So many bad things happening in 2020. Why should Cal football be any different. The New Year cannot come quickly enough.
killa22 said:
ncbears said:just seems like Cal never plays OSU well. Or Cal just saves its lesser performances for OSUBearSD said:
Close, but not close enough. Gave a winnable game away to a bad opponent.
Golden One said:
With the same awful coaching staff, why would expect 2021 to be any better?
Troll On You Bears said:
Man, this sucks. We flubbed so many important plays in this game. Didn't coach or play with a killer mentality.
Yeah that makes sense. I thought Musgrave was gonna bring pro style with some college flair but I guess that's not the case. It certainly doesn't seem to be a plug-and-play scheme - it's hard to see how you can win game after game in a slugfest style with mediocre depth exacerbated by pandemic absences. That said without a couple bad penalties on Remigio returns we would have probably won going away - what say you to that?killa22 said:Troll On You Bears said:
Man, this sucks. We flubbed so many important plays in this game. Didn't coach or play with a killer mentality.
That's why I lean spread. You're going for kill shots not ball control.
And that's the mentality you need to win as a non blue blood in a P5 conference.
I hope this is satire.TandemBear said:
Well, that sucks. Looked like we were gonna pull it off, thanks to repeated gifts by OSU.
Unrelated, but what the HECK is up with the mishmash of Cal coaches' masks? One wearing a dark blue - and blank - material mask, another coach in a LAME light blue paper mask? And Wilcox in a grey scarf? I don't think I saw a SINGLE "Cal" mask.
Why on EARTH are all the coaches NOT wearing MATCHING "Cal" script navy blue masks?
Bush league and terrible presentation for UC's flagship school.
How hard would THAT have been to set up for the season?
And looking at Oregon State? All coaches & staff in matching OSU masks, looking professional.
Pretty sad. Perhaps this is merely a reflection of how things are done at Cal Athletics.
That's pure B.S.bearister said:Golden One said:
With the same awful coaching staff, why would expect 2021 to be any better?
No COVID depletion of team. Good answer?
BearFumble said:
I guess we are out of the national title picture
Yeah. This coaching staff is just not competitive in the Pac-12. When you can't even beat Oregon State, that says it all.touchdownbears43 said:
Wilcox fulfilling his previous coaching behaviors. Looks the part, talks the part, has some flashes, yet has bounced around due to never quite being able to be the total package.
Absolute terrible offense game planning. Musgrave is a disaster higher in every way, shape and form. Special-teams play equally as poor. Defense has regressed.
I know to a certain extent COVID has not made it a fair playing field but you can just tell from the cohesiveness of the team that there are some major flaws.
Troll On You Bears said:Yeah that makes sense. I thought Musgrave was gonna bring pro style with some college flair but I guess that's not the case. It certainly doesn't seem to be a plug-and-play scheme - it's hard to see how you can win game after game in a slugfest style with mediocre depth exacerbated by pandemic absences. That said without a couple bad penalties on Remigio returns we would have probably won going away - what say you to that?killa22 said:Troll On You Bears said:
Man, this sucks. We flubbed so many important plays in this game. Didn't coach or play with a killer mentality.
That's why I lean spread. You're going for kill shots not ball control.
And that's the mentality you need to win as a non blue blood in a P5 conference.
It'll be the usual coach-speak. At this point, it doesn't appear Wilcox has a clue.Troll On You Bears said:
So what does Wilcox say after the game about the state of the program? About the identity we are trying to establish? About how this is now probably a lost season and how we use it as a building block? Will any of it ring true or will it be coach-speak?
Hard to say this game was much better than game 1. Yes, we kept the game close, but this was a very mediocre opponent. UCLA is a good team, as evidenced by their 38-35 loss to Oregon today.killa22 said:Troll On You Bears said:Yeah that makes sense. I thought Musgrave was gonna bring pro style with some college flair but I guess that's not the case. It certainly doesn't seem to be a plug-and-play scheme - it's hard to see how you can win game after game in a slugfest style with mediocre depth exacerbated by pandemic absences. That said without a couple bad penalties on Remigio returns we would have probably won going away - what say you to that?killa22 said:Troll On You Bears said:
Man, this sucks. We flubbed so many important plays in this game. Didn't coach or play with a killer mentality.
That's why I lean spread. You're going for kill shots not ball control.
And that's the mentality you need to win as a non blue blood in a P5 conference.
That's true but the perfectionist in me would always aim for having a bad ass offense to match a plus defense.
This was better than game 1, especially considering the injuries, but it's still not maximizing our skill guys (an opinion, granted, but founded in some reality)
Yeah I guess at least early in the season (and pending development of the offense as they get some experience with it) I'm tending to agree with you. "Pro-style" does tend to evoke that smash-mouth, principled football that Wilcox seems to exude and sounds so attractive on paper, but it seems that the game has passed that strategy by in some regards such that smash-mouth attitude needs to be paired with a modern approach to offense. We'll see what happens. Appreciate your valuable insights on the boards.killa22 said:Troll On You Bears said:Yeah that makes sense. I thought Musgrave was gonna bring pro style with some college flair but I guess that's not the case. It certainly doesn't seem to be a plug-and-play scheme - it's hard to see how you can win game after game in a slugfest style with mediocre depth exacerbated by pandemic absences. That said without a couple bad penalties on Remigio returns we would have probably won going away - what say you to that?killa22 said:Troll On You Bears said:
Man, this sucks. We flubbed so many important plays in this game. Didn't coach or play with a killer mentality.
That's why I lean spread. You're going for kill shots not ball control.
And that's the mentality you need to win as a non blue blood in a P5 conference.
That's true but the perfectionist in me would always aim for having a bad ass offense to match a plus defense.
This was better than game 1, especially considering the injuries, but it's still not maximizing our skill guys (an opinion, granted, but founded in some reality)
Which is not good news for our program.westcoast101 said:
A winless season should keep bigger programs away from Wilcox for a while!
We did play much better than last week, at least.Golden One said:Hard to say this game was much better than game 1. Yes, we kept the game close, but this was a very mediocre opponent. UCLA is a good team, as evidenced by their 38-35 loss to Oregon today.killa22 said:Troll On You Bears said:Yeah that makes sense. I thought Musgrave was gonna bring pro style with some college flair but I guess that's not the case. It certainly doesn't seem to be a plug-and-play scheme - it's hard to see how you can win game after game in a slugfest style with mediocre depth exacerbated by pandemic absences. That said without a couple bad penalties on Remigio returns we would have probably won going away - what say you to that?killa22 said:Troll On You Bears said:
Man, this sucks. We flubbed so many important plays in this game. Didn't coach or play with a killer mentality.
That's why I lean spread. You're going for kill shots not ball control.
And that's the mentality you need to win as a non blue blood in a P5 conference.
That's true but the perfectionist in me would always aim for having a bad ass offense to match a plus defense.
This was better than game 1, especially considering the injuries, but it's still not maximizing our skill guys (an opinion, granted, but founded in some reality)
Yes, but it was against a much inferior opponent than UCLA..Strykur said:We did play much better than last week, at least.Golden One said:Hard to say this game was much better than game 1. Yes, we kept the game close, but this was a very mediocre opponent. UCLA is a good team, as evidenced by their 38-35 loss to Oregon today.killa22 said:Troll On You Bears said:Yeah that makes sense. I thought Musgrave was gonna bring pro style with some college flair but I guess that's not the case. It certainly doesn't seem to be a plug-and-play scheme - it's hard to see how you can win game after game in a slugfest style with mediocre depth exacerbated by pandemic absences. That said without a couple bad penalties on Remigio returns we would have probably won going away - what say you to that?killa22 said:Troll On You Bears said:
Man, this sucks. We flubbed so many important plays in this game. Didn't coach or play with a killer mentality.
That's why I lean spread. You're going for kill shots not ball control.
And that's the mentality you need to win as a non blue blood in a P5 conference.
That's true but the perfectionist in me would always aim for having a bad ass offense to match a plus defense.
This was better than game 1, especially considering the injuries, but it's still not maximizing our skill guys (an opinion, granted, but founded in some reality)
Well next week we're playing another crap team, so who knows how that will go.Golden One said:Yes, but it was against a much inferior opponent than UCLA..Strykur said:We did play much better than last week, at least.Golden One said:Hard to say this game was much better than game 1. Yes, we kept the game close, but this was a very mediocre opponent. UCLA is a good team, as evidenced by their 38-35 loss to Oregon today.killa22 said:Troll On You Bears said:Yeah that makes sense. I thought Musgrave was gonna bring pro style with some college flair but I guess that's not the case. It certainly doesn't seem to be a plug-and-play scheme - it's hard to see how you can win game after game in a slugfest style with mediocre depth exacerbated by pandemic absences. That said without a couple bad penalties on Remigio returns we would have probably won going away - what say you to that?killa22 said:Troll On You Bears said:
Man, this sucks. We flubbed so many important plays in this game. Didn't coach or play with a killer mentality.
That's why I lean spread. You're going for kill shots not ball control.
And that's the mentality you need to win as a non blue blood in a P5 conference.
That's true but the perfectionist in me would always aim for having a bad ass offense to match a plus defense.
This was better than game 1, especially considering the injuries, but it's still not maximizing our skill guys (an opinion, granted, but founded in some reality)
Today's game gives us a pretty good indication.Strykur said:Well next week we're playing another crap team, so who knows how that will go.Golden One said:Yes, but it was against a much inferior opponent than UCLA..Strykur said:We did play much better than last week, at least.Golden One said:Hard to say this game was much better than game 1. Yes, we kept the game close, but this was a very mediocre opponent. UCLA is a good team, as evidenced by their 38-35 loss to Oregon today.killa22 said:Troll On You Bears said:Yeah that makes sense. I thought Musgrave was gonna bring pro style with some college flair but I guess that's not the case. It certainly doesn't seem to be a plug-and-play scheme - it's hard to see how you can win game after game in a slugfest style with mediocre depth exacerbated by pandemic absences. That said without a couple bad penalties on Remigio returns we would have probably won going away - what say you to that?killa22 said:Troll On You Bears said:
Man, this sucks. We flubbed so many important plays in this game. Didn't coach or play with a killer mentality.
That's why I lean spread. You're going for kill shots not ball control.
And that's the mentality you need to win as a non blue blood in a P5 conference.
That's true but the perfectionist in me would always aim for having a bad ass offense to match a plus defense.
This was better than game 1, especially considering the injuries, but it's still not maximizing our skill guys (an opinion, granted, but founded in some reality)
Yep. That was another very poor decision by Wilcox.SpartanBear20 said:
The decision not to take the chip shot FG at 4th & goal at the 2 down 14-10 looks really bad in hindsight. Take those points, and Cal likely is in position to kick a game winning FG in the last drive.
SpartanBear20 said:
The decision not to take the chip shot FG at 4th & goal at the 2 down 14-10 looks really bad in hindsight. Take those points, and Cal likely is in position to kick a game winning FG in the last drive.