Great write-up as always. 3 quick questions: do you have an opinion why Street saw playing time before Moore? And similarly, why Alftin saw time at TE as Tonges, Reinwald and Moore all played as well? Has the team moved away from the "star" position we heard about a few seasons ago. Paster looks like he is playing a traditional ILB position to my naive eyes? (hope it's ok to get away from the weird attack thread and back to football.)
1) I do not, honestly. I don't think it's bad by any means, though. He'll be needed in the future, at this rate (esp with no backs in the 2022 class atm)
2) Alftin had two snaps at TE, per PFF - he'd been switched here from OLB a few seasons ago but is behind those guys you mentioned. Because we run 2 and 3 TE sets a lot, it's not uncommon to see some of those depth guys show up - there were five this week with Latu also making a 2 snap appearance.
3) Yes, Trey is playing the traditional inside linebacker role 20 pounds short at the moment. It's my understanding that the STAR is really just their hope to get a hybrid linebacker/safety on the field, but this year with us playing a 2-4-5 a lot of the time, that 5th DB has been Drayden. In the future they would ideally like it to be someone both bigger than him, but roughly as quick/fast to keep up with slot guys as well as wide receivers (with this position not currently existing, one of Scott/Hicks is often responsible instead). Trey was a strong candidate for that role when he came in, but at the moment, they seem to like what he does more on the inside straight up.
I'm confused, did Cal lose this game? Did Cal's defense without 45% of its starters (Deng, Mo, BJ, McKenzie, Goode) not take down a top Pac12 offense? Granted there is still a steep hill ahead. But c'mon man!!
Two weeks, mate. Colorado and OSU. A third time will make it a trend. Colorado was the blip. Should the OL produce at 80% of what they did against OSU, from here on out, we will be bowling. Granted that's a big IF and a big ask from a unit that hasn't held up in over 2 years.
Either way the influx of young players in a developmental program like Cal is promising. Granted this production goes counter to the drum beat that Cal coaches can't coach and that Wilcox should be gone. Takes time to develop a team be it sport or corporate, Avinash. Wilcox is getting there with a few speed bumps along the way.
Colorado and Arizona aren't likely to beat a single FBS program this year aside from CU beating Arizona. Those are not indicative of future success as a program. If we DON'T win by double-digits against those teams I'd be on high alert.
Wilcox's future rests heavily on these final three games.
I mean, I wouldn't say *heavily*, since it's a foregone conclusion he'll return...but it's the difference about how happy we should be about him leading what will be a pseudo-rebuild again. I was hoping we would have a clearer idea by now, and I remain unconvinced he'll take us further than 7-5. Here's to finding out otherwise!
"First and foremost, the defensive effort to hold a dominant rushing team down to 4.3 yards per carry is impressive. That starts up front -- they played Ricky Correia on clear rushing situations to help with this, and even those JH Tevis and Luc Bequette struggled when they ran it against the 2-4-5, it truly was a team effort to keep Oregon State off schedule, where the Beavers averaged 5.3 yards to go on third down (essentially, no longer a rushing situation) and finished 0-4 on Power situations. From there, with them behind the chains -- and down two possessions most of the time -- the Bears were able to coast on what was their ideal game-state anyway.
It’s not the cast of guys anyone thought they’d be seeing this year on defense (no Brett, no Kuony, no Stanley McKenzie, no Mo or Goode this week), but they’re getting it done. So, hats off to the Young guys this week -- in Isaiah’s first serious playing time, after Collin Gamble went down: 1 of 5, 32 yards, TD, 2 PD. You love to see that, and like Hearns, another DB that was easiest to expect in the slot, and has stepped up outside big time. You can tell how both guys are wired: hyper competitive at each catchpoint, size be damned. Even the TD was not egregious. The Bears might have something here with each."
I'm not sure what you're critiquing? Nam addressed how well the defense played short-handed!
I could go and pull quotes but what is the point. Clearly you read the article through Nam Le colored glasses and are likely a bro mate of his, so I won't go there pulling the obvious quotes.
Rather, as you know, Nam has made it clear that ~ in his opinion ~ Wilcox has peaked and is half way out. His article smacks of that opinion/bias/conclusion. AS IT SHOULD, this is a sport blog!!!!!!!
In turn, I with a different opinion opine, which gets bro mates panties all in a bunch. I don't agree with a majority of the fan base and frankly feel that they have never built a team. Either sport of business. And building a team (sport) at Cal is tough. Look at the records of coaches be it football or basketball. Dismal.
Lastly, if I were not a Cal fan or had I not watched the game, reading the article would have given me the impression that Cal didn't play a good game ~ there is a heavy tone of the author's opinion of the program and specifically Wilcox. Just my opinion on the article. AGAIN, I'm all for authors writing their opinion. I just happen to not agree with Nam and several other authors here and at other Cal sites. As a Berkeley grad I'm used to thinking critically and challenging norms. So go ahead and cherry pick quotes...there is usually 1 or 2 points we can all agree to. To conclude, it is the tone towards the state of the program and Wilcox that I object to.
I don't really feel like getting into the rest, but I'd really appreciate if you didn't lash out at folks based on whether or not you think they happen to know me. Terence is his own person, and I don't ask anyone to defend my work, nor would I ever.
Ok, I'll add this for the night -- I try to write very carefully, so I believe I've been plenty fair to the game we played, and I feel that there is a lot more evidence that I've been complimentary than not. I am sorry that you do not agree, and did not read it the same way, as is your right.
Thanks for your input (and in a really genuine way, the fact checks you have done in weeks past, since I do miss things in my own editing).
I'm not lashing out at anyone. It is pretty clear y'all know each other (see below for confirmation). Don't lash out at me cuz I'm a Cal grad that came to a reasonable conclusion that happened to be right.
I responded to your article and, in turn, I responded to Terrence. It's a sport blog no one is defending anyone. Just sharing opinions, which are abundant kinda like....
We're 3-5 and Wilcox has never had a winning conference record. For Nam to think that he's halfway on his way out (which I definitely did not get from this article) is not something I got.
It's not cherry picking quotes from the article when you ask "didn't we do A and B?!" and Nam's article DIRECTLY addresses A and B.
See I told you it would be pointless. But fuck it, I'll take a quote from what I wrote to perhaps drive it through to you: "To conclude, it is the tone towards the state of the program and Wilcox that I object to."
And both Nam and I are on the record on our OPINIONS on the state of the program. That is crystal clear.
For some reason the video link to the WFC tailgate wouldn't work for me until today. Great to hear and see you!!
Great write-up as always. 3 quick questions: do you have an opinion why Street saw playing time before Moore? And similarly, why Alftin saw time at TE as Tonges, Reinwald and Moore all played as well? Has the team moved away from the "star" position we heard about a few seasons ago. Paster looks like he is playing a traditional ILB position to my naive eyes? (hope it's ok to get away from the weird attack thread and back to football.)
1) I do not, honestly. I don't think it's bad by any means, though. He'll be needed in the future, at this rate (esp with no backs in the 2022 class atm)
2) Alftin had two snaps at TE, per PFF - he'd been switched here from OLB a few seasons ago but is behind those guys you mentioned. Because we run 2 and 3 TE sets a lot, it's not uncommon to see some of those depth guys show up - there were five this week with Latu also making a 2 snap appearance.
3) Yes, Trey is playing the traditional inside linebacker role 20 pounds short at the moment. It's my understanding that the STAR is really just their hope to get a hybrid linebacker/safety on the field, but this year with us playing a 2-4-5 a lot of the time, that 5th DB has been Drayden. In the future they would ideally like it to be someone both bigger than him, but roughly as quick/fast to keep up with slot guys as well as wide receivers (with this position not currently existing, one of Scott/Hicks is often responsible instead). Trey was a strong candidate for that role when he came in, but at the moment, they seem to like what he does more on the inside straight up.
I think the injuries and depth at ILB has forced Paster into ILB position out of need.
I'm confused, did Cal lose this game? Did Cal's defense without 45% of its starters (Deng, Mo, BJ, McKenzie, Goode) not take down a top Pac12 offense? Granted there is still a steep hill ahead. But c'mon man!!
In the micro, great win! In the macro, still a lot to do, and November determines whether today was a blip or a breakthrough.
btw, is that Rob Hwang in that vid?
There's a lot of writers in that vid, but yeah that was Rob being interviewed (and Avi in the Bear hat waiting for a banh mi)
Who was running the grill?
They should post a pic with names, so we can attach name to face.
Two weeks, mate. Colorado and OSU. A third time will make it a trend. Colorado was the blip. Should the OL produce at 80% of what they did against OSU, from here on out, we will be bowling. Granted that's a big IF and a big ask from a unit that hasn't held up in over 2 years.
Either way the influx of young players in a developmental program like Cal is promising. Granted this production goes counter to the drum beat that Cal coaches can't coach and that Wilcox should be gone. Takes time to develop a team be it sport or corporate, Avinash. Wilcox is getting there with a few speed bumps along the way.
Colorado and Arizona aren't likely to beat a single FBS program this year aside from CU beating Arizona. Those are not indicative of future success as a program. If we DON'T win by double-digits against those teams I'd be on high alert.
Wilcox's future rests heavily on these final three games.
I mean, I wouldn't say *heavily*, since it's a foregone conclusion he'll return...but it's the difference about how happy we should be about him leading what will be a pseudo-rebuild again. I was hoping we would have a clearer idea by now, and I remain unconvinced he'll take us further than 7-5. Here's to finding out otherwise!
I doubt it, re: Wilcox's future
If I might quote directly from nam's article:
"First and foremost, the defensive effort to hold a dominant rushing team down to 4.3 yards per carry is impressive. That starts up front -- they played Ricky Correia on clear rushing situations to help with this, and even those JH Tevis and Luc Bequette struggled when they ran it against the 2-4-5, it truly was a team effort to keep Oregon State off schedule, where the Beavers averaged 5.3 yards to go on third down (essentially, no longer a rushing situation) and finished 0-4 on Power situations. From there, with them behind the chains -- and down two possessions most of the time -- the Bears were able to coast on what was their ideal game-state anyway.
It’s not the cast of guys anyone thought they’d be seeing this year on defense (no Brett, no Kuony, no Stanley McKenzie, no Mo or Goode this week), but they’re getting it done. So, hats off to the Young guys this week -- in Isaiah’s first serious playing time, after Collin Gamble went down: 1 of 5, 32 yards, TD, 2 PD. You love to see that, and like Hearns, another DB that was easiest to expect in the slot, and has stepped up outside big time. You can tell how both guys are wired: hyper competitive at each catchpoint, size be damned. Even the TD was not egregious. The Bears might have something here with each."
I'm not sure what you're critiquing? Nam addressed how well the defense played short-handed!
I could go and pull quotes but what is the point. Clearly you read the article through Nam Le colored glasses and are likely a bro mate of his, so I won't go there pulling the obvious quotes.
Rather, as you know, Nam has made it clear that ~ in his opinion ~ Wilcox has peaked and is half way out. His article smacks of that opinion/bias/conclusion. AS IT SHOULD, this is a sport blog!!!!!!!
In turn, I with a different opinion opine, which gets bro mates panties all in a bunch. I don't agree with a majority of the fan base and frankly feel that they have never built a team. Either sport of business. And building a team (sport) at Cal is tough. Look at the records of coaches be it football or basketball. Dismal.
Lastly, if I were not a Cal fan or had I not watched the game, reading the article would have given me the impression that Cal didn't play a good game ~ there is a heavy tone of the author's opinion of the program and specifically Wilcox. Just my opinion on the article. AGAIN, I'm all for authors writing their opinion. I just happen to not agree with Nam and several other authors here and at other Cal sites. As a Berkeley grad I'm used to thinking critically and challenging norms. So go ahead and cherry pick quotes...there is usually 1 or 2 points we can all agree to. To conclude, it is the tone towards the state of the program and Wilcox that I object to.
Hope this helps.
I don't really feel like getting into the rest, but I'd really appreciate if you didn't lash out at folks based on whether or not you think they happen to know me. Terence is his own person, and I don't ask anyone to defend my work, nor would I ever.
Ok, I'll add this for the night -- I try to write very carefully, so I believe I've been plenty fair to the game we played, and I feel that there is a lot more evidence that I've been complimentary than not. I am sorry that you do not agree, and did not read it the same way, as is your right.
Thanks for your input (and in a really genuine way, the fact checks you have done in weeks past, since I do miss things in my own editing).
Here's to beating Arizona.
I'm not lashing out at anyone. It is pretty clear y'all know each other (see below for confirmation). Don't lash out at me cuz I'm a Cal grad that came to a reasonable conclusion that happened to be right.
I responded to your article and, in turn, I responded to Terrence. It's a sport blog no one is defending anyone. Just sharing opinions, which are abundant kinda like....
In fact, Nam and I disagree quite a lot about Cal football, despite my knowing him.
We're 3-5 and Wilcox has never had a winning conference record. For Nam to think that he's halfway on his way out (which I definitely did not get from this article) is not something I got.
It's not cherry picking quotes from the article when you ask "didn't we do A and B?!" and Nam's article DIRECTLY addresses A and B.
Only because you amuse me cuz you "definitely did not get from the article" here you go:
"In any scenario, Wilcox will be the coach for 2022. It’s just a matter of how good we get to feel about it."
Get it now?
See I told you it would be pointless. But fuck it, I'll take a quote from what I wrote to perhaps drive it through to you: "To conclude, it is the tone towards the state of the program and Wilcox that I object to."
And both Nam and I are on the record on our OPINIONS on the state of the program. That is crystal clear.
Thanks Nam! Yes, let's hope Bimage gets another year!
Unfortunately, after writing this column I have asked around and my understanding is that this is unlikely.