Cal Football

Ruiz Report: Let Cal grow after gritty win vs. Syracuse

Joaquin Ruiz shares his fresh thoughts and opinions on Cal's 21-18 win over Syracuse in his weekly "Ruiz Report" column. The "Ruiz Report" was born at The Daily Californian.
September 13, 2026
13k Views
36 Comments
Story Poster

The first win of the Tosh Lupoi era wasn’t pretty. But success leaves clues.

Cal’s gritty 21-18 road win over Syracuse on Saturday confirmed more good than what met the eye, and that should give Golden Bears fans optimism moving forward.

Hear. Me. Out.

Defense wins championships

Michael Hutchings’ defense was elite in New York.

After allowing six rushing touchdowns in Week 1 against the Bruins, Cal buckled down against Syracuse, with cohesion and confidence. The Golden Bears allowed just 63 rushing yards after a 55-yard rush on the game’s second play and forced the Orange to try and win through the air.

Syracuse had no luck doing that. 

Kingston Lopa and Cal’s defense made Steve Angeli’s life a living hell, as the safety picked off the quarterback three times — including the go-ahead pick-six — and Hutchings’ unit sacked him three times.

Timely blitzes. Confusing alignments. Violent hits. Good tackling. Yeah, Hutchings was in his bag.

Despite being protected by the heaviest offensive line in the FBS, Angeli was under pressure all day. Nate Burrell, Solomon Williams and the trench troopers stepped up.

Led by Lopa in the secondary and AJ Tuitele in the middle, Cal’s defense truly dominated as one, bending at times but never breaking. Defensive backs Isaiah Crosby, Daniel Harris and Quimari Shemwell thrived in big moments. And freshman linebacker JD McKinley looked far more comfortable and disciplined than against the Bruins.

Hutchings said he wanted his unit to build on that strong third quarter against UCLA. Well, Cal pulled it off for an entire 60 minutes on the road.

The post-game film sessions presumably will be inspiring and motivating.

Let Somerville’s vision play out

It was far from ideal, but don’t give up on Jordan Somerville’s offense just yet.

“You have to allow for failure when teaching a complex system like this,” Somerville said in mid-August. “To challenge these guys and show the growth moments and the light bulb goes off has been really telling … excited about the growth …”

Yes, the 1st-and-10s remained challenging in Week 2. And there were more horizontal approaches than were probably necessary.

But, likely against popular belief, I felt Somerville’s play-calling was improved against Syracuse.

The first-time offensive coordinator mixed in some appropriate screens that didn’t see the light of day because of one or two missed blocks. Cal’s route concepts were also solid, but some crucial drops made the stat lines look worse. Jaron-Keawe Sagapolutele wasn’t his sharpest, either, maybe due to his banged-up ankle. Still much better than Angeli, Sagapolutele looked sped up at times, and again, the drops didn’t help.

While it’s an afterthought, running back Adam Mohammed remained integral, seeing 24 touches compared to his career-high 35 against UCLA. Without Carter Vargas, and as the offensive line still figures itself out, tip your cap to Somerville — and Ashten Emory — for taking the load off Mohammed in a winning effort.

Cal’s offense clearly hasn’t clicked on all cylinders yet, scoring 21 points over its last six quarters. But that also means that we have zero clue what Somerville’s offense looks like at its peak.

A home game against Wagner, the type of warm-up that the Golden Bears didn’t have to start the season, could do dividends for the developing offense. A peek of what success in Somerville’s system looks like, even if it's against a defense that just surrendered 87 points to James Madison, could help the unit better understand what is being asked of them and how to execute those visions.

Plenty of correctables

“Love these dudes, love this staff, just so thankful to be a part of this with them,” Lupoi said about his first win. “Can’t wait to just keep growing together.”

Take a page from Lupoi and let Cal grow.

Cal’s win over Syracuse, like the Golden Bears’ loss to UCLA, showed that the Blue and Gold don’t have any glaring holes lowering the team’s ceiling.

From what I can tell, most of Cal’s faults are addressable. Tweakable. Fixable.

Even the troubled special teams, which failed to stop a fake punt and struggled in coverage against the Orange, have more learning to do than praying for talent to walk in the door.

It took the defense two games to figure itself out — having an NFL prospect in Lopa helps. And while the offense and special-teams units need more time, this Cal team comes across as one that will be better as the season goes on.

In previous years, the Golden Bears were a program that had to stack wins early because consistently winning conference games wasn’t in the cards.

Not this year.

Saturday’s win proves Cal can win when far from its best. That’s a trait found in good teams.

Cal has tons of untapped potential right now, rather than a cap on what it can be. And yet, the Golden Bears still found a way to win an ACC game six hours away from home across multiple time zones, after taking a tough Week 1 loss on the chin.

It’s much easier to address what went wrong after a win. I’m eager to see who the Golden Bears really are against Clemson and beyond.

36 Comments
Discussion from...

Ruiz Report: Let Cal grow after gritty win vs. Syracuse

11,185 Views | 36 Replies | Last: 21 days ago by calumnus
Trumpanzee
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Hmm? What I witnessed was a Syracuse team that self destructed in their own home. If it wasn't for all the penalties (15 for 132 yards which was more yards than we gained on the ground and just 50 yards short of our total passing yards) this game should have been a win for Syracuse. But at the end of the day a win is a win and we are 1-0 in the ACC. We need a lot of help on both sides of the ball and coaching needs to get play calling corrected. I can honestly say I didn't feel comfortable at any part of this game.
upsetof86
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Did they lose it or did we win it. You could draw a thread through their special teams play/decisions as being the key to their losing the game. Two XPs skipped over v two failed 2PT attempts (2-4pts), one reasonable FG missed (3pts), and of course their PR TD (7pts) called back (tied in to their overall penalty issues). So that's ~12-14 points lost? On our side we missed a reasonable FG of our own and gave up a fake punt first down. So net a ~9-11pt factor. Arithmetically.
01Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
If Somerville's offense will take time to install, then he was the wrong hire from the outset. Cal needs to win and win now. It doesn't have the luxury of waiting around for Somerville's offense to catch on. Tosh needs to tell Somerville to sit down and install Rolo as the OC in fact; Somerville can remain the nominal OC so long as he has no duties beyond assisting Rolo.
nikeykid
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I will never complain about any road conference win 3,000 miles from home. style points are not important. learning to win when it comes down to a play or two is how a team really grows up fast. good write up!
Trumpanzee
How long do you want to ignore this user?
nikeykid said:

I will never complain about any road conference win 3,000 miles from home. style points are not important. learning to win when it comes down to a play or two is how a team really grows up fast. good write up!


I agree, so what's your answer for getting schooled in your own house from a cross state rival? I really didn't see much improvement from the UCLA game? The only difference is the officials were on our side and the chips fell to us instead.....
socaltownie
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The donors are going "Right on Ruiz". They watched a different game. I saw a VERy poorly coached team essentially steal a win on the road.
Rushinbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Trumpanzee said:

nikeykid said:

I will never complain about any road conference win 3,000 miles from home. style points are not important. learning to win when it comes down to a play or two is how a team really grows up fast. good write up!


I agree, so what's your answer for getting schooled in your own house from a cross state rival? I really didn't see much improvement from the UCLA game? The only difference is the officials were on our side and the chips fell to us instead.....

I must have missed all those off tackle runs by the cuse. and those int's? I must have been seeing things.

things still don't look great, but cuse didn't school us, near as I could tell. more subbing on the dl and lb. better wrap up.

next is catching the ball and ol coordination. wagner won't show us much, but give us a chance to work on more things.
Cal88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
01Bear said:

If Somerville's offense will take time to install, then he was the wrong hire from the outset. Cal needs to win and win now. It doesn't have the luxury of waiting around for Somerville's offense to catch on. Tosh needs to tell Somerville to sit down and install Rolo as the OC in fact; Somerville can remain the nominal OC so long as he has no duties beyond assisting Rolo.


He's coming from the NFL where it is easier to install a complex offense with seasoned 26 year old professional players. It was up to him to put in place a system that will be assimilated from day 1 with a college crew that includes many new players.
bluehenbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

showed that the Blue and Gold don't have any glaring holes lowering the team's ceiling.

Disagree --> OLINE: lack of pass protection, no up the middle rush lane, saw only one play (which almost got the clinching 1st down except for a bad spot not overturned cuz ****ty camera angles....) to outside edges. Their play (and play calling to mitigate their weaknesses) is our ceiling.

...and are we going to continue to ignore dropped passes as "bad luck".

nikeykid
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Trumpanzee said:

nikeykid said:

I will never complain about any road conference win 3,000 miles from home. style points are not important. learning to win when it comes down to a play or two is how a team really grows up fast. good write up!


I agree, so what's your answer for getting schooled in your own house from a cross state rival? I really didn't see much improvement from the UCLA game? The only difference is the officials were on our side and the chips fell to us instead.....

first game of new regime, we were tied in the 4th and didn't make plays to win, and they did. we were right there though, in the long run game 1 will be a fart in the wind.
Rushinbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
bluehenbear said:

Quote:

showed that the Blue and Gold don't have any glaring holes lowering the team's ceiling.

Disagree --> OLINE: lack of pass protection, no up the middle rush lane, saw only one play (which almost got the clinching 1st down except for a bad spot not overturned cuz ****ty camera angles....) to outside edges. Their play (and play calling to mitigate their weaknesses) is our ceiling.

...and are we going to continue to ignore dropped passes as "bad luck".



at this stage, the wr's have the skills. now, it's time for them to get the sacrificing part. they have to give up their bodies entirely to make the plays. they gotta wanna. haven't seen much of that yet.
ac_green33
How long do you want to ignore this user?
socaltownie said:

I posted over at SUnshine pumping central (the paid board) essentially this criticism. The donors are going "Right on Ruiz". They watched a different game. I saw a VERy poorly coached team essentially steal a win on the road.

Your rant didnt even have basic facts right. You said we only got one sack and gave up 3. Just backwards and demonstrably false. A ton of people agree with a lot of the criticisms you brought up, if you bothered to pay attention to anything other than your own musings.
89Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
socaltownie said:

I posted over at SUnshine pumping central (the paid board) essentially this criticism. The donors are going "Right on Ruiz". They watched a different game. I saw a VERy poorly coached team essentially steal a win on the road.

Different people will have different takes. This "sunshine pumping central" dig is childish.
01Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cal88 said:

01Bear said:

If Somerville's offense will take time to install, then he was the wrong hire from the outset. Cal needs to win and win now. It doesn't have the luxury of waiting around for Somerville's offense to catch on. Tosh needs to tell Somerville to sit down and install Rolo as the OC in fact; Somerville can remain the nominal OC so long as he has no duties beyond assisting Rolo.


He's coming from the NFL where it is easier to install a complex offense with seasoned 26 year old professional players. It was up to him to put in place a system that will be assimilated from day 1 with a college crew that includes many new players.

That's more reason why he was the wrong hire from the get-go. Cal doesn't have the luxury of time to install a new complex offense. Cal needs to win immediately. Heck, college offenses may need to be simplified even more especially because there's going to be so much personnel churn every year, it doesn't make sense to install complex offenses just to lose key players for the system and have to reinstall the system with new key players year after year. Tosh should've hired an OC with an offense that can be installed and learned quickly but still produce results on the field.
Rushinbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
01Bear said:

Cal88 said:

01Bear said:

If Somerville's offense will take time to install, then he was the wrong hire from the outset. Cal needs to win and win now. It doesn't have the luxury of waiting around for Somerville's offense to catch on. Tosh needs to tell Somerville to sit down and install Rolo as the OC in fact; Somerville can remain the nominal OC so long as he has no duties beyond assisting Rolo.


He's coming from the NFL where it is easier to install a complex offense with seasoned 26 year old professional players. It was up to him to put in place a system that will be assimilated from day 1 with a college crew that includes many new players.

That's more reason why he was the wrong hire from the get-go. Cal doesn't have the luxury of time to install a new complex offense. Cal needs to win immediately. Heck, college offenses may need to be simplified even more especially because there's going to be so much personnel churn every year, it doesn't make sense to install complex offenses just to lose key players for the system and have to reinstall the system with new key players year after year. Tosh should've hired an OC with an offense that can be installed and learned quickly but still produce results on the field.

I'm with you on the simplicity of O system, with the understanding that the simpler it is, the better the players you have to have to run it. Because the oppo will figure it out in two drives. Woody Hayes had 6 running plays, 3 of which they practiced incessantly. The OL hated practice, but loved games. 'Course, then he punched that opposing player on the sidelines...
01Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Rushinbear said:

01Bear said:

Cal88 said:

01Bear said:

If Somerville's offense will take time to install, then he was the wrong hire from the outset. Cal needs to win and win now. It doesn't have the luxury of waiting around for Somerville's offense to catch on. Tosh needs to tell Somerville to sit down and install Rolo as the OC in fact; Somerville can remain the nominal OC so long as he has no duties beyond assisting Rolo.


He's coming from the NFL where it is easier to install a complex offense with seasoned 26 year old professional players. It was up to him to put in place a system that will be assimilated from day 1 with a college crew that includes many new players.

That's more reason why he was the wrong hire from the get-go. Cal doesn't have the luxury of time to install a new complex offense. Cal needs to win immediately. Heck, college offenses may need to be simplified even more especially because there's going to be so much personnel churn every year, it doesn't make sense to install complex offenses just to lose key players for the system and have to reinstall the system with new key players year after year. Tosh should've hired an OC with an offense that can be installed and learned quickly but still produce results on the field.

I'm with you on the simplicity of O system, with the understanding that the simpler it is, the better the players you have to have to run it. Because the oppo will figure it out in two drives. Woody Hayes had 6 running plays, 3 of which they practiced incessantly. The OL hated practice, but loved games. 'Course, then he punched that opposing player on the sidelines...

Yup, it's like Bruce Lee said, he didn't fear the man who practiced 10,000 kicks once, he feared the one who practiced 1 kick 10,000 times.

Something simple, basic, but executed with complete mastery is more dangerous than a complex scheme executed poorly. Installing a scheme so simple the players can master and execute it perfectly with just the time spent in summer training means come game time, the players will be ready to go. Installing a complex scheme that takes six months or a year to master means the players won't be ready come game time.

Since Cal needs the team to win immediately, the right scheme to install is not a complex one. Yet, Somerville doesn't seem to understand this simple bit of logic. Again, this just goes to prove he's not the right person for the OC position.
upsetof86
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I'd love this offense to run an air raid type of RPO with its route tree adjustments. In the hands of JKS with Mohammed at RB we would have Goff 2.0 like results I'm convinced. Simple with the illusion of highly dynamic, get the ball out fast most of the time. We just don't need to play it like a two minute drill. Get a lead and force the opponent to throw more against our D/DBs. Is this heresy?
BearlyBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I actually went back and looked at some of the film and Somerville's playcalling this week wasn't as bad as I thought. There were some marked improvements and adjustments. Is it still the wrong philosophy? Perhaps and even probably. Especially for the situation of the program. But a lot went wrong because our O-line couldn't execute, a blocker missed an assignment, a receiver was a tad off or the like. Almost a freak occurence of bad execution on an already kind of disjointed offense. Not sure how an OC would work around the problems on the offense honestly unless there's some improvements to the fundamentals.

Well, some of the playcalling especially in the run game was still inscrutable. I guess that would be a start. A lot of the plays also seem like they don't have enough time to develop. We might just not have the talent to fit this particular scheme which looks to rely on executing well through a lot of points of failure
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sagapolutele was only sacked ONCE on Saturday despite playing on a still sore ankle. That is huge. He was sacked 30 times last year. The year before that Fernando, a future Heisman winner and #1 pick, was sacked 41 times in 11 games.

A big part of the credit goes to the offensive coordinator (and of course to Sagapolutele abd the offensive line).
Cal88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Hopefully by the Clemson game a lot of wrinkles will be ironed, the Wagner game comes at the right time.

Maybe we'll get to see the QB room in the second half.
HearstMining
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Several thoughts:

  • JKS obviously wants to go to the NFL as soon as possible and to ensure his return to Cal, this could have contributed to Tosh selecting an OC with NFL experience. Maybe with the $ that Tosh had, Somerville was the best he could do.
  • The high rate of Portal transfers makes the appeal of implementing a simplified offense obvious. But successfully running a simple offense means your athletes have to be better than the opposition and this is particularly not the case for Cal's OL. Having some motion, shifts, etc. may be necessary for Cal to compete.
  • Cal is faced with the age-old problem of the Cal DL practicing against the Cal OL and neither is consistently good. Hopefully the influx of HS recruits will change this.
  • Folks made a big deal about Cal Jericho Johnson transferring to Cal from Oregon. So far, he just looks like the second coming of Viliami Moala - fat and poorly conditioned.
  • Honestly, I like the general offense (if not the play selection) and hope/think the team gets better as the season progresses. Hey, I even saw Cal successfully run at least one pitch-out against Syracuse. It didn't exactly conjure up memories of Muncie, White, or Marshawn, but I'll take it!
Cal88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Good points.

As to Johnson, coming from Oregon and being a DL, I would trust Tosh's assessment on his potential.
calBlitz
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearlyBear said:

I actually went back and looked at some of the film and Somerville's playcalling this week wasn't as bad as I thought. There were some marked improvements and adjustments. Is it still the wrong philosophy? Perhaps and even probably. Especially for the situation of the program. But a lot went wrong because our O-line couldn't execute, a blocker missed an assignment, a receiver was a tad off or the like. Almost a freak occurence of bad execution on an already kind of disjointed offense. Not sure how an OC would work around the problems on the offense honestly unless there's some improvements to the fundamentals.

Well, some of the playcalling especially in the run game was still inscrutable. I guess that would be a start. A lot of the plays also seem like they don't have enough time to develop. We might just not have the talent to fit this particular scheme which looks to rely on executing well through a lot of points of failure


The O-line has definitely not improved. The offense in general has not improved. I would even say JKS, to this point, has somewhat regressed. Look at the last offensive possession of the Syracuse game, the attempt at making a first down to seal the game was a joke. Three consecutive runs. The staff gave me the impression they had no faith that JKS and the passing game could generate one first down.
TomBear
How long do you want to ignore this user?

You can correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe JKS was sacked only once or twice and was hurried only one other time than that. JKS is still very possibly dealing with a tender ankle and dependent upon severity, could be dealing with it for another week or two (remember, Cal has a plastic field). And the play selection was a little bit better vs. what we saw vs. UC(la).

I'll take a "little" improvement each week vs. a loss each week.

I am hopeful that by the time we get to Clemson and UNLV, that things will be much improved and even maybe stable.

New coach, new culture, new schemes, new players. Give us an easier opponent like Wagner to iron things out, and I hope after that we'll be pretty cohesive.
Big C
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cal88 said:

01Bear said:

If Somerville's offense will take time to install, then he was the wrong hire from the outset. Cal needs to win and win now. It doesn't have the luxury of waiting around for Somerville's offense to catch on. Tosh needs to tell Somerville to sit down and install Rolo as the OC in fact; Somerville can remain the nominal OC so long as he has no duties beyond assisting Rolo.


He's coming from the NFL where it is easier to install a complex offense with seasoned 26 year old professional players. It was up to him to put in place a system that will be assimilated from day 1 with a college crew that includes many new players.

Correct. I have expressed concern since the spring that maybe the young OCs from the NFL would try to implement schemes that were too complicated. They should've understood this, what with the amount they're getting paid.

OTOH, one thing the offense did better in Game Two was exploit the middle / deep middle of the field.

I'm hopeful, if not super-optimistic, that we will continue to get better.
BearSD
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calBlitz said:

BearlyBear said:

I actually went back and looked at some of the film and Somerville's playcalling this week wasn't as bad as I thought. There were some marked improvements and adjustments. Is it still the wrong philosophy? Perhaps and even probably. Especially for the situation of the program. But a lot went wrong because our O-line couldn't execute, a blocker missed an assignment, a receiver was a tad off or the like. Almost a freak occurence of bad execution on an already kind of disjointed offense. Not sure how an OC would work around the problems on the offense honestly unless there's some improvements to the fundamentals.

Well, some of the playcalling especially in the run game was still inscrutable. I guess that would be a start. A lot of the plays also seem like they don't have enough time to develop. We might just not have the talent to fit this particular scheme which looks to rely on executing well through a lot of points of failure


The O-line has definitely not improved. The offense in general has not improved. I would even say JKS, to this point, has somewhat regressed. Look at the last offensive possession of the Syracuse game, the attempt at making a first down to seal the game was a joke. Three consecutive runs. The staff gave me the impression they had no faith that JKS and the passing game could generate one first down.

IMO the decision to run three times to try to make a first down and then run out the clock is defensible. Many teams do the same, because the idea is to run as much clock as possible, force the other team to use all of its timeouts, and not stop the clock with an incomplete pass. Late in the fourth quarter, the defense is theoretically tired, and it should be possible to get a first down by running two or three times. Other teams manage to do it.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearSD said:

calBlitz said:

BearlyBear said:

I actually went back and looked at some of the film and Somerville's playcalling this week wasn't as bad as I thought. There were some marked improvements and adjustments. Is it still the wrong philosophy? Perhaps and even probably. Especially for the situation of the program. But a lot went wrong because our O-line couldn't execute, a blocker missed an assignment, a receiver was a tad off or the like. Almost a freak occurence of bad execution on an already kind of disjointed offense. Not sure how an OC would work around the problems on the offense honestly unless there's some improvements to the fundamentals.

Well, some of the playcalling especially in the run game was still inscrutable. I guess that would be a start. A lot of the plays also seem like they don't have enough time to develop. We might just not have the talent to fit this particular scheme which looks to rely on executing well through a lot of points of failure


The O-line has definitely not improved. The offense in general has not improved. I would even say JKS, to this point, has somewhat regressed. Look at the last offensive possession of the Syracuse game, the attempt at making a first down to seal the game was a joke. Three consecutive runs. The staff gave me the impression they had no faith that JKS and the passing game could generate one first down.

IMO the decision to run three times to try to make a first down and then run out the clock is defensible. Many teams do the same, because the idea is to run as much clock as possible, force the other team to use all of its timeouts, and not stop the clock with an incomplete pass. Late in the fourth quarter, the defense is theoretically tired, and it should be possible to get a first down by running two or three times. Other teams manage to do it.

Yes, it is the standard playcall, which is "defensible" because the typical, average coach will call it, but is disappointing. It is what Wilcox did repeatedly to lose games in the 4th quarter.

I think in that situation, the vast majority of the time you run on first and second down, the defense expects you to run and sells out to stop you, so (unless you have a dominating OL which we dont) you get little gain and you are forced to pass on third down. So, knowing you almost certainly are going have to pass eventually anyway, it is best to pass sooner, when they are still expecting you to run.

Moreover, on first and/or second down, while they are expecting you to run, if you run play action, with Muhammad crashing into the LOS, showing them what they are expecting, they will bite HARD, trying to stop him for no gain. Sagapolutele can roll left and hit a wide open Mini or Thomas behind the safeties, or a WR deep over the middle of the field. Worst case JKS has an open running lane for a good gain. If you do that a few times they will stop biting on the handoff to Muhammad and then when you do give it to him he will get a good gain.
BearSD
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

BearSD said:

calBlitz said:

BearlyBear said:

I actually went back and looked at some of the film and Somerville's playcalling this week wasn't as bad as I thought. There were some marked improvements and adjustments. Is it still the wrong philosophy? Perhaps and even probably. Especially for the situation of the program. But a lot went wrong because our O-line couldn't execute, a blocker missed an assignment, a receiver was a tad off or the like. Almost a freak occurence of bad execution on an already kind of disjointed offense. Not sure how an OC would work around the problems on the offense honestly unless there's some improvements to the fundamentals.

Well, some of the playcalling especially in the run game was still inscrutable. I guess that would be a start. A lot of the plays also seem like they don't have enough time to develop. We might just not have the talent to fit this particular scheme which looks to rely on executing well through a lot of points of failure


The O-line has definitely not improved. The offense in general has not improved. I would even say JKS, to this point, has somewhat regressed. Look at the last offensive possession of the Syracuse game, the attempt at making a first down to seal the game was a joke. Three consecutive runs. The staff gave me the impression they had no faith that JKS and the passing game could generate one first down.

IMO the decision to run three times to try to make a first down and then run out the clock is defensible. Many teams do the same, because the idea is to run as much clock as possible, force the other team to use all of its timeouts, and not stop the clock with an incomplete pass. Late in the fourth quarter, the defense is theoretically tired, and it should be possible to get a first down by running two or three times. Other teams manage to do it.

Yes, it is the standard playcall, which is "defensible" because the typical, average coach will call it, but is disappointing. It is what Wilcox did repeatedly to lose games in the 4th quarter.

The play call is not disappointing. What's disappointing is that our Bears can't successfully run for first downs in those situations when so many other teams do it well.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearSD said:

calumnus said:

BearSD said:

calBlitz said:

BearlyBear said:

I actually went back and looked at some of the film and Somerville's playcalling this week wasn't as bad as I thought. There were some marked improvements and adjustments. Is it still the wrong philosophy? Perhaps and even probably. Especially for the situation of the program. But a lot went wrong because our O-line couldn't execute, a blocker missed an assignment, a receiver was a tad off or the like. Almost a freak occurence of bad execution on an already kind of disjointed offense. Not sure how an OC would work around the problems on the offense honestly unless there's some improvements to the fundamentals.

Well, some of the playcalling especially in the run game was still inscrutable. I guess that would be a start. A lot of the plays also seem like they don't have enough time to develop. We might just not have the talent to fit this particular scheme which looks to rely on executing well through a lot of points of failure


The O-line has definitely not improved. The offense in general has not improved. I would even say JKS, to this point, has somewhat regressed. Look at the last offensive possession of the Syracuse game, the attempt at making a first down to seal the game was a joke. Three consecutive runs. The staff gave me the impression they had no faith that JKS and the passing game could generate one first down.

IMO the decision to run three times to try to make a first down and then run out the clock is defensible. Many teams do the same, because the idea is to run as much clock as possible, force the other team to use all of its timeouts, and not stop the clock with an incomplete pass. Late in the fourth quarter, the defense is theoretically tired, and it should be possible to get a first down by running two or three times. Other teams manage to do it.

Yes, it is the standard playcall, which is "defensible" because the typical, average coach will call it, but is disappointing. It is what Wilcox did repeatedly to lose games in the 4th quarter.

The play call is not disappointing. What's disappointing is that our Bears can't successfully run for first downs in those situations when so many other teams do it well.

I'm not disappointed we cant run for first downs in that situation because i came to understand and expect that most likely we cant.

Last year we were #131 out of 136 in yards per carry. We averaged 2.8 ypc. And that was throughout the game. On first down and times like this where the defense was expecting the run and we ran anyway, Im sure we averaged far less. It is almost guaranteeing a 3rd and 5 or worse.

This year? We are #130 in yards per carry, again at 2.8 ypc. Zero improvement. Again, if we cannot get those yards consistently throughout the game it is crazy to expect you can suddenly get them with the game on the line and the defense expecting it. As an OC you have to deal with the reality of what you have to work with, not what you wish you had or were.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result.

I dont blame Summerville too much for calling it in game two, because it is so common, but it was disappointing to me because I was hoping he would be better than common, even brilliant. Hopefully he has a better understanding of our strengths and weaknesses going forward and utilizes a lot more misdirection in our offense. He did on both of our TD plays. They were brilliant. He just needs to use those kinds of plays regularly to sustain drives instead of only using them in the red zone and hoping to get there running vanilla.

Or to your point, hopefully our OL and running game become dominant, averaging 5+ ypc running between the tackles and then at the end of the game the OC can reliably grind out wins on the ground. I will be happy if we do, but im not expecting it and hope our OC doesnt expect it either and instead calls plays that utlize misdirection and run counter to the defenses' expectations.
BearSD
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

BearSD said:

calumnus said:

BearSD said:

calBlitz said:

BearlyBear said:

I actually went back and looked at some of the film and Somerville's playcalling this week wasn't as bad as I thought. There were some marked improvements and adjustments. Is it still the wrong philosophy? Perhaps and even probably. Especially for the situation of the program. But a lot went wrong because our O-line couldn't execute, a blocker missed an assignment, a receiver was a tad off or the like. Almost a freak occurence of bad execution on an already kind of disjointed offense. Not sure how an OC would work around the problems on the offense honestly unless there's some improvements to the fundamentals.

Well, some of the playcalling especially in the run game was still inscrutable. I guess that would be a start. A lot of the plays also seem like they don't have enough time to develop. We might just not have the talent to fit this particular scheme which looks to rely on executing well through a lot of points of failure


The O-line has definitely not improved. The offense in general has not improved. I would even say JKS, to this point, has somewhat regressed. Look at the last offensive possession of the Syracuse game, the attempt at making a first down to seal the game was a joke. Three consecutive runs. The staff gave me the impression they had no faith that JKS and the passing game could generate one first down.

IMO the decision to run three times to try to make a first down and then run out the clock is defensible. Many teams do the same, because the idea is to run as much clock as possible, force the other team to use all of its timeouts, and not stop the clock with an incomplete pass. Late in the fourth quarter, the defense is theoretically tired, and it should be possible to get a first down by running two or three times. Other teams manage to do it.

Yes, it is the standard playcall, which is "defensible" because the typical, average coach will call it, but is disappointing. It is what Wilcox did repeatedly to lose games in the 4th quarter.

The play call is not disappointing. What's disappointing is that our Bears can't successfully run for first downs in those situations when so many other teams do it well.

I'm not disappointed we cant run for first downs in that situation because i came to understand and expect that most likely we cant.

Last year we were #131 out of 136 in yards per carry. We averaged 2.8 ypc. And that was throughout the game. On first down and times like this where the defense was expecting the run and we ran anyway, Im sure we averaged far less. It is almost guaranteeing a 3rd and 5 or worse.

This year? We are #130 in yards per carry, again at 2.8 ypc. Zero improvement. Again, if we cannot get those yards consistently throughout the game it is crazy to expect you can suddenly get them with the game on the line and the defense expecting it. As an OC you have to deal with the reality of what you have to work with, not what you wish you had or were.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result.

I dont blame Summerville too much for calling it in game two, because it is so common, but it was disappointing to me because I was hoping he would be better than common, even brilliant. Hopefully he has a better understanding of our strengths and weaknesses going forward and utilizes a lot more misdirection in our offense. He did on both of our TD plays. They were brilliant. He just needs to use those kinds of plays regularly to sustain drives instead of only using them in the red zone and hoping to get there running vanilla.

Or to your point, hopefully our OL and running game become dominant, averaging 5+ ypc running between the tackles and then at the end of the game the OC can reliably grind out wins on the ground. I will be happy if we do, but im not expecting it and hope our OC doesnt expect it either and instead calls plays that utlize misdirection and run counter to the defenses' expectations.


If Cal is #130 in rushing yards per carry, then *that* is what's indefensible, and it's a problem that should be fixed, not just schemed around.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearSD said:

calumnus said:

BearSD said:

calumnus said:

BearSD said:

calBlitz said:

BearlyBear said:

I actually went back and looked at some of the film and Somerville's playcalling this week wasn't as bad as I thought. There were some marked improvements and adjustments. Is it still the wrong philosophy? Perhaps and even probably. Especially for the situation of the program. But a lot went wrong because our O-line couldn't execute, a blocker missed an assignment, a receiver was a tad off or the like. Almost a freak occurence of bad execution on an already kind of disjointed offense. Not sure how an OC would work around the problems on the offense honestly unless there's some improvements to the fundamentals.

Well, some of the playcalling especially in the run game was still inscrutable. I guess that would be a start. A lot of the plays also seem like they don't have enough time to develop. We might just not have the talent to fit this particular scheme which looks to rely on executing well through a lot of points of failure


The O-line has definitely not improved. The offense in general has not improved. I would even say JKS, to this point, has somewhat regressed. Look at the last offensive possession of the Syracuse game, the attempt at making a first down to seal the game was a joke. Three consecutive runs. The staff gave me the impression they had no faith that JKS and the passing game could generate one first down.

IMO the decision to run three times to try to make a first down and then run out the clock is defensible. Many teams do the same, because the idea is to run as much clock as possible, force the other team to use all of its timeouts, and not stop the clock with an incomplete pass. Late in the fourth quarter, the defense is theoretically tired, and it should be possible to get a first down by running two or three times. Other teams manage to do it.

Yes, it is the standard playcall, which is "defensible" because the typical, average coach will call it, but is disappointing. It is what Wilcox did repeatedly to lose games in the 4th quarter.

The play call is not disappointing. What's disappointing is that our Bears can't successfully run for first downs in those situations when so many other teams do it well.

I'm not disappointed we cant run for first downs in that situation because i came to understand and expect that most likely we cant.

Last year we were #131 out of 136 in yards per carry. We averaged 2.8 ypc. And that was throughout the game. On first down and times like this where the defense was expecting the run and we ran anyway, Im sure we averaged far less. It is almost guaranteeing a 3rd and 5 or worse.

This year? We are #130 in yards per carry, again at 2.8 ypc. Zero improvement. Again, if we cannot get those yards consistently throughout the game it is crazy to expect you can suddenly get them with the game on the line and the defense expecting it. As an OC you have to deal with the reality of what you have to work with, not what you wish you had or were.

The definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result.

I dont blame Summerville too much for calling it in game two, because it is so common, but it was disappointing to me because I was hoping he would be better than common, even brilliant. Hopefully he has a better understanding of our strengths and weaknesses going forward and utilizes a lot more misdirection in our offense. He did on both of our TD plays. They were brilliant. He just needs to use those kinds of plays regularly to sustain drives instead of only using them in the red zone and hoping to get there running vanilla.

Or to your point, hopefully our OL and running game become dominant, averaging 5+ ypc running between the tackles and then at the end of the game the OC can reliably grind out wins on the ground. I will be happy if we do, but im not expecting it and hope our OC doesnt expect it either and instead calls plays that utlize misdirection and run counter to the defenses' expectations.


If Cal is #130 in rushing yards per carry, then *that* is what's indefensible, and it's a problem that should be fixed, not just schemed around.

It is not either/or it is both. By running out of two-tight end sets and varying the point of attack, running Muhammad out of the pistol, mixing in more playaction and being less predictable, it will help the run game be more productive. That is the job of the OC even as the OL coach works on OL technique, motivation, etc. and we continue to recruit better players.
Sonofoski
How long do you want to ignore this user?
There should have been a play action pass on first down to the tight end. I agree, there should be every effort to run the clock out but we do not have a Jayden Ott at running back, we have a grinder who cannot always get to the edge.
calBlitz
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

It is not either/or it is both. By running out of two-tight end sets and varying the point of attack, running Muhammad out of the pistol, mixing in more playaction and being less predictable, it will help the run game be more productive. That is the job of the OC even as the OL coach works on OL technique, motivation, etc. and we continue to recruit better players.


Good points calumnus. What really bothers me about the last possession is it reeks of playing not lose. Gaining just one first down essentially seals the game. The Cal strategy, given our inability to run the ball, guaranteed that Syracuse would've one last chance of tying or winning the game.
calBlitz
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sonofoski said:

There should have been a play action pass on first down to the tight end. I agree, there should be every effort to run the clock out but we do not have a Jayden Ott at running back, we have a grinder who cannot always get to the edge.

The problem is Cal has a very questionable O-line. We had Ott back in 2024, but his rushing had decreased due to the O-line regressing from 2023. I think the cause was the OC was also the O-line coach. The HC and OC should recognize that fact, but on the last Cal offensive possession went with the primary goal of making Syracuse expend all their timeouts and let the Cal defense decide the game. Yes, the Cal defense won the game, but this strategy will fail against a QB better than Angelli.
ac_green33
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calBlitz said:

Sonofoski said:

There should have been a play action pass on first down to the tight end. I agree, there should be every effort to run the clock out but we do not have a Jayden Ott at running back, we have a grinder who cannot always get to the edge.

The problem is Cal has a very questionable O-line. We had Ott back in 2024, but his rushing had decreased due to the O-line regressing from 2023. I think the cause was the OC was also the O-line coach. The HC and OC should recognize that fact, but on the last Cal offensive possession went with the primary goal of making Syracuse expend all their timeouts and let the Cal defense decide the game. Yes, the Cal defense won the game, but this strategy will fail against a QB better than Angelli.

I feel like this is a bit of revisionism regarding Angeli. Before the season, he would at worst be the 4th best QB we face this year. And our defense has agency and was a factor in him playing poorly!
Page 1 of 2 ▼
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.