dimitrig said:

---

Big C said:

---

The Musgrave/Garbers combo was unable to stretch the field vertically. Furd defenders were leaning forward all game. So far forward that they let Moore slip past them a few times.

---

I think Garbers didn't have a single completion over 20 yards.

He tried some throws, but he was overthrowing his receivers.

---

Yes, he's been floating his throws for at least 2 games now.
Ironic that he then gets his passes tipped at the LOS.

Big C said:

---

The Musgrave/Garbers combo was unable to stretch the field vertically. Furd defenders were leaning forward all game. So far forward that they let Moore slip past them a few times.

---

True - however with 3 OL starters out and our Center gutting it out with a playable injury, the pressure was mostly heavy (4 sacks) Garbers is the reason we were competing very well and should have won the game. offense easily would scored in the 30's without the TO's. missed fg and pat.

HoopDreams said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

With a make shift oline, Cal had 245 years rushing against a physical Furd defense, and Garbers has good numbers.

---

and I'm pretty sure that PAT doesn't get blocked (nor the punt in prior game) if we had our OL regulars

---

The K chili-dipped the PAT by a foot.

Our defense is good - Stanford only got so many points because they started with a short field twice due to turnovers by offense and special teams, and the D only had 1 penalty ... unfortunately on the same play as the interception.

Offense is OK - we drove the field for TDs a couple of time ... and had only one turnover.

Special teams? Well, no excuse there.

We still have a chance to win out (albeit not a good chance).

HoopDreams said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

With a make shift oline, Cal had 245 years rushing against a physical Furd defense, and Garbers has good numbers.

---

and I'm pretty sure that PAT doesn't get blocked (nor the punt in prior game) if we had our OL regulars

---

while I don't disagree, my post was not about mistakes or excuses. The running game had a big day, which is a good sign since it has not been great during the Wilcox era.

And I totally agree about Remigio. Find a way to get him the ball.

Bobodeluxe said:

---

19/29
151
2
0
62.9

---

A robust 5.2 yards per pass attempt. That is awful.

Other than the obvious not so special teams play, I don't understand what Musgraves is teaching. First of all every running play takes way to long to develop. OL has only a sec to establish a block and hold it! Secondly the offense is so predictable and in my mind easily defended. Garbers seems less confident this year in his decision making especially when rolling out. Also he seems to have lost some accuracy. Some really bad throws!

So here we are again, as my Cal Graduate son said "So Cal".

I was watching the game with a buddy who was part of the 1970 Cal defense that beat Jim Plunkett. Yesterday was bitterly painful. It seemed there were 5 significant, "game changing" errors by Cal.

-Punt return fumble. Then Stanford touchdown.
-Filed goal blocked.
-RB fumble. Then Stanford touchdown.
-Gratuitous conspicuous hold by DB negated interception. Eventual Stanford touchdown.
-Missed PAT.

We had some of the same problems at the OSU game.

It is probably my faded memory, but I just do not remember so many errors in the olden days of Cal football . . .
The team should drill and drill and drill on preventing these types of errors, then we would have a fearsome team. Global condemnation of players and coaches miss the mark.

The Sun Also Rises. We get Oregon next week.

Remigio also has 2 muffed punts.

6956bear said:

---

Bobodeluxe said:

---

19/29
151
2
0
62.9

---

A robust 5.2 yards per pass attempt. That is awful.

---

He took what Furd gave him, threw two TD passes, and did not turn the ball over. He managed the game well and put us in a position to win.

chazzed said:

---

6956bear said:

---

Bobodeluxe said:

---

19/29
151
2
0
62.9

---

A robust 5.2 yards per pass attempt. That is awful.

---

He took what Furd gave him, threw two TD passes, and did not turn the ball over. He managed the game well and put us in a position to win.

---

Stanford is not a top notch defense. Why is Cal taking what is given? Take what you want.

2701RidgeRoad said:

---

I was watching the game with a buddy who was part of the 1970 Cal defense that beat Jim Plunkett. Yesterday was bitterly painful. It seemed there were 5 significant, "game changing" errors by Cal.

-Punt return fumble. Then Stanford touchdown.
-Filed goal blocked.
-RB fumble. Then Stanford touchdown.
-Gratuitous conspicuous hold by DB negated interception. Eventual Stanford touchdown.
-Missed PAT.

We had some of the same problems at the OSU game.

It is probably my faded memory, but I just do not remember so many errors in the olden days of Cal football . . .
The team should drill and drill and drill on preventing these types of errors, then we would have a fearsome team. Global condemnation of players and coaches miss the mark.

The Sun Also Rises. We get Oregon next week.

---

Not to make excuses, but I'm pretty sure we are still way "underpracticed", compared to the normal amount of practices we would've had in a calendar year (Spring, Fall camp and in-season week days) up to our third game.

Other teams have had similar challenges, to be sure, but we've had the DL/OL situations, the new offense implementation and, on top of that the last thing we needed, the last two weeks have each been short weeks.

Allocation of practice time has probably been a triage situation.

6956bear said:

---

chazzed said:

---

6956bear said:

---

Bobodeluxe said:

---

19/29
151
2
0
62.9

---

A robust 5.2 yards per pass attempt. That is awful.

---

He took what Furd gave him, threw two TD passes, and did not turn the ball over. He managed the game well and put us in a position to win.

---

Stanford is not a top notch defense. Why is Cal taking what is given? Take what you want.

---

Because we are missing 5 or 6 starters on offense and because we have not had sufficient practice time in order to install our new offense.

chazzed said:

---

6956bear said:

---

chazzed said:

---

6956bear said:

---

Bobodeluxe said:

---

19/29
151
2
0
62.9

---

A robust 5.2 yards per pass attempt. That is awful.

---

He took what Furd gave him, threw two TD passes, and did not turn the ball over. He managed the game well and put us in a position to win.

---

Stanford is not a top notch defense. Why is Cal taking what is given? Take what you want.

---

Because we are missing 5 or 6 starters on offense and because we have not had sufficient practice time in order to install our new offense.

---

They are missing 2 starters. Curhan and Craig. Brown played and Cindric started all last season at LG. A season in which they managed to win 8 games. Dancy who started for Brown has been here 3 years now. Everybody else is a returning starter. This unit is one of the most experienced in the conference. Garbers is the MOST experienced returning QB in terms of starts.