I always enjoy reading your articles even when you are blowing a gasket!!
I feel the OL played a great game and there is a lot to build from there. As you stated, the OL has not been a strength for this team. Hopefully the recent tape of these young OL will inspire the staff to mix things up. To my eye several of these youngins deserve more PT and the "veterans" just haven't gotten the job done, period. Saturday's OL was close to the OL I preferred to start this season, so I'm bullish on the OL. Running the ball is still an issue for the Bears but it would seem that we need to play the quicker backs for the time being.
I concur on the "block in the back". It appeared, on replay, that initially the defender and blocker were face-to-face but then the defender turned his back and the blockers momentum carried him into it. A poor call but I'm a homer.
The blocked punt was just a great play by the defender. He put on a juke and 49 damn near broke his ankles trying to adjust to it. Perhaps the punter was meant to roll with the wall perhaps not. Sometimes the opponent makes a great play and that was one IMO.
There is a lot of good about this season. Young players are getting PT and coaches have tape to evaluate. This is a positive.
A negative, with just weeks until early signing Cal may have some difficulty holding on to commits. Let's hope this does not happen.
A better punter would solve many of our problems. With Cal backed up deep in their own territory and minimal pressure, Sheahan's punts were 24(!), 40, 37, and 38 yards. That's below-average at the P5 level. No wonder Oregon State had so few yards; they had half the field to travel than we did.
The issue is, in years past, punters (and kickers) were widely ignored in the recruiting process, meaning that your local talented legs would inevitably end up in your program. Now, recruiting budgets have ballooned enough to justify national recruiting of special teams, meaning that the best legs go to the best programs. Ryan Longwell and Bryan Anger would be on Alabama and Clemson, not with us, if they graduated now.
Just an addendum, I don't have any data on Sheahan's punting windup, but it looks to be at least a full second longer than a normal punter (he makes a running start and lowers the ball to his foot rather than his foot meeting the ball). So not only are his punts short, but any punt blocking unit has a lot longer to get to him.
If conditions remained the same for this game (with the removed players), I'd say Cal wins this game 6 times out of 10. Smith outcoached Wilcox this one, plain and simple. It's just the nature of college football, especially in a shortened season, that the better players don't always win. If we had been able to play our first game (and assuming both of our lines weren't positive that week of practice), I figure we'd have a pretty good shot at 3-0. The Huskies basically got the bounces (aka, the refs) against Oregon State that we didn't.
It's impossible to say, other than to presume that Wilcox hires a coach who will run an offense with a style and philosophy that fits his coaching, and that coaches that want to coach under Wilcox will likely want to play under him because they share his style and philosophy.
I think it has to do with the talent. Polk is only a sophomore out of necessity; as a 3*, he should really be a redshirt freshman not contributing until his third year. Remigio can't run routes. Crawford couldn't cut it at Michigan; why should he do any better here? At tight end, our starter is a walk-on, and his two backups are a walk-on and a 2*.
I don't blame Wilcox, or really any of the coaches, for the offense's struggles. Players, not plays.
If a pattern has been detected (confirmed) I think it would be reasonable to say it's on Wilcox. Perhaps a beat writer could bring this up during a presser and ask Wilcox if he has a mandate to run the ball with an xx point lead?
But as was stated, Cal can't run the ball on demand when everyone knows they are going to run it. Although I recall a game last year (year before??) where call started the second half and ran the ball like 9 consecutive times down the field.
I guess we have been conditioned to think that all rugby style Aussie punters are great. But Cal's punts were all low and easily returnable. We know that Aussie punters like to survey the field and run around a little to give the coverage team time to get down and smother the punt. But it looked like he ran forward and straight into the guy that blocked his kick. Is there another guy who can kick on the roster?
I think that kind of policy is more likely to harm than hurt. Special teams plays are too chaotic to ever eliminate those kinds of flags, and benching players who commit them will only result in less experienced players taking the place of the guys you bench.
I always enjoy reading your articles even when you are blowing a gasket!!
I feel the OL played a great game and there is a lot to build from there. As you stated, the OL has not been a strength for this team. Hopefully the recent tape of these young OL will inspire the staff to mix things up. To my eye several of these youngins deserve more PT and the "veterans" just haven't gotten the job done, period. Saturday's OL was close to the OL I preferred to start this season, so I'm bullish on the OL. Running the ball is still an issue for the Bears but it would seem that we need to play the quicker backs for the time being.
I concur on the "block in the back". It appeared, on replay, that initially the defender and blocker were face-to-face but then the defender turned his back and the blockers momentum carried him into it. A poor call but I'm a homer.
The blocked punt was just a great play by the defender. He put on a juke and 49 damn near broke his ankles trying to adjust to it. Perhaps the punter was meant to roll with the wall perhaps not. Sometimes the opponent makes a great play and that was one IMO.
There is a lot of good about this season. Young players are getting PT and coaches have tape to evaluate. This is a positive.
A negative, with just weeks until early signing Cal may have some difficulty holding on to commits. Let's hope this does not happen.
Go Bears beat the 'furd!!
A better punter would solve many of our problems. With Cal backed up deep in their own territory and minimal pressure, Sheahan's punts were 24(!), 40, 37, and 38 yards. That's below-average at the P5 level. No wonder Oregon State had so few yards; they had half the field to travel than we did.
The issue is, in years past, punters (and kickers) were widely ignored in the recruiting process, meaning that your local talented legs would inevitably end up in your program. Now, recruiting budgets have ballooned enough to justify national recruiting of special teams, meaning that the best legs go to the best programs. Ryan Longwell and Bryan Anger would be on Alabama and Clemson, not with us, if they graduated now.
Just an addendum, I don't have any data on Sheahan's punting windup, but it looks to be at least a full second longer than a normal punter (he makes a running start and lowers the ball to his foot rather than his foot meeting the ball). So not only are his punts short, but any punt blocking unit has a lot longer to get to him.
If conditions remained the same for this game (with the removed players), I'd say Cal wins this game 6 times out of 10. Smith outcoached Wilcox this one, plain and simple. It's just the nature of college football, especially in a shortened season, that the better players don't always win. If we had been able to play our first game (and assuming both of our lines weren't positive that week of practice), I figure we'd have a pretty good shot at 3-0. The Huskies basically got the bounces (aka, the refs) against Oregon State that we didn't.
About the turtling of the offense. It’s now two different OCs but same turtling issue. Do you think this has more to do with Wilcox than the OCs?
It's impossible to say, other than to presume that Wilcox hires a coach who will run an offense with a style and philosophy that fits his coaching, and that coaches that want to coach under Wilcox will likely want to play under him because they share his style and philosophy.
I think it has to do with the talent. Polk is only a sophomore out of necessity; as a 3*, he should really be a redshirt freshman not contributing until his third year. Remigio can't run routes. Crawford couldn't cut it at Michigan; why should he do any better here? At tight end, our starter is a walk-on, and his two backups are a walk-on and a 2*.
I don't blame Wilcox, or really any of the coaches, for the offense's struggles. Players, not plays.
If a pattern has been detected (confirmed) I think it would be reasonable to say it's on Wilcox. Perhaps a beat writer could bring this up during a presser and ask Wilcox if he has a mandate to run the ball with an xx point lead?
But as was stated, Cal can't run the ball on demand when everyone knows they are going to run it. Although I recall a game last year (year before??) where call started the second half and ran the ball like 9 consecutive times down the field.
If that question were asked, I'm sure he'd say that they don't coach that way, that they call the plays that they think will succeed.
EDIT: ...where **Cal** started the second half and ran the ball like 9 consecutive times down the field.
It was last year. It was one of the games that Modster started. It was right after halftime. They marched down field. It was impressive.
Amen on the last point. Keep the axe
I guess we have been conditioned to think that all rugby style Aussie punters are great. But Cal's punts were all low and easily returnable. We know that Aussie punters like to survey the field and run around a little to give the coverage team time to get down and smother the punt. But it looked like he ran forward and straight into the guy that blocked his kick. Is there another guy who can kick on the roster?
Pump that sunshine!
I think that kind of policy is more likely to harm than hurt. Special teams plays are too chaotic to ever eliminate those kinds of flags, and benching players who commit them will only result in less experienced players taking the place of the guys you bench.