Overall, many posters, including me, had Cal going 7-5. Therefore, the Bears hit our predicted target. Based on how the 7-5 was achieved, it is still fair to go back and suggest it could have been better (or worse).
IMO, Cal would have exceeded the target had Garbers not gone down with an injury. Therefore, my biggest criticism was Wilcox's failure to find a #2 ready to play in case of injury. You simply do not go into a season without a competent #2 at the most important position on the team.
On the plus side, despite experiencing a "regression to the mean" pertaining to turnovers, the D held up well, especially the LB corps.
Special teams were a bit shaky. Hopefully, next season, Cal can find another "Doug Brien" from the high school ranks to come in and deliver better than the 65% FG success rate we saw this season.
Overall, I give the season a "meets expectations" evaluation. However, I would also suggest that the program is on notice that next year expectations will ramp up considerably due to the favorable "even year schedule" and the number of returnees. 9 wins? Why not?
IMO, Cal would have exceeded the target had Garbers not gone down with an injury. Therefore, my biggest criticism was Wilcox's failure to find a #2 ready to play in case of injury. You simply do not go into a season without a competent #2 at the most important position on the team.
On the plus side, despite experiencing a "regression to the mean" pertaining to turnovers, the D held up well, especially the LB corps.
Special teams were a bit shaky. Hopefully, next season, Cal can find another "Doug Brien" from the high school ranks to come in and deliver better than the 65% FG success rate we saw this season.
Overall, I give the season a "meets expectations" evaluation. However, I would also suggest that the program is on notice that next year expectations will ramp up considerably due to the favorable "even year schedule" and the number of returnees. 9 wins? Why not?