Jahvid Best was a great running back at Cal but for the "greatest", he needed to have more production by staying healthy. Other than that unforgettable (in a bad way) concussion that ended his Cal career, Best also took a big hit (and was puking out stuff on the field) at the Maryland game on the road (also the lone Cal game during that era that I saw in person) and was not effective for the rest of that game (or the following week, IIRC). He also dislocated his elbow and somehow only missed just one game later that season in 2008.
When he was healthy, Jahvid Best embodied the rare and since missing optimism of what Cal Football could be. The reality was a lot harsher, unfortunately.
But offensive line aside, QB aside - if I needed 4 yards for a first, or absolutely needed grind out the clock for 4 minutes with running plays, I'm going to give the ball to Marshawn "Money" Lynch.
I think Marshawn is the most versatile, who could blown up defenders, make defenders miss, move a pile, had break-away speed, could catch coming out of the back-field, could throw a touchdown on a halfback pass, could go on Conan O'Brian, who best represents Oakland, who can gas, brake, dip a golf cart, who can organize large bike rides from Oakland to Berkeley, who can wander around Oakland handing out masks to people who aren't wearing them, who will run through a motherfucker's face over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over. . . and over and over.
I am to young to have seen Muncie and have only vague memories of Russell White.
I would pick Marshawn. When Best was at 100% he was amazing, but he was not durable and a lot of his yards-per-carry average was based on big home run plays. Snap to snap I think Marshawn was more the kind of player who could put the team on his back when nothing else was working (and he also had his share of home run plays).
He should have. Same for Bartkowski. And also for Best.
An interesting factoid is the Joe Roth did not get any votes for the Heisman in his best season, 1975 (though I don't think he started as the season began and may have missed a few games when Besana was Cal's QB). But he was seventh or so in the Heisman voting in 1976, probably an inferior season, stat wise, compared to 1975, most likely as a result of his cancer progressing, which killed him shortly after that season ended.
Again, I should mention that Mike White, at Cal Camp, indicated that Roth was his best QB and he had Bartkowski and Ferragamo at Cal and at least three excellent QB's when he was the coach at Illinois.
Just looked up where Steve Bartkowski finished in the 1974 Heisman voting. Surprising, he made the list -- he finished 10th. So he was the No. 1 NFL draftee and gets drafted No. 10. Goff was the No. 1 person drafted and didn't make the Heisman list. Same for Marshawn Lynch.
I've seen Cal running backs in person since the Sixties and I'd go like this: 1) Muncie 2 )Best 3) Lynch 4) White. No one close to that top four and not much to separate them from each other.
Be sure to look below for the Heisman voting rank for Cal stars Aaron Rodgers, Joe Roth, Chuck Muncie, Steve Bartkowski, Craig Morton, Jackie Jensen, and Vic Bottari. Special bonus points for those who can name the year each player listed above received received Heisman votes.
I'll bet, since 1975 or so, Cal is easily in the top five in terms of the number of backs who had at least one ball carry in the pro's. We've had a lot of good backs that made the pro's but were not standout players there. I think there were a string of players in the late seventies to nineties where we had a new RB, each year, who made the pro's.
It is a great list and I have been a season ticket holder for decades, the fall of 1969 was my freshman year at Cal. No one was ever better than Chuck Muncie! It is very cool that his debate has so many great names, though. The comment that Muncie was a man among boys on the field is very accurate. He had it all. Speed , moves, power and was an excellent receiver. I knew Chuck and he was one of the nicest guys you would ever meet, but he got as lot of bad press in the NFL. Unfortunately, he was a first million dollar, very high draft pick, to a team in the deep south, you do the racist math... Like just about everyone back then around Berkeley, Chuck liked to party and have a good time, and New Orleans was a bad fit. He should have won the Heisman that year, but "West Coast Berkeley" thing may have cost him. We need another name to debate over very soon, I hope. Go bears.
Being a HUGE fan of our Cal running backs, and while I do believe you have different types of backs for different jobs, no one electrified the field and terrified opposing coaches more than Best. His quickness, intelligence, agility, receiving hands, and then break-away speed were the greatest I ever [personally] witnessed.
I can appreciate ALL of the counter-arguments about durability, limited production, and so forth. But every time he was on the field there was a good possibility he could score.
I don my hat to ALL of our great ones: Muncie, Marshawn, White, Arrington, and Foresett - love them all to this day - great individuals and AMAZING BEARS! But I could not agree more with this writing. Best would be my pick (followed very closely by Marshawn) to anchor a backfield.
Jahvid Best was a great running back at Cal but for the "greatest", he needed to have more production by staying healthy. Other than that unforgettable (in a bad way) concussion that ended his Cal career, Best also took a big hit (and was puking out stuff on the field) at the Maryland game on the road (also the lone Cal game during that era that I saw in person) and was not effective for the rest of that game (or the following week, IIRC). He also dislocated his elbow and somehow only missed just one game later that season in 2008.
When he was healthy, Jahvid Best embodied the rare and since missing optimism of what Cal Football could be. The reality was a lot harsher, unfortunately.
Chuck Muncie, who could do it all. And his single-handed demolishment of Stanford in 1975 on The Farm caps to WIN the Pac. (when's teh last time that has happened?) Chuck had 166 yards & 4 TDS rushing, and even thru a HB option for a TD. https://www.sfgate.com/sports/article/SPIRIT-OF-75-Chuck-Muncie-starred-as-Cal-2896732.php
YOU CRAZY FOR THIS ONE NICK
But offensive line aside, QB aside - if I needed 4 yards for a first, or absolutely needed grind out the clock for 4 minutes with running plays, I'm going to give the ball to Marshawn "Money" Lynch.
I think Marshawn is the most versatile, who could blown up defenders, make defenders miss, move a pile, had break-away speed, could catch coming out of the back-field, could throw a touchdown on a halfback pass, could go on Conan O'Brian, who best represents Oakland, who can gas, brake, dip a golf cart, who can organize large bike rides from Oakland to Berkeley, who can wander around Oakland handing out masks to people who aren't wearing them, who will run through a motherfucker's face over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over and over. . . and over and over.
Shining! 365 days a week! Shining!
Chuck Muncie! Boom! We've had our share of greats, but none better than Chuck. He was a man amongst boys.
I am to young to have seen Muncie and have only vague memories of Russell White.
I would pick Marshawn. When Best was at 100% he was amazing, but he was not durable and a lot of his yards-per-carry average was based on big home run plays. Snap to snap I think Marshawn was more the kind of player who could put the team on his back when nothing else was working (and he also had his share of home run plays).
He should have. Same for Bartkowski. And also for Best.
An interesting factoid is the Joe Roth did not get any votes for the Heisman in his best season, 1975 (though I don't think he started as the season began and may have missed a few games when Besana was Cal's QB). But he was seventh or so in the Heisman voting in 1976, probably an inferior season, stat wise, compared to 1975, most likely as a result of his cancer progressing, which killed him shortly after that season ended.
Again, I should mention that Mike White, at Cal Camp, indicated that Roth was his best QB and he had Bartkowski and Ferragamo at Cal and at least three excellent QB's when he was the coach at Illinois.
Just looked up where Steve Bartkowski finished in the 1974 Heisman voting. Surprising, he made the list -- he finished 10th. So he was the No. 1 NFL draftee and gets drafted No. 10. Goff was the No. 1 person drafted and didn't make the Heisman list. Same for Marshawn Lynch.
https://www.sports-reference.com/cfb/awards/heisman-1974.html
This was my freshman year, and being in the stands makes it stand out that much more. Hard for me to argue against Marshawn being #1.
https://youtu.be/lnWHRERvnaE
I've seen Cal running backs in person since the Sixties and I'd go like this: 1) Muncie 2 )Best 3) Lynch 4) White. No one close to that top four and not much to separate them from each other.
I agree that Best was the best of the bunch. No disrespect to Marshawn, who I think is number two followed by Chuck Muncie.
Be sure to look below for the Heisman voting rank for Cal stars Aaron Rodgers, Joe Roth, Chuck Muncie, Steve Bartkowski, Craig Morton, Jackie Jensen, and Vic Bottari. Special bonus points for those who can name the year each player listed above received received Heisman votes.
A ranking of Cal running backs. I think most in the top 15 or so played pro. John Tuggle certainly did.
https://www.ranker.com/list/best-california-golden-bears-running-backs/ranker-college-football
I'll bet, since 1975 or so, Cal is easily in the top five in terms of the number of backs who had at least one ball carry in the pro's. We've had a lot of good backs that made the pro's but were not standout players there. I think there were a string of players in the late seventies to nineties where we had a new RB, each year, who made the pro's.
Chuck Muncie all the way. He was the LeBron James of Cal's football history. In a league of his own.
It is a great list and I have been a season ticket holder for decades, the fall of 1969 was my freshman year at Cal. No one was ever better than Chuck Muncie! It is very cool that his debate has so many great names, though. The comment that Muncie was a man among boys on the field is very accurate. He had it all. Speed , moves, power and was an excellent receiver. I knew Chuck and he was one of the nicest guys you would ever meet, but he got as lot of bad press in the NFL. Unfortunately, he was a first million dollar, very high draft pick, to a team in the deep south, you do the racist math... Like just about everyone back then around Berkeley, Chuck liked to party and have a good time, and New Orleans was a bad fit. He should have won the Heisman that year, but "West Coast Berkeley" thing may have cost him. We need another name to debate over very soon, I hope. Go bears.
Being a HUGE fan of our Cal running backs, and while I do believe you have different types of backs for different jobs, no one electrified the field and terrified opposing coaches more than Best. His quickness, intelligence, agility, receiving hands, and then break-away speed were the greatest I ever [personally] witnessed.
I can appreciate ALL of the counter-arguments about durability, limited production, and so forth. But every time he was on the field there was a good possibility he could score.
I don my hat to ALL of our great ones: Muncie, Marshawn, White, Arrington, and Foresett - love them all to this day - great individuals and AMAZING BEARS! But I could not agree more with this writing. Best would be my pick (followed very closely by Marshawn) to anchor a backfield.