altacalifornia said:

---

It's Mike Sanford.

---

hmm ... the CAL OC job would be step up. and he is affordable

how good was Helfrich with recruiting?

I think BB would have turned out okay if we had a few more 4 stars with a 5 star or two sprinkled in...

If it is Sanford... his Utah State team lost their bowl game, but scored 41 points. They scored a lot of points against weaker opponents, not so much against better teams.

SadbutTrue999 said:

---

how good was Helfrich with recruiting?

I think BB would have turned out okay if we had a few more 4 stars with a 5 star or two sprinkled in...

---

If memory serves Correctly he was not very strong. There head coach now Crystabol is Much stronger with a long track record.

altacalifornia said:

---

It's Mike Sanford.

---

I hope so. He has been my choice for some time.

Im almost resigned to fact its gonna be Mike Sanford. hes gonna be a really good recruiter for sure. I hope we get 2014 Boise State offense instead of what he ran at Utah State this past season.

WavyBear said:

---

Im almost resigned to fact its gonna be Mike Sanford. hes gonna be a really good recruiter for sure. I hope we get 2014 Boise State offense instead of what he ran at Utah State this past season.

---

During his three year tenure as an offensive asst. coach at Stanford, the Cardinal averaged 34.2 points/game. I would happily take those results....

Here's a link to their stats...they played some tougher teams this year with expected offensive results...when they played teams at their level, seemed to be ok.

Utah State offense (Sanford)

whomever gets the job needs to come in with a plan/ capability to make the pieces we have work.

71Bear said:

---

WavyBear said:

---

Im almost resigned to fact its gonna be Mike Sanford. hes gonna be a really good recruiter for sure. I hope we get 2014 Boise State offense instead of what he ran at Utah State this past season.

---

During his three year tenure as an offensive asst. coach at Stanford, the Cardinal averaged 34.2 points/game. I would happily take those results....

---

sure. but he wasnt OC....

Big C said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

KoreAmBear said:

---

Uthaithani said:

---

AXLBear said:

---

Not impressed with helfrich as an OC. He's only had success when the HC was the prime offense mind. Chip Kelly, dirk koetter etc. Nice guy, good man, but underwhelming results

---

When your resume includes "OC of the 2019 Chicago Bears," that would make you the last person on earth that should be considered for an OC job. Which means he's probably already been hired by Wilcox

---

Well he was the prime offensive mind after Chip left and he still got Oregon to the national championship game. I think that's pretty good.

---

I'm still shaking my head about all this speculation. Maybe Kellen Moore, maybe. But, he's the only one I think of the NFL names mentioned has even a remote chance of coming here. "How you gonna keep 'im down on the farm (no pun intended), after he's seen Paree?"

I still think it's gonna be an up-and-comer from MWC or Sky team or the equiv. A name we haven't considered. Something like that.

Don't forget, we're not super-competitive on pay, we're more demanding on grades, and JW is likely to look for a balanced, clock-eating O.

---

Wilcox did say he was surprised there was so much interest in the job.

---

Isn't that something coaches say to the media? Didn't Knowlton say that last March regarding hiring a basketball coach?

---

I think Knowlton said "I know it's the same day since we let go of Wyking, but I really got a home run hire for everyone! He coached in the SEC!!! You will be very proud of me."

going4roses said:

---

whomever gets the job needs to come in with a plan/ capability to make the pieces we have work.

---

Whats really scares me is watching Jordan Love under Sanford vs under Yost. Love regressed significantly. I think they lost some OL and Wrs. not really sure, but the offense looked like the second coming of Chip Kelly at Oregon last year. this year did not look to have the same level of execution. just super fast.

WavyBear said:

---

71Bear said:

---

WavyBear said:

---

Im almost resigned to fact its gonna be Mike Sanford. hes gonna be a really good recruiter for sure. I hope we get 2014 Boise State offense instead of what he ran at Utah State this past season.

---

During his three year tenure as an offensive asst. coach at Stanford, the Cardinal averaged 34.2 points/game. I would happily take those results....

---

sure. but he wasnt OC....

---

True. However, he had significant input into the game plan (his focus was on the run game) and was their recruiting coordinator (and a damn good one, I might add).

71Bear said:

---

WavyBear said:

---

71Bear said:

---

WavyBear said:

---

Im almost resigned to fact its gonna be Mike Sanford. hes gonna be a really good recruiter for sure. I hope we get 2014 Boise State offense instead of what he ran at Utah State this past season.

---

During his three year tenure as an offensive asst. coach at Stanford, the Cardinal averaged 34.2 points/game. I would happily take those results....

---

sure. but he wasnt OC....

---

True. However, he had significant input into the game plan (his focus was on the run game) and was their recruiting coordinator (and a damn good one, I might add).

---

Mike Bloomgren was Run Game Coordinator. Ill give Sanford the recruiting bit without looking it up. but im not ready to give Sanford much credit on the offense game plan with a staff of David Shaw, Mike Bloomgren and Pep Hamilton. Maybe some credit in 2013. I said before. theres no denying his resume on paper. but how much of his resume has real substance im not sure. I mean he basically killed all momentum Brohm built at Western Kentucky in 2 years. ala Wyking Jones.

altacalifornia said:

---

It's Mike Sanford.

---

Welp, if the guy at Boston Market said so, it must be.

WavyBear said:

---

71Bear said:

---

WavyBear said:

---

71Bear said:

---

WavyBear said:

---

Im almost resigned to fact its gonna be Mike Sanford. hes gonna be a really good recruiter for sure. I hope we get 2014 Boise State offense instead of what he ran at Utah State this past season.

---

During his three year tenure as an offensive asst. coach at Stanford, the Cardinal averaged 34.2 points/game. I would happily take those results....

---

sure. but he wasnt OC....

---

True. However, he had significant input into the game plan (his focus was on the run game) and was their recruiting coordinator (and a damn good one, I might add).

---

Mike Bloomgren was Run Game Coordinator. Ill give Sanford the recruiting bit without looking it up. but im not ready to give Sanford much credit on the offense game plan with a staff of David Shaw, Mike Bloomgren and Pep Hamilton. Maybe some credit in 2013. I said before. theres no denying his resume on paper. but how much of his resume has real substance im not sure. I mean he basically killed all momentum Brohm built at Western Kentucky in 2 years. ala Wyking Jones.

---

I know Bloomgren was the run game coordinator. That is why I wrote that Sanford's focus was on the run game (he was the RB coach, Bloomgren was the OL coach). As for Western Ky., I really don't care, he is not a head coach candidate, he is an OC candidate. As we know, some guys are great coordinators but terrible head coaches.

Of course, this discussion could be moot because there is no guarantee he will get the job. I am hoping that he will but I certainly do not know if that will be the case.

Whoever the new OC is must be able to persuade Miller Moss, Terry, and Bowers to want to be part of his offense.

calumnus said:

---

Wilcox did say he was surprised there was so much interest in the job.

---

Yeah, but they're all currently high school coaches.

OaktownBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

golden sloth said:

---

Yea, based on those comments, it seems as though Wilcox had more influence on the offense than I originally thought.

---

Yes.
And that could explain why Baldwin left and it also is a bit concerning.
If Wilcox wants to limit explosiveness because of the possibility of scoring too fast for his defense, then I think we are going to end up with the same problems of folks loading the box against us.

I really think the 49ers are good example of how success is achieved. They don't pigeonhole themselves by micromanaging their options. They win a whole bunch of ways. Cal needs to be willing to win defensively and offensively. And they need to coach that ability into their players.

We need an OC that can do ball control for 70% of the play but then knows when to break it open downfield. The old Seattle Seahawks were a good example. When Wilson first emerged, he did not have that impressive passing numbers, except one, yards per pass. The Seahawk offense would underwhelm you until suddenly they had a 50 yard touchdown to Baldwin or a 60 yard pass downfield to Golden Tate.

With Polk, Remigio and now Hunter, we will have the personnel to engage in this type of offense. There is no reason why Cal can't score 30 points/gm, this way, especially with a healthy Garbers arm and shoulder. But if Wilcox doesn't like that, then it won't happen and we will be back to winning on 24 point games and losing on 20 point games.

Keep in mind, our defense next season is not going to be holding teams under 20 points as often as in the past. We will be young in the back 7. Even if several players emerge, they won't be maximizing their abilities until well into the season.

---

You guys are extrapolating his words not only to the breaking point but in direct contradiction to what he said.

All he said was that we have a program philosophy. He didn't say he runs the offense or interferes. He definitely didn't say that he wants to limit explosiveness. Putting an "if" in front of that statement doesn't make it better.

A program philosophy means he knows to a certain extent what offense he wants to run and he gets a guy who runs that offense. That is every head coach. There is zero in here that implies that he interfered with Baldwin.

In talking about wide receivers he specifically talked about needing to get guys that can get down the field. He said absolutely nothing about limiting explosiveness.

I'm sorry, but people often read these threads, don't watch the actual video, and assume what people talk about was actually said. Not only is none of this in anything he said, it is contradicted in the video.

---

The above video isn't the only video where Wilcox has referred to game strategy or philosophy. In the past he has mentioned the strategy of shortening the game by limiting possessions. That's how we won some of our games. It's also how we lost to Oregon St. So, if that is his philosophy, I don't agree with it. In fact, I don't agree with any philosophy that is stubbornly adhered to regardless of the dynamics of that particular game. That is also what happened against OSU. I was at that game, and it really sucked. It was also the game that gave first hand knowledge that Baldwin had to go. But, if he was trying to exercise Wilcox's philosophy of limiting possessions, then that is a concern. And yes the if matters. That is why it is part of the english language. And it is not my problem if folks don't watch the video or don't read each word carefully.

---

Okay, IF you are proposing an offense that maximizes interceptions and fumbles and has our running backs run backwards, I drastically disagree with you. Since you are not, and since Wilcox isn't doing anything like what you are saying you would disagree with, I won't worry about it.

That isn't why we lost the OSU game. Going into the OSU game, in the 6+ quarters since Garbers went down we were 22 for 48 passing for 203 yards, 3 interceptions and had scored 17 points. Our QB play had been terrible. Against OSU we were 14-33 passing for 175 yards and an interception. If you think opening up the offense in that situation is the right way to go, you must have loved Baldwin's performance in the CheezIt bowl. When your pass offense, and specifically quarterback play is inept, and you have a good defense going up against a mediocre offense, you shorten the game. That is flat out obvious situational strategy. You uglify the game. I don't know who looks at the pass offense we had at the time and says yeah, I wants me some more of that. Turn that baby loose.

In context, his statements have been clear that he is running a ball control offense that picks its shots down the field vs. an uptempo score as fast as you can offense. It doesn't mean he doesn't want to score. Most ball control offenses like to pressure down field to keep men out of the box and he has specifically stated in this video he needs receivers who can get down the field.

Feel free to link video where Wilcox says he doesn't want to stretch the field or have any chunk plays. Otherwise, IF you choose to worry about him interfering in the offense based on comments that don't say that and IF you choose to worry about him running an offense he doesn't run, I will choose to correct your characterization in both points.

---

The bowl game tells me Wilcox isn't putting pressure on the OC to uglify the game. Any OC will have the freedom to take big shots downfield, run every down, or anything in between. And with a better offensive coaching staff and better personnel, the offense will look much better in 2020 than it has in recent years.

And people need to read between the lines. When Wilcox makes a point to keep repeating how great Baldwin was and how much he'll be missed, that doesn't actually mean Wilcox didn't nudge him out. Nothing in Wilcox's body language tells me he is the slightest bit unhappy to be looking for a new OC. His constant repetition about how great Baldwin was just means Wilcox understands politics.

Sanford seems appealing and I imagine we'd have strong interest. I like that he has experience in places like Stanford, Yale and Notre Dame too...

As an OC, yards/play:

2014 (BSU) - 6.53 (19th FBS)
2015 (ND) - 7.02 (6th FBS)
2016 (ND) - 6.07 (43rd FBS)
2019 (US) - 5.81 (69th FBS)

3rd down conversions %:

2014 (BSU) - 44.39 (33rd FBS)
2015 (ND) - 42.50 (39th FBS)
2016 (ND) - 40.48 (65th FBS)
2019 (US) - 42.64 (37th FBS)

Turnovers:

2014 (BSU) - 24 (87th FBS)
2015 (ND) - 20 (61st FBS)
2016 (ND) - 18 (47th FBS)
2019 (US) - 26 (122nd FBS)

Scoring:

2014 (BSU) - 39.7 (9th FBS)
2015 (ND) - 34.2 (34th FBS)
2016 (ND) - 30.9 (53rd FBS)
2019 (US) - 29.2 (63rd FBS)

The 29+ PPG low (this year) was likely hampered by the many turnovers. Also, according to Phil Steele, Utah State was the 123rd least experienced team in 2019.

Would seem to be a good hire.

Cal89 said:

---

Sanford seems appealing and I imagine we'd have strong interest. I like that he has experience in places like Stanford, Yale and Notre Dame too...

As an OC, yards/play:

2014 (BSU) - 6.53 (19th FBS)
2015 (ND) - 7.02 (6th FBS)
2016 (ND) - 6.07 (43rd FBS)
2019 (US) - 5.81 (69th FBS)

3rd down conversions %:

2014 (BSU) - 44.39 (33rd FBS)
2015 (ND) - 42.50 (39th FBS)
2016 (ND) - 40.48 (65th FBS)
2019 (US) - 42.64 (37th FBS)

Turnovers:

2014 (BSU) - 24 (87th FBS)
2015 (ND) - 20 (61st FBS)
2016 (ND) - 18 (47th FBS)
2019 (US) - 26 (122nd FBS)

Scoring:

2014 (BSU) - 39.7 (9th FBS)
2015 (ND) - 34.2 (34th FBS)
2016 (ND) - 30.9 (53rd FBS)
2019 (US) - 29.2 (63rd FBS)

The 29+ PPG low (this year) was likely hampered by the many turnovers. Also, according to Phil Steele, Utah State was the 123rd least experienced team in 2019.

Would seem to be a good hire.

---

I think his record is fairly pedestrian and only the one year at Notre Dame stands out. Not my preference.

Mr. Sandman said:

---

Cal89 said:

---

Sanford seems appealing and I imagine we'd have strong interest. I like that he has experience in places like Stanford, Yale and Notre Dame too...

As an OC, yards/play:

2014 (BSU) - 6.53 (19th FBS)
2015 (ND) - 7.02 (6th FBS)
2016 (ND) - 6.07 (43rd FBS)
2019 (US) - 5.81 (69th FBS)

3rd down conversions %:

2014 (BSU) - 44.39 (33rd FBS)
2015 (ND) - 42.50 (39th FBS)
2016 (ND) - 40.48 (65th FBS)
2019 (US) - 42.64 (37th FBS)

Turnovers:

2014 (BSU) - 24 (87th FBS)
2015 (ND) - 20 (61st FBS)
2016 (ND) - 18 (47th FBS)
2019 (US) - 26 (122nd FBS)

Scoring:

2014 (BSU) - 39.7 (9th FBS)
2015 (ND) - 34.2 (34th FBS)
2016 (ND) - 30.9 (53rd FBS)
2019 (US) - 29.2 (63rd FBS)

The 29+ PPG low (this year) was likely hampered by the many turnovers. Also, according to Phil Steele, Utah State was the 123rd least experienced team in 2019.

Would seem to be a good hire.

---

I think his record is fairly pedestrian and only the one year at Notre Dame stands out. Not my preference.

---

My preference might be more of an unknown, up-and-comer type. I can see the appeal with Sanford though. If he recruit and we average 30+ PPG, with a JW D, we'll be in contention for the North on a regular basis...

Sanford was terrible at WKU and absolutely destroyed Jordan Love at Utah State

Would rather have Baldwin back.

Yost was far superior at USU, his Mizzou offenses were amazing.

Sanford had McCaffrey at RB the 2 years he was OC at Furd. A blind monkey could successfully OC with that RB talent and the talent they had on the OL.

Cal89 said:

---

Sanford seems appealing and I imagine we'd have strong interest. I like that he has experience in places like Stanford, Yale and Notre Dame too...

As an OC, yards/play:

2014 (BSU) - 6.53 (19th FBS)
2015 (ND) - 7.02 (6th FBS)
2016 (ND) - 6.07 (43rd FBS)
2019 (US) - 5.81 (69th FBS)

3rd down conversions %:

2014 (BSU) - 44.39 (33rd FBS)
2015 (ND) - 42.50 (39th FBS)
2016 (ND) - 40.48 (65th FBS)
2019 (US) - 42.64 (37th FBS)

Turnovers:

2014 (BSU) - 24 (87th FBS)
2015 (ND) - 20 (61st FBS)
2016 (ND) - 18 (47th FBS)
2019 (US) - 26 (122nd FBS)

Scoring:

2014 (BSU) - 39.7 (9th FBS)
2015 (ND) - 34.2 (34th FBS)
2016 (ND) - 30.9 (53rd FBS)
2019 (US) - 29.2 (63rd FBS)

The 29+ PPG low (this year) was likely hampered by the many turnovers. Also, according to Phil Steele, Utah State was the 123rd least experienced team in 2019.

Would seem to be a good hire.

---

No, just no.

First, his one season as OC at BSU was under Harsin, who was de facto OC and playcaller. I'm not inclined to see those stats as indicative of Sanford when he was basically assistant offensive coordinator. Not surprisingly, once Sanford got out of Harsin's shadow and had control of the offense (either as HC himself, or as OC under defensive HCs) his own offense emerges and it looks nothing like Boise State. In fact it looks a lot like Baldwin's offense, but lighter and more pass happy -- and none of those three attributes are positi

Forget YPP, 3rd Down % and Turnovers. While those metrics aren't completely irrelevant, scoring PPG already incorporates every subordinate aspect of offense including those other three metrics. If a coach has a poor YPP but great PPG, I don't care about the poor YPP. Conversely if a coach has a great YPP but poor PPG, I don't care about the great YPP. Scoring is what matters most, in conjunction with the temperament of the offense.

Let's take a close look at Sanford's offenses post-Harsin

Sanford's two year stint at ND was uneven. Their 2015 offense was a marginal improvement on the 2014 pre-Sanford offense (34.2 PPG, +1.4 over 2014) but then in Sanford's second season, 2016, the offense took big step back (30.9 PPG, -3.3 from 2015) which was surprising because they returned a huge amount of offensive production from 2015. When Sanford left ND to be HC at Western Kentucky, ND also lost their star QB DeShone Kizer who was an NFL early entrant. The replacement for Kizer was the mediocre Brandon Wimbush, but now without Sanford their offense stepped back up to 34.2 PPG again.

In two seasons at WKU, Sanford's offenses averaged a total of 23.4 PPG -- and that's while playing schedules that were among the very worst in FBS. They averaged 2.0 yards per carry and his QBs were sacked 48 times in 2017 while scoring 25.5 PPG. Their offense was even worse in Sanford's second year, at 21.1 PPG.

Now we have Utah State. When Sanford arrived they were coming off a 2018 season wherein they were #2 in FBS in scoring at 47.5 PPG. Sanford led the 2019 offense off a cliff, dropping them to 29.2 PPG. QB Jordan Love regressed big time.

Your analysis just glosses over anything problematic. The trajectory of his ND stint was not good. His WKU offenses (which you didn't even include, choosing to limit the results to just "OC" with no justification for it) were truly awful and his USU offense was a gigantic step down from the previous year.

I hope Wilcox knows we can do better

Cave Bear said:

---

Cal89 said:

---

Sanford seems appealing and I imagine we'd have strong interest. I like that he has experience in places like Stanford, Yale and Notre Dame too...

As an OC, yards/play:

2014 (BSU) - 6.53 (19th FBS)
2015 (ND) - 7.02 (6th FBS)
2016 (ND) - 6.07 (43rd FBS)
2019 (US) - 5.81 (69th FBS)

3rd down conversions %:

2014 (BSU) - 44.39 (33rd FBS)
2015 (ND) - 42.50 (39th FBS)
2016 (ND) - 40.48 (65th FBS)
2019 (US) - 42.64 (37th FBS)

Turnovers:

2014 (BSU) - 24 (87th FBS)
2015 (ND) - 20 (61st FBS)
2016 (ND) - 18 (47th FBS)
2019 (US) - 26 (122nd FBS)

Scoring:

2014 (BSU) - 39.7 (9th FBS)
2015 (ND) - 34.2 (34th FBS)
2016 (ND) - 30.9 (53rd FBS)
2019 (US) - 29.2 (63rd FBS)

The 29+ PPG low (this year) was likely hampered by the many turnovers. Also, according to Phil Steele, Utah State was the 123rd least experienced team in 2019.

Would seem to be a good hire.

---

No, just no.

First, his one season as OC at BSU was under Harsin, who was de facto OC and playcaller. I'm not inclined to see those stats as indicative of Sanford when he was basically assistant offensive coordinator. Not surprisingly, once Sanford got out of Harsin's shadow and had control of the offense (either as HC himself, or as OC under defensive HCs) his own offense emerges and it looks nothing like Boise State. In fact it looks a lot like Baldwin's offense, but lighter and more pass happy -- and none of those three attributes are positi

Forget YPP, 3rd Down % and Turnovers. While those metrics aren't completely irrelevant, scoring PPG already incorporates every subordinate aspect of offense including those other three metrics. If a coach has a poor YPP but great PPG, I don't care about the poor YPP. Conversely if a coach has a great YPP but poor PPG, I don't care about the great YPP. Scoring is what matters most, in conjunction with the temperament of the offense.

Let's take a close look at Sanford's offenses post-Harsin

Sanford's two year stint at ND was uneven. Their 2015 offense was a marginal improvement on the 2014 pre-Sanford offense (34.2 PPG, +1.4 over 2014) but then in Sanford's second season, 2016, the offense took big step back (30.9 PPG, -3.3 from 2015) which was surprising because they returned a huge amount of offensive production from 2015. When Sanford left ND to be HC at Western Kentucky, ND also lost their star QB DeShone Kizer who was an NFL early entrant. The replacement for Kizer was the mediocre Brandon Wimbush, but now without Sanford their offense stepped back up to 32.4 PPG again.

In two seasons at WKU, Sanford's offenses averaged a total of 23.4 PPG -- and that's while playing schedules that were among the very worst in FBS. They averaged 2.0 yards per carry and his QBs were sacked 48 times in 2017 while scoring 25.5 PPG. Their offense was even worse in Sanford's second year, at 21.1 PPG.

Now we have Utah State. When Sanford arrived they were coming off a 2018 season wherein they were #2 in FBS in scoring at 47.5 PPG. Sanford led the 2019 offense off a cliff, dropping them to 29.2 PPG. QB Jordan Love regressed big time.

Your analysis just glosses over anything problematic. The trajectory of his ND stint was not good. His WKU offenses (which you didn't even include, choosing to limit the results to just "OC" with no justification for it) were truly awful and his USU offense was a gigantic step down from the previous year.

I hope Wilcox knows we can do better

---

Dude, I simply provided what many would find to be relevant offensive metrics to gauge offensive success, for when he was OC by title; with pretty much zero in the way of analysis. Sanford ticks boxes that likely have him being considered, possibly strongly...

I have long said on this forum that PPG is what matters most because it's points that decides who wins.

I agree that his most recent stint at Utah State, that notable decline in offensive production, with a highly acclaimed junior QB, is concerning.

Cave Bear said:

---

Cal89 said:

---

Sanford seems appealing and I imagine we'd have strong interest. I like that he has experience in places like Stanford, Yale and Notre Dame too...

As an OC, yards/play:

2014 (BSU) - 6.53 (19th FBS)
2015 (ND) - 7.02 (6th FBS)
2016 (ND) - 6.07 (43rd FBS)
2019 (US) - 5.81 (69th FBS)

3rd down conversions %:

2014 (BSU) - 44.39 (33rd FBS)
2015 (ND) - 42.50 (39th FBS)
2016 (ND) - 40.48 (65th FBS)
2019 (US) - 42.64 (37th FBS)

Turnovers:

2014 (BSU) - 24 (87th FBS)
2015 (ND) - 20 (61st FBS)
2016 (ND) - 18 (47th FBS)
2019 (US) - 26 (122nd FBS)

Scoring:

2014 (BSU) - 39.7 (9th FBS)
2015 (ND) - 34.2 (34th FBS)
2016 (ND) - 30.9 (53rd FBS)
2019 (US) - 29.2 (63rd FBS)

The 29+ PPG low (this year) was likely hampered by the many turnovers. Also, according to Phil Steele, Utah State was the 123rd least experienced team in 2019.

Would seem to be a good hire.

---

No, just no.

First, his one season as OC at BSU was under Harsin, who was de facto OC and playcaller. I'm not inclined to see those stats as indicative of Sanford when he was basically assistant offensive coordinator. Not surprisingly, once Sanford got out of Harsin's shadow and had control of the offense (either as HC himself, or as OC under defensive HCs) his own offense emerges and it looks nothing like Boise State. In fact it looks a lot like Baldwin's offense, but lighter and more pass happy -- and none of those three attributes are positi

Forget YPP, 3rd Down % and Turnovers. While those metrics aren't completely irrelevant, scoring PPG already incorporates every subordinate aspect of offense including those other three metrics. If a coach has a poor YPP but great PPG, I don't care about the poor YPP. Conversely if a coach has a great YPP but poor PPG, I don't care about the great YPP. Scoring is what matters most, in conjunction with the temperament of the offense.

Let's take a close look at Sanford's offenses post-Harsin

Sanford's two year stint at ND was uneven. Their 2015 offense was a marginal improvement on the 2014 pre-Sanford offense (34.2 PPG, +1.4 over 2014) but then in Sanford's second season, 2016, the offense took big step back (30.9 PPG, -3.3 from 2015) which was surprising because they returned a huge amount of offensive production from 2015. When Sanford left ND to be HC at Western Kentucky, ND also lost their star QB DeShone Kizer who was an NFL early entrant. The replacement for Kizer was the mediocre Brandon Wimbush, but now without Sanford their offense stepped back up to 32.4 PPG again.

In two seasons at WKU, Sanford's offenses averaged a total of 23.4 PPG -- and that's while playing schedules that were among the very worst in FBS. They averaged 2.0 yards per carry and his QBs were sacked 48 times in 2017 while scoring 25.5 PPG. Their offense was even worse in Sanford's second year, at 21.1 PPG.

Now we have Utah State. When Sanford arrived they were coming off a 2018 season wherein they were #2 in FBS in scoring at 47.5 PPG. Sanford led the 2019 offense off a cliff, dropping them to 29.2 PPG. QB Jordan Love regressed big time.

Your analysis just glosses over anything problematic. The trajectory of his ND stint was not good. His WKU offenses (which you didn't even include, choosing to limit the results to just "OC" with no justification for it) were truly awful and his USU offense was a gigantic step down from the previous year.

I hope Wilcox knows we can do better

---

Thank you. I'm not even sure he ever called plays until his 2nd season at Western Kentucky, Junior Adams was calling plays in 2017. Boise State is Harsins Offense. Kelly or Mike Dendrock called played at Notre Dame. And the Utah State offense Regressed big time under Sanford. Jordan Love was Jared Goff under Sean McVay with David Yost and now looks like Jared Goff under Jeff Fisher. And that's not an exaggeration.

Oh and after Sanford was fired at Western Kentucky, Clay Heltons brother Tyson Helton, who was a first time head coach, won 9 games this year.

Still waiting!

71Bear said:

---

altacalifornia said:

---

It's Mike Sanford.

---

I hope so. He has been my choice for some time.

---

I certainly think this is possible. I do not share your optimism however. But I do think Wilcox has earned some trust and will be open minded in regards to who he chooses. But he is down my list a bit but I do not know how many folks I would like are really candidates. JW says there has been a lot of interest. But who is interested is the key.

I am a fan of Brian Lindgren at OSU. I think he fits very well. But apparently he renewed at OSU. Luke warm on Helfrich. Intrigued by Kellen Moore but he may be in demand elsewhere and be a bit too pricey. Lots of good candidates if you want a more open spread type offense, or even a tempo offense. JW wants neither IMO. So that limits the pool a bit. I have seen Matt Canada's name as well.

But if it is Mike Sanford I will be open minded. You can be a good OC and a poor HC. Happens all the time. But his OC resume is nothing special IMO. He was once a hot commodity and now not so much.

Cave Bear said:

---

No, just no.

First, his one season as OC at BSU was under Harsin, who was de facto OC and playcaller. I'm not inclined to see those stats as indicative of Sanford when he was basically assistant offensive coordinator. Not surprisingly, once Sanford got out of Harsin's shadow and had control of the offense (either as HC himself, or as OC under defensive HCs) his own offense emerges and it looks nothing like Boise State. In fact it looks a lot like Baldwin's offense, but lighter and more pass happy -- and none of those three attributes are positi

Forget YPP, 3rd Down % and Turnovers. While those metrics aren't completely irrelevant, scoring PPG already incorporates every subordinate aspect of offense including those other three metrics. If a coach has a poor YPP but great PPG, I don't care about the poor YPP. Conversely if a coach has a great YPP but poor PPG, I don't care about the great YPP. Scoring is what matters most, in conjunction with the temperament of the offense.

Let's take a close look at Sanford's offenses post-Harsin

Sanford's two year stint at ND was uneven. Their 2015 offense was a marginal improvement on the 2014 pre-Sanford offense (34.2 PPG, +1.4 over 2014) but then in Sanford's second season, 2016, the offense took big step back (30.9 PPG, -3.3 from 2015) which was surprising because they returned a huge amount of offensive production from 2015. When Sanford left ND to be HC at Western Kentucky, ND also lost their star QB DeShone Kizer who was an NFL early entrant. The replacement for Kizer was the mediocre Brandon Wimbush, but now without Sanford their offense stepped back up to 32.4 PPG again.

In two seasons at WKU, Sanford's offenses averaged a total of 23.4 PPG -- and that's while playing schedules that were among the very worst in FBS. They averaged 2.0 yards per carry and his QBs were sacked 48 times in 2017 while scoring 25.5 PPG. Their offense was even worse in Sanford's second year, at 21.1 PPG.

Now we have Utah State. When Sanford arrived they were coming off a 2018 season wherein they were #2 in FBS in scoring at 47.5 PPG. Sanford led the 2019 offense off a cliff, dropping them to 29.2 PPG. QB Jordan Love regressed big time.

Your analysis just glosses over anything problematic. The trajectory of his ND stint was not good. His WKU offenses (which you didn't even include, choosing to limit the results to just "OC" with no justification for it) were truly awful and his USU offense was a gigantic step down from the previous year.

I hope Wilcox knows we can do better

---

Points per game just seems like a lousy indicator when we are talking about the relatively small difference between 30.9, 32.4, and 34.2 points per game over seasons with different personnel.

Instead of points per game, I would love to look at points per possession (or "drive" in football parlance). Is that a stat that any public source publishes? It would account for defensive scores and for pace (e.g., quick scores versus long sustained drives).

However, even that metric has some flaws because in football the defense helps determine the starting position of the offense on the field. A defense giving the offense good field position all the time will make the offense seem better than it is.

I am not sure how to account for that. Are there some advanced stats that do?

71Bear said:

---

altacalifornia said:

---

It's Mike Sanford.

---

I hope so. He has been my choice for some time.

---

Cave Bear said:

---

Cal89 said:

---

Sanford seems appealing and I imagine we'd have strong interest. I like that he has experience in places like Stanford, Yale and Notre Dame too...

As an OC, yards/play:

2014 (BSU) - 6.53 (19th FBS)
2015 (ND) - 7.02 (6th FBS)
2016 (ND) - 6.07 (43rd FBS)
2019 (US) - 5.81 (69th FBS)

3rd down conversions %:

2014 (BSU) - 44.39 (33rd FBS)
2015 (ND) - 42.50 (39th FBS)
2016 (ND) - 40.48 (65th FBS)
2019 (US) - 42.64 (37th FBS)

Turnovers:

2014 (BSU) - 24 (87th FBS)
2015 (ND) - 20 (61st FBS)
2016 (ND) - 18 (47th FBS)
2019 (US) - 26 (122nd FBS)

Scoring:

2014 (BSU) - 39.7 (9th FBS)
2015 (ND) - 34.2 (34th FBS)
2016 (ND) - 30.9 (53rd FBS)
2019 (US) - 29.2 (63rd FBS)

The 29+ PPG low (this year) was likely hampered by the many turnovers. Also, according to Phil Steele, Utah State was the 123rd least experienced team in 2019.

Would seem to be a good hire.

---

No, just no.

First, his one season as OC at BSU was under Harsin, who was de facto OC and playcaller. I'm not inclined to see those stats as indicative of Sanford when he was basically assistant offensive coordinator. Not surprisingly, once Sanford got out of Harsin's shadow and had control of the offense (either as HC himself, or as OC under defensive HCs) his own offense emerges and it looks nothing like Boise State. In fact it looks a lot like Baldwin's offense, but lighter and more pass happy -- and none of those three attributes are positi

Forget YPP, 3rd Down % and Turnovers. While those metrics aren't completely irrelevant, scoring PPG already incorporates every subordinate aspect of offense including those other three metrics. If a coach has a poor YPP but great PPG, I don't care about the poor YPP. Conversely if a coach has a great YPP but poor PPG, I don't care about the great YPP. Scoring is what matters most, in conjunction with the temperament of the offense.

Let's take a close look at Sanford's offenses post-Harsin

Sanford's two year stint at ND was uneven. Their 2015 offense was a marginal improvement on the 2014 pre-Sanford offense (34.2 PPG, +1.4 over 2014) but then in Sanford's second season, 2016, the offense took big step back (30.9 PPG, -3.3 from 2015) which was surprising because they returned a huge amount of offensive production from 2015. When Sanford left ND to be HC at Western Kentucky, ND also lost their star QB DeShone Kizer who was an NFL early entrant. The replacement for Kizer was the mediocre Brandon Wimbush, but now without Sanford their offense stepped back up to 32.4 PPG again.

In two seasons at WKU, Sanford's offenses averaged a total of 23.4 PPG -- and that's while playing schedules that were among the very worst in FBS. They averaged 2.0 yards per carry and his QBs were sacked 48 times in 2017 while scoring 25.5 PPG. Their offense was even worse in Sanford's second year, at 21.1 PPG.

Now we have Utah State. When Sanford arrived they were coming off a 2018 season wherein they were #2 in FBS in scoring at 47.5 PPG. Sanford led the 2019 offense off a cliff, dropping them to 29.2 PPG. QB Jordan Love regressed big time.

Your analysis just glosses over anything problematic. The trajectory of his ND stint was not good. His WKU offenses (which you didn't even include, choosing to limit the results to just "OC" with no justification for it) were truly awful and his USU offense was a gigantic step down from the previous year.

I hope Wilcox knows we can do better

---

You lost me when you said "forget YPP" and then tried to argue PPG subsumes all other stats. This is backwards thinking. It's arguing for the pitcher win as a determining stat in 2020 when we know so much more goes into what makes a good pitcher.

PPG is much more random. It includes defensive and special teams scores. It does not take into account field position. It does not take into account pace of play. Yes, points are how we win or lose, but we have better ways to measure how the offense performed. One of those ways is YPP.

I know little to nothing about Sanford, but having read your argument, I'd lean slightly toward optimistic if he's the hire.

WavyBear said:

---

Im almost resigned to fact its gonna be Mike Sanford. hes gonna be a really good recruiter for sure. I hope we get 2014 Boise State offense instead of what he ran at Utah State this past season.l

---

Also knows how to recruit at academic-oriented places like Stanford and Notre Dame.

He is not my first choice, but I think he could be a good choice.

Uthaithani said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

OaktownBear said:

---

heartofthebear said:

---

golden sloth said:

---

Yea, based on those comments, it seems as though Wilcox had more influence on the offense than I originally thought.

---

Yes.
And that could explain why Baldwin left and it also is a bit concerning.
If Wilcox wants to limit explosiveness because of the possibility of scoring too fast for his defense, then I think we are going to end up with the same problems of folks loading the box against us.

I really think the 49ers are good example of how success is achieved. They don't pigeonhole themselves by micromanaging their options. They win a whole bunch of ways. Cal needs to be willing to win defensively and offensively. And they need to coach that ability into their players.

We need an OC that can do ball control for 70% of the play but then knows when to break it open downfield. The old Seattle Seahawks were a good example. When Wilson first emerged, he did not have that impressive passing numbers, except one, yards per pass. The Seahawk offense would underwhelm you until suddenly they had a 50 yard touchdown to Baldwin or a 60 yard pass downfield to Golden Tate.

With Polk, Remigio and now Hunter, we will have the personnel to engage in this type of offense. There is no reason why Cal can't score 30 points/gm, this way, especially with a healthy Garbers arm and shoulder. But if Wilcox doesn't like that, then it won't happen and we will be back to winning on 24 point games and losing on 20 point games.

Keep in mind, our defense next season is not going to be holding teams under 20 points as often as in the past. We will be young in the back 7. Even if several players emerge, they won't be maximizing their abilities until well into the season.

---

You guys are extrapolating his words not only to the breaking point but in direct contradiction to what he said.

All he said was that we have a program philosophy. He didn't say he runs the offense or interferes. He definitely didn't say that he wants to limit explosiveness. Putting an "if" in front of that statement doesn't make it better.

A program philosophy means he knows to a certain extent what offense he wants to run and he gets a guy who runs that offense. That is every head coach. There is zero in here that implies that he interfered with Baldwin.

In talking about wide receivers he specifically talked about needing to get guys that can get down the field. He said absolutely nothing about limiting explosiveness.

I'm sorry, but people often read these threads, don't watch the actual video, and assume what people talk about was actually said. Not only is none of this in anything he said, it is contradicted in the video.

---

The above video isn't the only video where Wilcox has referred to game strategy or philosophy. In the past he has mentioned the strategy of shortening the game by limiting possessions. That's how we won some of our games. It's also how we lost to Oregon St. So, if that is his philosophy, I don't agree with it. In fact, I don't agree with any philosophy that is stubbornly adhered to regardless of the dynamics of that particular game. That is also what happened against OSU. I was at that game, and it really sucked. It was also the game that gave first hand knowledge that Baldwin had to go. But, if he was trying to exercise Wilcox's philosophy of limiting possessions, then that is a concern. And yes the if matters. That is why it is part of the english language. And it is not my problem if folks don't watch the video or don't read each word carefully.

---

Okay, IF you are proposing an offense that maximizes interceptions and fumbles and has our running backs run backwards, I drastically disagree with you. Since you are not, and since Wilcox isn't doing anything like what you are saying you would disagree with, I won't worry about it.

That isn't why we lost the OSU game. Going into the OSU game, in the 6+ quarters since Garbers went down we were 22 for 48 passing for 203 yards, 3 interceptions and had scored 17 points. Our QB play had been terrible. Against OSU we were 14-33 passing for 175 yards and an interception. If you think opening up the offense in that situation is the right way to go, you must have loved Baldwin's performance in the CheezIt bowl. When your pass offense, and specifically quarterback play is inept, and you have a good defense going up against a mediocre offense, you shorten the game. That is flat out obvious situational strategy. You uglify the game. I don't know who looks at the pass offense we had at the time and says yeah, I wants me some more of that. Turn that baby loose.

In context, his statements have been clear that he is running a ball control offense that picks its shots down the field vs. an uptempo score as fast as you can offense. It doesn't mean he doesn't want to score. Most ball control offenses like to pressure down field to keep men out of the box and he has specifically stated in this video he needs receivers who can get down the field.

Feel free to link video where Wilcox says he doesn't want to stretch the field or have any chunk plays. Otherwise, IF you choose to worry about him interfering in the offense based on comments that don't say that and IF you choose to worry about him running an offense he doesn't run, I will choose to correct your characterization in both points.

---

The bowl game tells me Wilcox isn't putting pressure on the OC to uglify the game. Any OC will have the freedom to take big shots downfield, run every down, or anything in between. And with a better offensive coaching staff and better personnel, the offense will look much better in 2020 than it has in recent years.

And people need to read between the lines. When Wilcox makes a point to keep repeating how great Baldwin was and how much he'll be missed, that doesn't actually mean Wilcox didn't nudge him out. Nothing in Wilcox's body language tells me he is the slightest bit unhappy to be looking for a new OC. His constant repetition about how great Baldwin was just means Wilcox understands politics.

---

I agree, the Bowl Game was the Garbers show. I think he really does want a multiple offense (both pass and run balanced) as opposed to a one-dimentinal running game with long passes when the box is overloaded like Furd a few years back. That is why I think (thought?) the new OC also will be the QB coach, though Greatwood stepping down and noise (and public admission from Wilcox) that some guys with major resumes wanting in, may mean a new OC with an oline background (speculation on my part).

Heard from a commentor at the other site it's Troy Taylor ... thrilled if true!