I'm so glad you've highlighted the mystery of our TE play, since I've been focused on the lack of them getting passes or being effective blockers. If Terry isn't being thrown to, or blocking, then what the hell? I'm increasingly convinced Musgrave is not the signal caller we need. Who doubts that Tedford or Dykes could get double the points out of these same players?
"The rest of this season is going to be defined by how Cal addresses their offensive line problems." I just don't think they will; I have not seen anything in the past three games to indicate they are making improvement or changing plays to compensate for this fundamental problem. And believe me man, I want to see improvement, I really do. I will look at the game again, see what others have seen and described so well on this blog, for myself. But I already know what I saw the first time. One thing about the defense, why not attack the QB with more blitzes throughout the game, especially in the first half when he was vulnerable and nervous? So, Arizona up next, looks like two evenly matched teams. Cal at home. Cal should win, yes? Maybe?
Understandably a lot of comments about play calling on offense.
But I have to say I’m equally baffled by the game Sirmon called. ND’s QB was a basket case early in the game, and we let him off the hook. Should have blitzed and stunted the hell out of him, and stacked the box against the run, until he proved he could burn us downfield, which I don’t think he would have done. Instead we let him get comfortable with short passes, and gave up a ton of 5-10 yard runs.
I think ND has a really good D line (it def looked good at Ohio State), and that really magnified our greatest weakness (our O line). But I don’t think anyone left on our schedule has as formidable a defensive front as ND, so I think there is room for our O line to look better.
ND had a hangover loss v Marshall and let us play closer than they normally would have because of their QB being so green. They will probably eventually have 7-8 wins, and so will we.
I don’t think anyone left on our schedule has as formidable a defensive line as ND but outside of Colorado, I don’t think anyone left on our schedule will have as bad a QB/offense as ND.
Our offense can’t score many points and if we fall behind by 2 scores and we have to abandon the running game, it will be a disaster for our OL.
Looking at ND’s schedule, they will likely lose to Clemson and USC, giving them four losses. Possible that they lose to BYU, so maybe 5. I’d say unlikely they lose to anyone else on there. So 8-4, 7-5 seems likely
This was an excellent analysis. I believe the defense did as much as it could, with the exception of the point of attack on 2nd half running plays. I do believe the egregious off-sides call changed the complexion of the game. Cal's drives could have resulted in field goal attempts, and put pressure on Notre Dame to catch up rather than vice-versa. I especially agree that failure to use three-step drops, slants and quick 5 yard passes, and the absence of the tight end, was completely perplexing.
To be fair to the Cal D-line, Notre Dame has an established history, especially recently, of absolutely churning out 1st and 2nd round, Pro-Bowl-caliber NFL offensive linemen, with Quinton Nelson, the Martin brothers, McGlinchy, Aaron Banks, etc. all excelling in South Bend. That made it so much easier for ND to literally keep their backup QB completely out of harms way with short passes.
Those TE stats are SO, so disappointing. I wasn't really paying attention to the personnel but had assumed we were using TEs to block (and they were just getting blown up by a good ND defense).
sayeth the raven, dump Musgrave ---- in close games where Cal has a chance to win, they won't as long as Musgrave is the OC. Had Cal scored on the Hail Mary and gone for two, he'd have called a sneak or A gap dive
Speaking of tight ends, Jermaine Terry had his first catch of the season on a short crosser. He is not even close to the pass catching beast everyone thought he would be. The dude has shown he can put the weight on. Put him on the D line, a position he played to great success in high school. Or even more outside the box, make him a lean and mean O tackle.
Maybe not if his aspirations are to play at the next level. There are plenty of examples of good athletes who switched positions and flourished. Joe Staley of the 49ers comes to mind as a TE/O tackle switch in college. He had a 4.7 40 time. I think there is a better chance of him transferring out if he feels like he is being under utilized at the TE position, which is happening now.
Watching from sec. 117, what I found most frustrating was that the ND OC clearly made adjustments to the playcalling based on game script and flow, while Musgrave seemingly made very few, if any. Plummer’s inaccuracy in the passing game definitely contributed to some inefficiency, but there also did not appear to be any change in the approach, especially in the 2H.
Musgrave’s limitations as an offensive mind were on full display.
TDR was an absolute mess towards the end imo. OLB recruiting cratered. Rumors of Wilcox having to step in in-game after a lack of preparation. I know Oregon felt he wasn't living up to the hype, and he's not lighting up the world at Texas Tech (which we know he could do at Cal).
GA is a toughie. Obviously he was great, but remember that Wilcox was a relatively young head coach when GA got an NFL opportunity. That's something that both GA and Wilcox felt was too good to pass up.
Wilcox's idea is to create an incubator for our assistants to get promotions - this leads to general goodwill in-unit but also is done so that, when looking for a replacement, the best and brightest think "I can get a good step-up in my career at Cal". We don't have to go into the dregs for assistants.
I was just going on what I've seen with my eyes....some of the best defensive scheme and execution I've seen at Cal since 1974, with DeRuyter up in the booth calling plays. Except for that 2006-2009 period, with Gregory. But that team also had superior talent.
Indeed. Last offseason when there was a heated conversation about a certain Cal de-commit, a certain pro-Wilcox member of the community (to whom I assumed you were referring) lost his mind and started comparing the character of these current high school kids to someone he knew from an earlier generation who at the same age went to 'nam.
He's saying that we should go with three receiver sets and have the TE(s) chip block off the line to slow down the DE on the pass rush. In this context, it means that the TE lays a hard shoulder into the DE before releasing onto their route. The idea is to throw them slightly off their rushing lane.
When someone asked why we aren’t utilizing the TEs in the passing game I made a snarky comment that we were utilizing them in the pass protection game because that was only thing that would make any common sense, I had no idea how wrong I was.
Also, weren’t we told that the new TEs were a talent upgrade over our previous ones?
They seemingly are. Terry is a beast, big, strong, athletic, yet he’s not even a factor, in ANY capacity.
Dunno…perhaps this is what happens when you hire an average-at-best, career NFL assistant coach that has no experience whatsoever at the collegiate level and has never worked with 18 year old kids…
It was just a silly hire, given his complete unfamiliarity with the college game/recruiting, etc., to say nothing of his poor scheme fit with todays athletes.
Wilcox must've felt so out of his depth on offense and panicked when it turned out Baldwin didn't actually have a system. Along with having his own disconnect from reality about what kind of offense might work in this decade for this program. So, silly hire from an objective perspective, but the perfect hire from Wilcox's mindset. I'd bet Musgrave was the first choice on the top of his mind before Baldwin was even shown the exit, I mean Cal Poly opportunity .
Throwing more screens seems like a reasonable approach, but the WR blocking is abysmal.
The TE statistic Nick mentioned is mind-boggling. They're not blocking to spell the woeful O-line and they're not catching passes...so why are they out there?
If Musgrave isn't gone at the end of the season, Wilcox might as well pack as his own bags as well.
I don't know with the Eugene Connection and loyalty if Musgrave ever will be held accountable. At the time I thought he was too old to be effective and relate to 18 year olds. Seems the strategy piece along with adjustments is lacking as well.
Our screens have been TERRIBLE. For how talented the WRs are at catching and running with the ball, I haven't seen one well blocked screen this season.
With or without Musgrave or Angus, Wilcox won’t be fired after this season or next. If by year 8 he hasn’t corrected the offense or produce a winning Pac12 season he might be fired. Even then, with the uncertainty of the post Pac12 world for Cal after 2025, we might keep him around for consistency.*
*consistency being a stagnant offense and a 6-6 record.
Would be funny sad, not funny ha-ha, if that ever came to be, but Cal won't get rid of Wilcox. Mark Fox is still coaching hoops & Knowlton is still there denying any McKeever crap. This is an athletic program that's embarrassingly inept when it comes to revenue sports, settling for as bland a product as humanly possible, while the entire landscape of college sports has left these guys in the dust.
Was never a fan of Musgrave's to begin with; ironic that he's a 'pro-style' OC who doesn't utilize the TE position. Even before Avi's post, I could tell from the first half play (& play-calling) that Cal would find a way to lose. Wilcox doesn't have the aggressive mindset, the killer instinct, he's as 'meh' as they come. Can't recruit to elevate the program, destined to live in mediocrity. You know the line from Terminator 2: "there's no fate but what we make for ourselves"? Cal (esp. the AD, Wilcox, Musgrave, Fox) is the program farthest from.
Correct, no chance Wilcox will be replaced unless there some sort of unsightly PR debacle. But given how Knowlton has handled the Teri McKeever, maybe not even that. Cal HCs under Knowlton basically have the same tenure that Supreme Court justices do.
Great write-up. 2 questions and an agreement-observations.
1) Does anyone know what #10 didn't start the second half? He's our most impactful defender amongst the front 7. Is it a rotation issue? ND went 9 plays, 60 yards to score on that possession.
2) Your comment re: TEs was maddening to me during the game and since. #85 is a poor blocker. #4 is ok. I see many plays where the team needs a quality block and in comes #14 (WR) to help. If we need blocking, why didn't #34 get more action? Or a six OL formation?
3) Why did Musgrave call so many traditional drop back plays? Do you believe we don't have roll out plays?
I was wondering the same thing about Oladejo's absence. When Antzoulatos was disqualified following the targeting call and Puskas came in for the rest of the series, I assumed that Femi was hurt, but he was in on the next possession. Brief injury that required taping up? Pre-planned rotation? I have no clue.
There have been a few designed roll outs, but they've been rare. I don't think they planned the offense around being so limited in pass protection, and haven't been able to quickly pivot in another direction to compensate.
Great analysis and write-up. Given the extreme weakness of the O-line I can't really think of anything to mask this deficiency other than moving to a completely different scheme like (chuckle) the triple option. Other than that, give Plummer a chance by hitting short passes with perhaps a two step drop back. Our screen passes have generally been blown up, though. But if the QB is getting hit before you can say one Mississippi you're probably in big trouble. I also was wondering what the TE's were doing since edge blocking has been poor. If they really are doing nothing we might as well be running an offense with 9 or 10 players.
This was definitely a game that you would hope to win in year 6 of the Wilcox regime...to lose for the same reasons that were his Achilles heel in year 1...sigh.
I'm so glad you've highlighted the mystery of our TE play, since I've been focused on the lack of them getting passes or being effective blockers. If Terry isn't being thrown to, or blocking, then what the hell? I'm increasingly convinced Musgrave is not the signal caller we need. Who doubts that Tedford or Dykes could get double the points out of these same players?
"The rest of this season is going to be defined by how Cal addresses their offensive line problems." I just don't think they will; I have not seen anything in the past three games to indicate they are making improvement or changing plays to compensate for this fundamental problem. And believe me man, I want to see improvement, I really do. I will look at the game again, see what others have seen and described so well on this blog, for myself. But I already know what I saw the first time. One thing about the defense, why not attack the QB with more blitzes throughout the game, especially in the first half when he was vulnerable and nervous? So, Arizona up next, looks like two evenly matched teams. Cal at home. Cal should win, yes? Maybe?
Understandably a lot of comments about play calling on offense.
But I have to say I’m equally baffled by the game Sirmon called. ND’s QB was a basket case early in the game, and we let him off the hook. Should have blitzed and stunted the hell out of him, and stacked the box against the run, until he proved he could burn us downfield, which I don’t think he would have done. Instead we let him get comfortable with short passes, and gave up a ton of 5-10 yard runs.
We spent years making fun of a Toyota Tercel offense. Boy, what I would give for a Toyota Tercel offense right now.
I think ND has a really good D line (it def looked good at Ohio State), and that really magnified our greatest weakness (our O line). But I don’t think anyone left on our schedule has as formidable a defensive front as ND, so I think there is room for our O line to look better.
ND had a hangover loss v Marshall and let us play closer than they normally would have because of their QB being so green. They will probably eventually have 7-8 wins, and so will we.
I don’t think anyone left on our schedule has as formidable a defensive line as ND but outside of Colorado, I don’t think anyone left on our schedule will have as bad a QB/offense as ND.
Our offense can’t score many points and if we fall behind by 2 scores and we have to abandon the running game, it will be a disaster for our OL.
We can deal with defending a better QB, we cannot afford to look as offensively inept in Pac-12 play.
Looking at ND’s schedule, they will likely lose to Clemson and USC, giving them four losses. Possible that they lose to BYU, so maybe 5. I’d say unlikely they lose to anyone else on there. So 8-4, 7-5 seems likely
https://www.sportingnews.com/us/ncaa-football/news/notre-dame-TD-phantom-offsides-call-win-over-Cal/jawhtc542r0m2fwnntf29zoj
This was an excellent analysis. I believe the defense did as much as it could, with the exception of the point of attack on 2nd half running plays. I do believe the egregious off-sides call changed the complexion of the game. Cal's drives could have resulted in field goal attempts, and put pressure on Notre Dame to catch up rather than vice-versa. I especially agree that failure to use three-step drops, slants and quick 5 yard passes, and the absence of the tight end, was completely perplexing.
To be fair to the Cal D-line, Notre Dame has an established history, especially recently, of absolutely churning out 1st and 2nd round, Pro-Bowl-caliber NFL offensive linemen, with Quinton Nelson, the Martin brothers, McGlinchy, Aaron Banks, etc. all excelling in South Bend. That made it so much easier for ND to literally keep their backup QB completely out of harms way with short passes.
Thank you for this insight.
Those TE stats are SO, so disappointing. I wasn't really paying attention to the personnel but had assumed we were using TEs to block (and they were just getting blown up by a good ND defense).
sayeth the raven, dump Musgrave ---- in close games where Cal has a chance to win, they won't as long as Musgrave is the OC. Had Cal scored on the Hail Mary and gone for two, he'd have called a sneak or A gap dive
Our 2 point play would have been 3 WRs, with a TE split out wide, leaving 5 overmatched OL to give up a sack.
Speaking of tight ends, Jermaine Terry had his first catch of the season on a short crosser. He is not even close to the pass catching beast everyone thought he would be. The dude has shown he can put the weight on. Put him on the D line, a position he played to great success in high school. Or even more outside the box, make him a lean and mean O tackle.
He might be a good TE if they can get him the ball. TE's seem to not have a role in the offense, which is not really his fault.
Could it be that the TE in the Musgrave offense is akin to LBs in the Buh defense?
We used TEs in passing game last year
Yep, that’s why this year is so confusing.
Which is crazy with all of Wilcox’s talk of being like Wisconsin and using TEs.
It’s just lip service
Maybe not if his aspirations are to play at the next level. There are plenty of examples of good athletes who switched positions and flourished. Joe Staley of the 49ers comes to mind as a TE/O tackle switch in college. He had a 4.7 40 time. I think there is a better chance of him transferring out if he feels like he is being under utilized at the TE position, which is happening now.
Watching from sec. 117, what I found most frustrating was that the ND OC clearly made adjustments to the playcalling based on game script and flow, while Musgrave seemingly made very few, if any. Plummer’s inaccuracy in the passing game definitely contributed to some inefficiency, but there also did not appear to be any change in the approach, especially in the 2H.
Musgrave’s limitations as an offensive mind were on full display.
Hey, I was in sec. 117 as well - the picture up top is from row 26 at the very top
Thanks, Nick. Great stuff!
The frustrating part in Musgrave's inability to scheme around an obviously deficient OL. 4 wide and empty sets ain’t getting it done.
Funny thing is that Gerald Alexander was watching the game and seemed to have some ideas: https://twitter.com/GAlexander21/status/1571253444337434624
Just my opinion, but I think that GA and TDR are two guys that they should have done anything to keep.
TDR was an absolute mess towards the end imo. OLB recruiting cratered. Rumors of Wilcox having to step in in-game after a lack of preparation. I know Oregon felt he wasn't living up to the hype, and he's not lighting up the world at Texas Tech (which we know he could do at Cal).
GA is a toughie. Obviously he was great, but remember that Wilcox was a relatively young head coach when GA got an NFL opportunity. That's something that both GA and Wilcox felt was too good to pass up.
Wilcox's idea is to create an incubator for our assistants to get promotions - this leads to general goodwill in-unit but also is done so that, when looking for a replacement, the best and brightest think "I can get a good step-up in my career at Cal". We don't have to go into the dregs for assistants.
I was just going on what I've seen with my eyes....some of the best defensive scheme and execution I've seen at Cal since 1974, with DeRuyter up in the booth calling plays. Except for that 2006-2009 period, with Gregory. But that team also had superior talent.
GA Pointing out obvious schemes available when the OLine ain't gettin' it done.
And some fans were not happy with GA giving his opinions and felt that GA was betraying Wilcox.
Wilcox seems to have a cult like following among a small but significant number of Cal fans.
It's almost like he's been really nice to the son of some very important donors
One Wilcox/Musgrave Stan specifically.
This has nothing to do with 'nam, man
Lebowski reference?
Indeed. Last offseason when there was a heated conversation about a certain Cal de-commit, a certain pro-Wilcox member of the community (to whom I assumed you were referring) lost his mind and started comparing the character of these current high school kids to someone he knew from an earlier generation who at the same age went to 'nam.
One resident of Wilcoxistan-Musgravistan empire here but many over at BI.
He's saying that we should go with three receiver sets and have the TE(s) chip block off the line to slow down the DE on the pass rush. In this context, it means that the TE lays a hard shoulder into the DE before releasing onto their route. The idea is to throw them slightly off their rushing lane.
When someone asked why we aren’t utilizing the TEs in the passing game I made a snarky comment that we were utilizing them in the pass protection game because that was only thing that would make any common sense, I had no idea how wrong I was.
Also, weren’t we told that the new TEs were a talent upgrade over our previous ones?
They are being used as decoys to spread the field. Somebody has to cover them.
That was me! I made the comment! Wikipedia page in the works to prove it.
I only trust Wikipedia pages that are linked by Bob R or Gobears49.
What about occasionally Calbears49?
They seemingly are. Terry is a beast, big, strong, athletic, yet he’s not even a factor, in ANY capacity.
Dunno…perhaps this is what happens when you hire an average-at-best, career NFL assistant coach that has no experience whatsoever at the collegiate level and has never worked with 18 year old kids…
Musgrave was the most uninspiring hire. Only Andy Buh was a worse coordinator hire during my Cal fandom.
It was just a silly hire, given his complete unfamiliarity with the college game/recruiting, etc., to say nothing of his poor scheme fit with todays athletes.
Wilcox must've felt so out of his depth on offense and panicked when it turned out Baldwin didn't actually have a system. Along with having his own disconnect from reality about what kind of offense might work in this decade for this program. So, silly hire from an objective perspective, but the perfect hire from Wilcox's mindset. I'd bet Musgrave was the first choice on the top of his mind before Baldwin was even shown the exit, I mean Cal Poly opportunity .
I actually liked the Baldwin hire a helluva lot more than Musgrave, which despite the Eugene connection was always a puzzler.
Throwing more screens seems like a reasonable approach, but the WR blocking is abysmal.
The TE statistic Nick mentioned is mind-boggling. They're not blocking to spell the woeful O-line and they're not catching passes...so why are they out there?
If Musgrave isn't gone at the end of the season, Wilcox might as well pack as his own bags as well.
I don't know with the Eugene Connection and loyalty if Musgrave ever will be held accountable. At the time I thought he was too old to be effective and relate to 18 year olds. Seems the strategy piece along with adjustments is lacking as well.
Our screens have been TERRIBLE. For how talented the WRs are at catching and running with the ball, I haven't seen one well blocked screen this season.
With or without Musgrave or Angus, Wilcox won’t be fired after this season or next. If by year 8 he hasn’t corrected the offense or produce a winning Pac12 season he might be fired. Even then, with the uncertainty of the post Pac12 world for Cal after 2025, we might keep him around for consistency.*
*consistency being a stagnant offense and a 6-6 record.
He’s gonna get 3 chances to re-boot the offense, after whiffing on the first 2…
He will be given a 3rd chance to reboot the offense and I hope he takes it. I worry he might be too loyal and stubborn to replace Angus/Musgrave.
Would be funny sad, not funny ha-ha, if that ever came to be, but Cal won't get rid of Wilcox. Mark Fox is still coaching hoops & Knowlton is still there denying any McKeever crap. This is an athletic program that's embarrassingly inept when it comes to revenue sports, settling for as bland a product as humanly possible, while the entire landscape of college sports has left these guys in the dust.
Was never a fan of Musgrave's to begin with; ironic that he's a 'pro-style' OC who doesn't utilize the TE position. Even before Avi's post, I could tell from the first half play (& play-calling) that Cal would find a way to lose. Wilcox doesn't have the aggressive mindset, the killer instinct, he's as 'meh' as they come. Can't recruit to elevate the program, destined to live in mediocrity. You know the line from Terminator 2: "there's no fate but what we make for ourselves"? Cal (esp. the AD, Wilcox, Musgrave, Fox) is the program farthest from.
Correct, no chance Wilcox will be replaced unless there some sort of unsightly PR debacle. But given how Knowlton has handled the Teri McKeever, maybe not even that. Cal HCs under Knowlton basically have the same tenure that Supreme Court justices do.
Ughh! It makes no sense at all. This should have Wilcox doing some serious thinking about the future of Musgrave.
Empty sets mean a traditional dropback pass. With the current sieve, this is a recipe for disaster since opponents just have to pin their ears back...
Yes, THIS.
Great write-up. 2 questions and an agreement-observations.
1) Does anyone know what #10 didn't start the second half? He's our most impactful defender amongst the front 7. Is it a rotation issue? ND went 9 plays, 60 yards to score on that possession.
2) Your comment re: TEs was maddening to me during the game and since. #85 is a poor blocker. #4 is ok. I see many plays where the team needs a quality block and in comes #14 (WR) to help. If we need blocking, why didn't #34 get more action? Or a six OL formation?
3) Why did Musgrave call so many traditional drop back plays? Do you believe we don't have roll out plays?
thank you.
I was wondering the same thing about Oladejo's absence. When Antzoulatos was disqualified following the targeting call and Puskas came in for the rest of the series, I assumed that Femi was hurt, but he was in on the next possession. Brief injury that required taping up? Pre-planned rotation? I have no clue.
There have been a few designed roll outs, but they've been rare. I don't think they planned the offense around being so limited in pass protection, and haven't been able to quickly pivot in another direction to compensate.
Great analysis and write-up. Given the extreme weakness of the O-line I can't really think of anything to mask this deficiency other than moving to a completely different scheme like (chuckle) the triple option. Other than that, give Plummer a chance by hitting short passes with perhaps a two step drop back. Our screen passes have generally been blown up, though. But if the QB is getting hit before you can say one Mississippi you're probably in big trouble. I also was wondering what the TE's were doing since edge blocking has been poor. If they really are doing nothing we might as well be running an offense with 9 or 10 players.
This was definitely a game that you would hope to win in year 6 of the Wilcox regime...to lose for the same reasons that were his Achilles heel in year 1...sigh.