

---

Pigskin Pete said:

---

Bear19 said:

---

Interesting how much better the offense performs with the season starters at QB, OL & RB all playing. Nikko R. emerging as a top receiver as well.

---

We're playiing against one of the most awful defensive teams in the country. This game is not an advertisement for "Keep Beau" like you desperately want it to be.

---

drizzlybears brother said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

drizzlybears brother said:

---

Thanks for those great answers

---

I am grateful that I was able to address some of your issues.

---

Well I appreciated your honest reply. You're the first to do so. I personally didn't find them persuasive, as I found them to be back filled rationalizations, but at least you took it seriously.

Regarding the reason Baldwin was retained you admitted you didn't know, which I suspect is true for all of us, but I think is fundamentally important to understand. It may be as simple as you surmise, but to assume it is as simple as that is self serving and allows us to proceed down whichever path of self deception we choose. That people haven't wanted to know this is a big shortcoming, it indicates they're more interested in their own take than on what's really going on.

---

Pigskin Pete said:

---

Bear19 said:

---

Interesting how much better the offense performs with the season starters at QB, OL & RB all playing. Nikko R. emerging as a top receiver as well.

---

We're playiing against one of the most awful defensive teams in the country. This game is not an advertisement for "Keep Beau" like you desperately want it to be.

---

heartofthebear said:

---

drizzlybears brother said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

drizzlybears brother said:

---

Thanks for those great answers

---

I am grateful that I was able to address some of your issues.

---

Well I appreciated your honest reply. You're the first to do so. I personally didn't find them persuasive, as I found them to be back filled rationalizations, but at least you took it seriously.

Regarding the reason Baldwin was retained you admitted you didn't know, which I suspect is true for all of us, but I think is fundamentally important to understand. It may be as simple as you surmise, but to assume it is as simple as that is self serving and allows us to proceed down whichever path of self deception we choose. That people haven't wanted to know this is a big shortcoming, it indicates they're more interested in their own take than on what's really going on.

---

I don't understand why you think folks don't want to know why Baldwin was retained. Fans always want to know the reasons for things. But most of the time the reasons are kept secret as if they are issues of national security rather than sports. The same goes for injuries etc.

You are confusing desire to know with ability to know.

Do you have any idea how any of us are supposed to know the answer?

---

drizzlybears brother said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

drizzlybears brother said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

drizzlybears brother said:

---

Thanks for those great answers

---

I am grateful that I was able to address some of your issues.

---

Well I appreciated your honest reply. You're the first to do so. I personally didn't find them persuasive, as I found them to be back filled rationalizations, but at least you took it seriously.

Regarding the reason Baldwin was retained you admitted you didn't know, which I suspect is true for all of us, but I think is fundamentally important to understand. It may be as simple as you surmise, but to assume it is as simple as that is self serving and allows us to proceed down whichever path of self deception we choose. That people haven't wanted to know this is a big shortcoming, it indicates they're more interested in their own take than on what's really going on.

---

I don't understand why you think folks don't want to know why Baldwin was retained. Fans always want to know the reasons for things. But most of the time the reasons are kept secret as if they are issues of national security rather than sports. The same goes for injuries etc.

You are confusing desire to know with ability to know.

Do you have any idea how any of us are supposed to know the answer?

---

I haven't heard it being asked.

---

heartofthebear said:

---

drizzlybears brother said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

drizzlybears brother said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

drizzlybears brother said:

---

Thanks for those great answers

---

I am grateful that I was able to address some of your issues.

---

Well I appreciated your honest reply. You're the first to do so. I personally didn't find them persuasive, as I found them to be back filled rationalizations, but at least you took it seriously.

Regarding the reason Baldwin was retained you admitted you didn't know, which I suspect is true for all of us, but I think is fundamentally important to understand. It may be as simple as you surmise, but to assume it is as simple as that is self serving and allows us to proceed down whichever path of self deception we choose. That people haven't wanted to know this is a big shortcoming, it indicates they're more interested in their own take than on what's really going on.

---

I don't understand why you think folks don't want to know why Baldwin was retained. Fans always want to know the reasons for things. But most of the time the reasons are kept secret as if they are issues of national security rather than sports. The same goes for injuries etc.

You are confusing desire to know with ability to know.

Do you have any idea how any of us are supposed to know the answer?

---

I haven't heard it being asked.

---

The question has been implied during many discussions and threads over the last year. I am sure it was specifically asked at the time when Wilcox made his staffing adjustments following the end of last season, but it never needed to be asked. Folks were incredulous.

---

Bobodeluxe said:

---

Methinks Beau will be back.

75%

---

Bobodeluxe said:

---

Methinks Beau will be back.

75%

---

Bear19 said:

---

Pigskin Pete said:

---

Bear19 said:

---

Interesting how much better the offense performs with the season starters at QB, OL & RB all playing. Nikko R. emerging as a top receiver as well.

---

We're playiing against one of the most awful defensive teams in the country. This game is not an advertisement for "Keep Beau" like you desperately want it to be.

---

I was critical of Baldwin earlier in the season, after Garbers went down. I took the position that Modster should have played better.

However, since Garbers' return as well as the return of some key OL players, the offense has played remarkably better. This is simply a fact imo. I now believe that despite the protestations of the Baldwin haters on BI, his return next year is virtually assured.

And it's fun to poke the Baldwin Haters in the ribs when the offense performs well. Which it has been doing.

---

ducky23 said:

---

HoopDreams said:

---

there are several types of offenses

in the modern college era, I think there are only two that Cal should consider ... the spread and the rpo

both somewhat equalize the advantages of the powerhouse programs that can load up on 4 and 5 star OL, big, fast, talented WRs and RBs, and it puts another offensive threat in the line up ... the QB

i just don't think Cal can return to a pure pro offense that we had with Rodgers

Baldwin is primarily a rpo coach

if we think rpo is best for cal, then I think we should keep him. it will also be better for our pocketbook, as we can't afford the binge and purge approach. it's obvious that cal sports are short on funds across the board

if we think spread is best, I'm good with that as I think it's the superior college offense. in that case, we might be better with a change.

if we want to go to a pro set, or something else, I think we should abandon all hope, although a very mobile pro style QB may be ok

---

I think deciding what type of offense cal should run is a much more interesting question than any of the questions posed by the OP. (Very quickly, when I evaluate an OC I look at 1. Recruiting (poor) 2. Development (fair) 3. Play calling (poor - way too predictable 4. Play design (poor - lack of imagination, poor route concepts).

Whether Baldwin should go is not interesting to me since just based on results, the decision should be clear.

What type of offense cal should run in the long run is much more interesting.

I think spread is out of the question just because it's completely incompatible with wilcox's offense and how he wants to play

RPO relies on recruiting skilled playmakers and a mobile QB. I don't believe that this is necessarily the way cal wants to go in the long run just because of the inherent disadvantages cal has in recruiting those types of players. However, in the short run, we are probably stuck running RPO since that is best suited for garbers.

But in my opinion, I think running a traditional pro style is best for cal in the long run. First, it's the most compatible with how Wilcox wants to play. Second, I think it's easier to recruit OLine and TE's than skilled playmakers. I think OLineman and TE generally have better grades (nothing to do with race - cal has had plenty of very bright non white TE's and olineman).

Also I think we can develop olineman whereas skilled players rely more on god given ability. Wisconsin has done just fine recruiting 3-4 star olineman and developing them.

Lastly, I'm a strong believer in going against trends. When cfb is trending towards more spread/rpo offendes, you gain an advantage by going the opposite direction. For instance, most cfb defenses are going more nickel and dime and going lighter in their back 7. Well, why not run a more heavy offense to take advantage. Unfortunately harbaugh figured this out. No reason we can't replicate.

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Bobodeluxe said:

---

Methinks Beau will be back.

75%

---

If this is the way Baldwin calls plays next year, I don't mind him coming back.
But I will never understand why it took so long.

---

southseasbear said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

...But the days of us recruiting guys like djax or best are probably over.

---

Why?

---

Cal84 said:

---

southseasbear said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

...But the days of us recruiting guys like djax or best are probably over.

---

Why?

---

These days we aren't just competing against USC/Oregon/Washington for 5 star Cali recruits. Those kids now get offers from 'Bama. LSU, Georgia, etc. Najee Harris was the top HS RB in the country, came from the Bay Area and we didn't get a sniff from him. California is what Texas was 10 years ago - the place everyone goes to poach HS recruits because the home state teams are in a "recession". For example for the 2020 class, of the top 10 Cali HS players, 1 is committed to a P12 school. 3 are committed to SEC schools, one to Clemson and one to tOSU (the rest uncommitted).

People who think we can just try harder and land a slug of 4 & 5 stars because they are native Californians are not realistic. If and when we get a couple of 10 win seasons and a conference championship, we can recruit on par with the Oregons & Washingtons - which is to say we get the leftovers after Bama/Clemson/tOSU get their picks.

That doesn't mean it will be that way forever. But for right now, progress means another full (25 recruits) class of 3 stars, an offensive unit that returns all its starters next year and has its two best players (Garbers and Brown) for 2 years. Get lucky with a lack of injuries and 9 wins next season could be in the cards.

---

ducky23 said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Bobodeluxe said:

---

Methinks Beau will be back.

75%

---

If this is the way Baldwin calls plays next year, I don't mind him coming back.
But I will never understand why it took so long.

---

Amazing. I just learned something from watching today. Downfield passing can actually open up the run game. Who knew?

Now if someone tells Baldwin how to properly use play action, maybe just maybe we have something.

I don't know why it's taken Baldwin this long to figure out how to competently call a game. It's taken this season to figure out you can actually go under center and qb sneak on short yardage.

I will give credit for one un-Baldwin like call. About 5 mins left in game, desperately need a first down. 3rd and 2. What's this? Play action that sucks in the linebackers and allows an easy running lane for garbers. That's a good call.

Also liked seeing more passing on running downs. And a little more run play diversity.

When the opposing team has to guess when you're going to run (and has to account for play action or qb keepers) it sure makes things a little easier. Only took till the end of the season.

I'm still in favor of getting rid of Baldwin. However, at least you can see that he's learning (albeit slowly).

---

drizzlybears brother said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Bobodeluxe said:

---

Methinks Beau will be back.

75%

---

If this is the way Baldwin calls plays next year, I don't mind him coming back.
But I will never understand why it took so long.

---

Amazing. I just learned something from watching today. Downfield passing can actually open up the run game. Who knew?

Now if someone tells Baldwin how to properly use play action, maybe just maybe we have something.

I don't know why it's taken Baldwin this long to figure out how to competently call a game. It's taken this season to figure out you can actually go under center and qb sneak on short yardage.

I will give credit for one un-Baldwin like call. About 5 mins left in game, desperately need a first down. 3rd and 2. What's this? Play action that sucks in the linebackers and allows an easy running lane for garbers. That's a good call.

Also liked seeing more passing on running downs. And a little more run play diversity.

When the opposing team has to guess when you're going to run (and has to account for play action or qb keepers) it sure makes things a little easier. Only took till the end of the season.

I'm still in favor of getting rid of Baldwin. However, at least you can see that he's learning (albeit slowly).

---

This is going to sound harsh, and that's not my intention. You're just the most recent example of this almost ubiquitous type of comment on this type of forum, and really it's just quintessential fandom, but unless you've actually been employed at this in some comparable manner, there's not a single line you've written in this post where Baldwin doesn't have exponentially more understanding than you do.

---

HoopDreams said:

---

there are several types of offenses

in the modern college era, I think there are only two that Cal should consider ... the spread and the rpo

both somewhat equalize the advantages of the powerhouse programs that can load up on 4 and 5 star OL, big, fast, talented WRs and RBs, and it puts another offensive threat in the line up ... the QB

i just don't think Cal can return to a pure pro offense that we had with Rodgers

Baldwin is primarily a rpo coach

if we think rpo is best for cal, then I think we should keep him. it will also be better for our pocketbook, as we can't afford the binge and purge approach. it's obvious that cal sports are short on funds across the board

if we think spread is best, I'm good with that as I think it's the superior college offense. in that case, we might be better with a change.

if we want to go to a pro set, or something else, I think we should abandon all hope, although a very mobile pro style QB may be ok

---

ducky23 said:

---

drizzlybears brother said:

---

ducky23 said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Bobodeluxe said:

---

Methinks Beau will be back.

75%

---

If this is the way Baldwin calls plays next year, I don't mind him coming back.
But I will never understand why it took so long.

---

Amazing. I just learned something from watching today. Downfield passing can actually open up the run game. Who knew?

Now if someone tells Baldwin how to properly use play action, maybe just maybe we have something.

I don't know why it's taken Baldwin this long to figure out how to competently call a game. It's taken this season to figure out you can actually go under center and qb sneak on short yardage.

I will give credit for one un-Baldwin like call. About 5 mins left in game, desperately need a first down. 3rd and 2. What's this? Play action that sucks in the linebackers and allows an easy running lane for garbers. That's a good call.

Also liked seeing more passing on running downs. And a little more run play diversity.

When the opposing team has to guess when you're going to run (and has to account for play action or qb keepers) it sure makes things a little easier. Only took till the end of the season.

I'm still in favor of getting rid of Baldwin. However, at least you can see that he's learning (albeit slowly).

---

This is going to sound harsh, and that's not my intention. You're just the most recent example of this almost ubiquitous type of comment on this type of forum, and really it's just quintessential fandom, but unless you've actually been employed at this in some comparable manner, there's not a single line you've written in this post where Baldwin doesn't have exponentially more understanding than you do.

---

Sure. And of course no one here is implying they are smarter than Baldwin. But here's just one example where fans sometimes do know better

First couple years, cal had been awful on 3rd and 1 because Baldwin kept insisting on running out of shotgun. Fans have been complaining about that since year 1

Only this year, we've run more qb sneaks under center. And have made it every single time (to my knowledge). This is a switch that should have been made immediately. It's inexcusable it's taken this long to change that philosophy.

Yes, no one on this board knows 1/1000th as Baldwin. Doesn't mean that fans are always wrong. And just because Baldwin knows more than everyone here, doesn't mean he should be retained. That sounds like an awful reason to keep an OC.

---

ducky23 said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

Bobodeluxe said:

---

Methinks Beau will be back.

75%

---

If this is the way Baldwin calls plays next year, I don't mind him coming back.
But I will never understand why it took so long.

---

Amazing. I just learned something from watching today. Downfield passing can actually open up the run game. Who knew?

Now if someone tells Baldwin how to properly use play action, maybe just maybe we have something.

I don't know why it's taken Baldwin this long to figure out how to competently call a game. It's taken this season to figure out you can actually go under center and qb sneak on short yardage.

I will give credit for one un-Baldwin like call. About 5 mins left in game, desperately need a first down. 3rd and 2. What's this? Play action that sucks in the linebackers and allows an easy running lane for garbers. That's a good call.

Also liked seeing more passing on running downs. And a little more run play diversity.

When the opposing team has to guess when you're going to run (and has to account for play action or qb keepers) it sure makes things a little easier. Only took till the end of the season.

I'm still in favor of getting rid of Baldwin. However, at least you can see that he's learning (albeit slowly).

---

Bobodeluxe said:

---

Methinks Beau will be back.

75%

---

GBear4Life said:

---

There are better options out west than there were in 2003. Cal had arguably the second most talented roster in the Pac for the better part of 5 years or so. No reason to expect similar success on the field without similar success recruiting that kind of competitive personnel.

---