Photo by Twitter / DeShawn Collins
Cal Football

CCSF Running Back DeShawn Collins Jumps in With Cal

December 17, 2018
7,547

The Bears picked up a commitment from their second running back of the 2019 class, adding 5-10/205 running back DeShawn Collins after his official visit over the weekend in Berkeley.

“I committed to Cal this weekend,” said Collins, rated the nation’s #11 JuCo running back. “The visit went really well.

“We toured the campus and football facilities and rode the ferry to San Francisco. The other guys visiting were really cool. I feel like I fit in well at Cal.

“I feel like it’s a good opportunity for me to get on the field and a Cal education is top of the line. Coach Toler thinks I can come in and get on the field immediately.

“I’m a one-cut running back and can do all three phases as far as running, blocking and receiving so I feel like I could bring those elements to the program at Cal.”

After the recent departure of running backs Derrick Clark and Biaggio Ali-Walsh, Cal running backs coach Burl Toler reached back into his old rolodex to reach out to Ram running back Collins, who Toler initially recruited and has stayed in touch with since his prior stint at Cal when Collins was starring for Grant High School in Sacramento.

It was no surprise that the powerfully-built Collins was on Toler’s radar as the then-senior ran for an amazing 2298 yards at a 10.2 yards per carry clip for Grant/Sacramento, adding 28 touchdowns for the 2015 season.

The dual threat Collins had 1016 yards on the ground with 10 touchdowns in 2018 along with 28 receptions for 434 yards and four touchdowns through the air as a redshirt frosh at CCSF.

Besides excelling in both the running and passing game, Collins’ strength (27 reps of 225 on the bench) makes him excellent in pass protection -an often underrated trait in running backs.

Besides bringing rushing, receiving and pass-blocking skills to the game, Collins also adds additional unique value as an experienced midyear transfer with three years to play three.

“Cal’s been talking to me since midseason this year,” said Collins earlier. “And I have a great relationship with Coach Toler. He’s been recruiting me since he was at Cal and Fresno.”

Collins originally committed to Rhode Island after being underrecruited but after spending the summer there, he decided to transfer to CCSF to increase his transfer opportunities.

After missing all but the first game of the 2017 season with a bone bruise, Collins came back for his big 2018 season -one that earned him offers from his four finalists: Cal, BYU, UNLV and Hawaii.

“It’s been good,” said Collins of his time at CCSF. “I was able to go there and achieve what I set out to achieve.”

Next step: Spring ball at Cal.

Discussion from...

CCSF Running Back DeShawn Collins Jumps in With Cal

Goobear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Welcome to the Bear Family DeShawn. Go Bears!
tequila4kapp
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It's nice to see some talent coming in on this side of the ball. I think it's also a good thing the staff is going the JC route for a few slots.

I was a little surprised to see we are losing 2 RBs though.
TheSouseFamily
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It's gonna be an interesting RB battle in the spring (and beyond probably). Lots of opportunity available and no one guy who seems like a clear and obvious choice to be the lead.

Welcome to Cal, Deshawn.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
TheSouseFamily said:

It's gonna be an interesting RB battle in the spring (and beyond probably). Lots of opportunity available and no one guy who seems like a clear and obvious choice to be the lead.

Welcome to Cal, Deshawn.


I think Dancy has the lead going in, but that is about it
NVBear78
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Welcome to Cal, another great addition. We will have a much improved offense next year.
philbert
How long do you want to ignore this user?
good read

http://www.sfexaminer.com/city-college-san-francisco-running-back-deshawn-collins-commits-cal-will-sign-wednesday/
Big C
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Welcome to Cal, DeShawn Collins!

Kudos to Wilcox and his staff, who are in the process of doing a quick rebuilding of our offensive skill position players, WR, QB and now RB.
HungryCalBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
His tape shows exceptional speed and vision. Not sure about the level of competition though. Little concerned about injury prone, but what a fine young man, hard working with a healthy dose of ambition. Welcome to Cal, Collins.
Bear19
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"Coach Toler thinks I can come in and get on the field immediately."

Opportunity, preparation and prior contact with Coach Toler all come together. We're going to see a new cast off characters in skill positions next year.
Rushinbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
philbert said:

good read

http://www.sfexaminer.com/city-college-san-francisco-running-back-deshawn-collins-commits-cal-will-sign-wednesday/

More speed than I expected. Usually, speed's the thing that JCs lack (and grades) more than any other factor. Not this guy (at that size).
82gradDLSdad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"new cast off characters in skill positions next year."

You probably didn't mean to type this but it may turn out to be true.
KoreAmBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
82gradDLSdad said:

"new cast off characters in skill positions next year."

You probably didn't mean to type this but it may turn out to be true.
LOL. Hey we'll take bandits and castoffs if they get us to the Rose Bowl.
510 Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
KoreAmBear said:

82gradDLSdad said:

"new cast off characters in skill positions next year."

You probably didn't mean to type this but it may turn out to be true.
LOL. Hey we'll take bandits and castoffs if they get us to the Rose Bowl.
It'll make for a sweeter story if it plays out. You know furd, UCLA, USC, Oregon and UW are laughing at our recruits and our lack of stars. I'll bet it'll fire these guys up.

And if Collins has speed, that's even better. Seems to be the one thing we needed most this year.
71Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
510 Bear said:

KoreAmBear said:

82gradDLSdad said:

"new cast off characters in skill positions next year."

You probably didn't mean to type this but it may turn out to be true.
LOL. Hey we'll take bandits and castoffs if they get us to the Rose Bowl.
It'll make for a sweeter story if it plays out. You know furd, UCLA, USC, Oregon and UW are laughing at our recruits and our lack of stars. I'll bet it'll fire these guys up.

And if Collins has speed, that's even better. Seems to be the one thing we needed most this year.
It doesn't matter how fired up they are if they don't possess talent. Heck, I would have been fired up to play during my college days but the first time I got hit would have been the last time. You need talent to play the game.
510 Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
71Bear said:


It doesn't matter how fired up they are if they don't possess talent.
This year's Cal defense doesn't agree with you.
Golden One
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Bear19 said:

We're going to see a new cast off characters in skill positions next year.
If we're going to continue to make progress, we'll have to. Hopefully, the new offfensive cast will be more skilled and productive than the current one.
71Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
510 Bear said:

71Bear said:


It doesn't matter how fired up they are if they don't possess talent.
This year's Cal defense doesn't agree with you.
I would suggest there is some talent on that unit. To say otherwise does a disservice to the guys. Fired up only gets you so far....
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
71Bear said:

510 Bear said:

71Bear said:


It doesn't matter how fired up they are if they don't possess talent.
This year's Cal defense doesn't agree with you.
I would suggest there is some talent on that unit. To say otherwise does a disservice to the guys. Fired up only gets you so far....


Agree 100%. Talent and scheme/coaching are probably 90%. Motivation is maybe 10%

As an example, too many people blamed our loss to Texas Tech in the 2004 Holiday Bowl on lack of motivation. I really think it was a minor factor. The big factors were 1) no adjustment in our 4-3 defense for the Air Raid 2) Cal not sticking with the run game and instead getting into a shootout with an Air Raid team and this despite all our WR injuries and 3) with the injuries at WR not finding ways to get great athletes who were back-ups (Marshawn Lynch, Justin Forsett, etc) on the field at other positions.

Moreover, as you saw in this years' defense, when players know they are playing in a great scheme with great coaching that can maximize their talent, they get fired up.
Another Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Collins looks like he has an extra gear. Hard to tell just how fast given the competition but he pulls away, looks like he like he can truck.
71Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

71Bear said:

510 Bear said:

71Bear said:


It doesn't matter how fired up they are if they don't possess talent.
This year's Cal defense doesn't agree with you.
I would suggest there is some talent on that unit. To say otherwise does a disservice to the guys. Fired up only gets you so far....


Agree 100%. Talent and scheme/coaching are probably 90%. Motivation is maybe 10%

As an example, too many people blamed our loss to Texas Tech in the 2004 Holiday Bowl on lack of motivation. I really think it was a minor factor. The big factors were 1) no adjustment in our 4-3 defense for the Air Raid 2) Cal not sticking with the run game and instead getting into a shootout with an Air Raid team and this despite all our WR injuries and 3) with the injuries at WR not finding ways to get great athletes who were back-ups (Marshawn Lynch, Justin Forsett, etc) on the field at other positions.

Moreover, as you saw in this years' defense, when players know they are playing in a great scheme with great coaching that can maximize their talent, they get fired up.
#2 was the killer.
Cal8285
How long do you want to ignore this user?
71Bear said:

calumnus said:

71Bear said:

510 Bear said:

71Bear said:


It doesn't matter how fired up they are if they don't possess talent.
This year's Cal defense doesn't agree with you.
I would suggest there is some talent on that unit. To say otherwise does a disservice to the guys. Fired up only gets you so far....


Agree 100%. Talent and scheme/coaching are probably 90%. Motivation is maybe 10%

As an example, too many people blamed our loss to Texas Tech in the 2004 Holiday Bowl on lack of motivation. I really think it was a minor factor. The big factors were 1) no adjustment in our 4-3 defense for the Air Raid 2) Cal not sticking with the run game and instead getting into a shootout with an Air Raid team and this despite all our WR injuries and 3) with the injuries at WR not finding ways to get great athletes who were back-ups (Marshawn Lynch, Justin Forsett, etc) on the field at other positions.

Moreover, as you saw in this years' defense, when players know they are playing in a great scheme with great coaching that can maximize their talent, they get fired up.
#2 was the killer.
100% correct. We just run the damn ball, TT can't stop us and we win going away.
OaktownBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
71Bear said:

calumnus said:

71Bear said:

510 Bear said:

71Bear said:


It doesn't matter how fired up they are if they don't possess talent.
This year's Cal defense doesn't agree with you.
I would suggest there is some talent on that unit. To say otherwise does a disservice to the guys. Fired up only gets you so far....


Agree 100%. Talent and scheme/coaching are probably 90%. Motivation is maybe 10%

As an example, too many people blamed our loss to Texas Tech in the 2004 Holiday Bowl on lack of motivation. I really think it was a minor factor. The big factors were 1) no adjustment in our 4-3 defense for the Air Raid 2) Cal not sticking with the run game and instead getting into a shootout with an Air Raid team and this despite all our WR injuries and 3) with the injuries at WR not finding ways to get great athletes who were back-ups (Marshawn Lynch, Justin Forsett, etc) on the field at other positions.

Moreover, as you saw in this years' defense, when players know they are playing in a great scheme with great coaching that can maximize their talent, they get fired up.
#2 was the killer.
I've always disagreed with this. To be clear, if you said #2 was A killer, I'd agree. We should have run over them. The thing I disagree with is this being primarily an offensive issue. Even with the offense we called that day, the offense was very productive and did enough to win. The defense, which was awesome that year got bulldozed. And it got bulldozed because of #1. Gregory decided to "do what we do". Made no adjustments for the Air Raid and they picked us apart. Because our offense was so good and Tedford was an offensive coach, we tended to give the offense the responsibility for wins and losses whether fair or not. The offense wasn't at its peak that day. It wasn't great, but it was good. Had the defense been good, we slaughter them. Had the defense been merely average, we win. The defense was a steaming pile. That loss is at least 80% on the defense (and by that I mean the scheme that Gregory put in for the game). We MAY have won if we ran the ball. We WOULD have won if we were remotely prepared for the Air Raid.

I'll add this. We scored 31 points that day. Had we scored 31 points in every game in the regular season, we would have gone 11-0. We gave up 45 points that day. Had we given up 45 in every game we would have gone 2-8-1. That game is on the defense.
kad02002
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Grant is always hard nosed; looks like an attitude runner.
Cal8285
How long do you want to ignore this user?
OaktownBear said:

71Bear said:

calumnus said:

71Bear said:

510 Bear said:

71Bear said:


It doesn't matter how fired up they are if they don't possess talent.
This year's Cal defense doesn't agree with you.
I would suggest there is some talent on that unit. To say otherwise does a disservice to the guys. Fired up only gets you so far....


Agree 100%. Talent and scheme/coaching are probably 90%. Motivation is maybe 10%

As an example, too many people blamed our loss to Texas Tech in the 2004 Holiday Bowl on lack of motivation. I really think it was a minor factor. The big factors were 1) no adjustment in our 4-3 defense for the Air Raid 2) Cal not sticking with the run game and instead getting into a shootout with an Air Raid team and this despite all our WR injuries and 3) with the injuries at WR not finding ways to get great athletes who were back-ups (Marshawn Lynch, Justin Forsett, etc) on the field at other positions.

Moreover, as you saw in this years' defense, when players know they are playing in a great scheme with great coaching that can maximize their talent, they get fired up.
#2 was the killer.
I've always disagreed with this. To be clear, if you said #2 was A killer, I'd agree. We should have run over them. The thing I disagree with is this being primarily an offensive issue. Even with the offense we called that day, the offense was very productive and did enough to win. The defense, which was awesome that year got bulldozed. And it got bulldozed because of #1. Gregory decided to "do what we do". Made no adjustments for the Air Raid and they picked us apart. Because our offense was so good and Tedford was an offensive coach, we tended to give the offense the responsibility for wins and losses whether fair or not. The offense wasn't at its peak that day. It wasn't great, but it was good. Had the defense been good, we slaughter them. Had the defense been merely average, we win. The defense was a steaming pile. That loss is at least 80% on the defense (and by that I mean the scheme that Gregory put in for the game). We MAY have won if we ran the ball. We WOULD have won if we were remotely prepared for the Air Raid.

I'll add this. We scored 31 points that day. Had we scored 31 points in every game in the regular season, we would have gone 11-0. We gave up 45 points that day. Had we given up 45 in every game we would have gone 2-8-1. That game is on the defense.
Reasonable people can disagree, but I'd say it is the opposite. I wish Gregory had prepared differently for the Air Raid, and if he had done so, we MAY have won. We WOULD have won if we had run the ball.

I'm not sure it can be reasonably disputed that the turning point of the game was the interception. The Bears were ahead 14-10, ball at the Cal 48, 2nd and 2. We call for a pass play, Rodgers throws into and off the hands of true freshman Robert Jordan, who only had his redshirt pulled mid-season due to the WR injuries. The ball returned 48 yards from the TT 44, giving TT the ball on the Cal 22, from where they get a quick TD, and now the Bears are operating from behind, and the psychology of the game is different.

By the time we were down 21 points late third quarter, the game was pretty clearly over, so the last 2 4th quarter TD's didn't really mean a whole lot. The issue isn't so much what we scored in the entire game as what we scored in the first 3 quarters when the game was being decided. If we score 28 in the first half instead of 14, I don't think that TT ends up with 45 points. We scored 17 points on the first 10 drives, i.e., all drives that finished in the 3rd quarter or earlier, and basically gave 7 back through the interception. Even a good defensive stand after the INT would have likely at best held them to 3. This offensive net scoring of 10 or 14 through 3 quarters wasn't good enough to win the game.

I agree it MAY have changed things if the D prepared differently, but we don't know how effective the D would have been if we had prepared differently, we MAY have been just as ineffective or we MAY have been a lot better. Because we DIDN'T prepare differently, so all we can say is we MAY have been a lot more effective.

But we all saw with our own eyes how TT looked against the run early on, and you seem to agree that #2 was A killer. They were not a team that could have stopped us if we had been stubborn with the run. I am confident we WOULD have scored a lot more than 17 points in the first 10 possessions if we run the damn ball. Just take away the INT and the game is a lot different.

It is all just crazy speculation, so nobody can say with certainty that either one of us is wrong. I suspect 71Bear and I will go to our graves confident that #2 was THE killer, because what we saw makes us confident that TT couldn't stop the run and we know an INT changed the game, while we didn't get a chance to see what different defensive preparation would have done to the TT offense.

71Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cal8285 said:

OaktownBear said:

71Bear said:

calumnus said:

71Bear said:

510 Bear said:

71Bear said:


It doesn't matter how fired up they are if they don't possess talent.
This year's Cal defense doesn't agree with you.
I would suggest there is some talent on that unit. To say otherwise does a disservice to the guys. Fired up only gets you so far....


Agree 100%. Talent and scheme/coaching are probably 90%. Motivation is maybe 10%

As an example, too many people blamed our loss to Texas Tech in the 2004 Holiday Bowl on lack of motivation. I really think it was a minor factor. The big factors were 1) no adjustment in our 4-3 defense for the Air Raid 2) Cal not sticking with the run game and instead getting into a shootout with an Air Raid team and this despite all our WR injuries and 3) with the injuries at WR not finding ways to get great athletes who were back-ups (Marshawn Lynch, Justin Forsett, etc) on the field at other positions.

Moreover, as you saw in this years' defense, when players know they are playing in a great scheme with great coaching that can maximize their talent, they get fired up.
#2 was the killer.
I've always disagreed with this. To be clear, if you said #2 was A killer, I'd agree. We should have run over them. The thing I disagree with is this being primarily an offensive issue. Even with the offense we called that day, the offense was very productive and did enough to win. The defense, which was awesome that year got bulldozed. And it got bulldozed because of #1. Gregory decided to "do what we do". Made no adjustments for the Air Raid and they picked us apart. Because our offense was so good and Tedford was an offensive coach, we tended to give the offense the responsibility for wins and losses whether fair or not. The offense wasn't at its peak that day. It wasn't great, but it was good. Had the defense been good, we slaughter them. Had the defense been merely average, we win. The defense was a steaming pile. That loss is at least 80% on the defense (and by that I mean the scheme that Gregory put in for the game). We MAY have won if we ran the ball. We WOULD have won if we were remotely prepared for the Air Raid.

I'll add this. We scored 31 points that day. Had we scored 31 points in every game in the regular season, we would have gone 11-0. We gave up 45 points that day. Had we given up 45 in every game we would have gone 2-8-1. That game is on the defense.
Reasonable people can disagree, but I'd say it is the opposite. I wish Gregory had prepared differently for the Air Raid, and if he had done so, we MAY have won. We WOULD have won if we had run the ball.

I'm not sure it can be reasonably disputed that the turning point of the game was the interception. The Bears were ahead 14-10, ball at the Cal 48, 2nd and 2. We call for a pass play, Rodgers throws into and off the hands of true freshman Robert Jordan, who only had his redshirt pulled mid-season due to the WR injuries. The ball returned 48 yards from the TT 44, giving TT the ball on the Cal 22, from where they get a quick TD, and now the Bears are operating from behind, and the psychology of the game is different.

By the time we were down 21 points late third quarter, the game was pretty clearly over, so the last 2 4th quarter TD's didn't really mean a whole lot. The issue isn't so much what we scored in the entire game as what we scored in the first 3 quarters when the game was being decided. If we score 28 in the first half instead of 14, I don't think that TT ends up with 45 points. We scored 17 points on the first 10 drives, i.e., all drives that finished in the 3rd quarter or earlier, and basically gave 7 back through the interception. Even a good defensive stand after the INT would have likely at best held them to 3. This offensive net scoring of 10 or 14 through 3 quarters wasn't good enough to win the game.

I agree it MAY have changed things if the D prepared differently, but we don't know how effective the D would have been if we had prepared differently, we MAY have been just as ineffective or we MAY have been a lot better. Because we DIDN'T prepare differently, so all we can say is we MAY have been a lot more effective.

But we all saw with our own eyes how TT looked against the run early on, and you seem to agree that #2 was A killer. They were not a team that could have stopped us if we had been stubborn with the run. I am confident we WOULD have scored a lot more than 17 points in the first 10 possessions if we run the damn ball. Just take away the INT and the game is a lot different.

It is all just crazy speculation, so nobody can say with certainty that either one of us is wrong. I suspect 71Bear and I will go to our graves confident that #2 was THE killer, because what we saw makes us confident that TT couldn't stop the run and we know an INT changed the game, while we didn't get a chance to see what different defensive preparation would have done to the TT offense.


You are correct, 8285...
upsetof86
How long do you want to ignore this user?
225 x 27 is two short of Saquon Barkleys combine total of 29, which was tied for highest among RBs that year.
going4roses
How long do you want to ignore this user?
What year did this tech vs Cal game take place?
joe amos yaks
How long do you want to ignore this user?
going4roses said:

What year did this tech vs Cal take place?
2004.

Brought to you courtesy of kneepads Brown, uTx. . . uNoCar.
going4roses
How long do you want to ignore this user?
14 yrs ago
NVBear78
How long do you want to ignore this user?
71Bear said:

calumnus said:

71Bear said:

510 Bear said:

71Bear said:


It doesn't matter how fired up they are if they don't possess talent.
This year's Cal defense doesn't agree with you.
I would suggest there is some talent on that unit. To say otherwise does a disservice to the guys. Fired up only gets you so far....


Agree 100%. Talent and scheme/coaching are probably 90%. Motivation is maybe 10%

As an example, too many people blamed our loss to Texas Tech in the 2004 Holiday Bowl on lack of motivation. I really think it was a minor factor. The big factors were 1) no adjustment in our 4-3 defense for the Air Raid 2) Cal not sticking with the run game and instead getting into a shootout with an Air Raid team and this despite all our WR injuries and 3) with the injuries at WR not finding ways to get great athletes who were back-ups (Marshawn Lynch, Justin Forsett, etc) on the field at other positions.

Moreover, as you saw in this years' defense, when players know they are playing in a great scheme with great coaching that can maximize their talent, they get fired up.
#2 was the killer.


The interception was critical in the sense that after it occurred Tedford moved away from the run game even more.

The sad thing was that while Jordan was wide open on the play and should have caught the ball to move deep into TT territory the pass was not necessary. The run game was killing them and if we had jammed it down their throats to go up two scores at that point in time it could have been a whole different outcome...
Page 1 of 1
 
×
Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.