Ted Miller Really Loves the Pac-10 (But HATES Duck)
If you’ve been following this recent post-Washington columnist/now ESPN blogger, he finds some pretty good stuff around the Pac-10, which makes him a pretty good man for finding the various info that I need to know about the Pac-10.
That being said, he’s been going a little nutty with his Pac-10 love the past few days. Starting with this shining nugget about non-conference scheduling:
Moreover, these fans should muster their outrage for cowardly — and greedy — athletic directors who schedule boring, automatic victories but still charge a full ticket price for a terrible game.
Of course, the Pac-10 is the conference of bravery. It doesn’t embarrass itself by scheduling Appalachian State, Troy, North Texas and Tulane (LSU) or Eastern Washington, Nevada, SMU and Massachusetts (Texas Tech).
Alright Teddy, we get your point. We schedule the majority of our games in Division I. I guess this means we bring swords to a gunfight or schedule a Hindu wedding ceremony in a Texas smokehouse.
But I wrote about this earlier this year, and despite the extra win, the Pac-10 doesn’t come off THAT much better. Last year two Pac-10 teams played Idaho (one win in the WAC), bottom-dweller Syracuse of the Big East, and Cal got the pleasure of being taken to the wire with Colorado State. For every Oregon domination of the Big House and Troy burning down of Corn Nation, there was an Oregon State getting blasted by Cincinnati or UCLA imploding at home vs. the Irish. I think this is more of Miller griping at how UW got the thankless job of playing Boise State, Ohio State, and Hawaii (a combined 33-6 in 2007) whereas other Pac-10 teams got the luck of the draw with Northern Arizona, San Diego State and Idaho State.
Bottom line: The Pac-10 has an advantage over other conferences in terms of scheduling. But the advantage is slight, and in the end it doesn’t really do them jack. (To view the results of the big conference results OOC 2007, click here!)
As for most hated Pac-10 teams, there isn’t much reason in this delightfully homerish column. He starts off reasonably well enough.
1. USC
Okay. Fairly reasonable point. You just had to put those three letters down, didn’t even have to justify that answer to a nationally televised audience. Now just don’t say what I think you’re going to say next. Anyone with a conscience would have UCLA next…
2. Oregon
D’oh!
Okay, now, may I ask how the Ducks became the second most hated program in the Pac-10?
The Ducks are rich, rich, rich. With billionaire, hands-on booster Phil Knight opening the coffers, Oregon owns perhaps the best facilities of any program in the nation. When folks out West talk about an “Arms Race,” they point at Oregon. Moreover, Oregon is loud. Loud uniforms. Loud promotions. Loud stadium. That’s why Oregon State and Washington aren’t the only teams that stick pins into Ducks voodoo dolls.
Translation: Woof Woof Woof! Husky FAN! BOOOOOO DUCKS! QUACKERY! ME WANT MONEY! MONEY GOOOOD! WHY NO PHIL KNIGHT LIKE ME! WEAR ADIDAS!
Ah yes, I always hated Oregon for having loud fans. You know, doing exactly what they were supposed to be doing at a college football game. Don’t you know you have to treat every football game like the Brandenburg Symphony is playing?
Well, now it’s clear where UCLA should go.
Arizona State: This is a recent hate elevation. The Sun Devils used to be middle-of-the-pack for all teams other than Arizona. But now the program, long hailed a sleeping giant, appears to be waking up with Dennis Erickson at the helm. That breeds jealousy. And lots of folks are quick to insist that ASU is easier to get into academically than most Pac-10 schools.
Okay, I guess not. But I enjoy schools that are easier to get into academically. Because you end up with coeds like these.
UCLA come in 4th, which has to be an insult to condescending Bruins fans everywhere. Cal comes in 6th, despite having about ten times more success the past five years than Sun Devils. Oregon State is 7th, which will make those lovable Beavers fans get even more annoyed (Can you really get angry at a team that has a beaver for a mascot? I can’t muster it). Stanford is 10th, which must delight the Hoover Institution to no end.
Also the Oregon-Washington rivalry is somehow 3rd above the FREAKING CIVIL WAR, which doesn’t even make the top 5 rivalries list in the Pac-10. UW has two rivalries in the top 5. Does the acrimony run that deep in Huskyland for two different teams that it outweighs another state? And don’t forget that the Ducks have the ninth toughest schedule despite an interesting tilt with Boise State and a decent road matchup with Purdue (you don’t even have to guess who’s number 1).
Ahh, college football and objectivity. They go as well together as Genghis Khan and tofu farmers.
Them Shores Be Long: Pac-10 Quarterback Analysis, Part I
Part-time BN contributor Danzig wrote a killer post on CGB discussing the merits and demerits of Nate Longshore. There are a few parts I want to analyze and some other issues I’d like to expand upon, as I look across the state of Pac-10 QBs this week going into 2008.
Passing efficiency:
Also notice that versus certain opponents, Nate just does not perform well: Arizona, Washington St, USC and Stanford.
Yes, indeed Longshore does not perform well against these four teams. But this shouldn’t be the only concern. How well does he perform relative to the mean? In other words, do other quarterbacks in the Pac-10 perform better or worse than he does? I do think the passer rating has significant flaws (there are some absurd things about the system that really need to be pointed out), but this is a theoretical debate that can wait for another time. Let’s look at the numbers of Nate Longshore’s performance compared to the relative strength of the passing defenses.
You can see how big the swings are in Longshore’s 2006 performances. Sophomore swings I guess (I had those too; they involved hookers and a bunny). Longshore hit some performances out of the stadium (that UCLA game was unreal two years ago), but he also threw some clunkers, especially in the Arizona-USC losses. He threw at about average against Stanford (which actually had a better passing defense than Arizona), and people forget that the winds were furious in that game. Yet you’re not going to see too many critics of Nate’s 2006 season because he could AIR THAT BALL OUT! OH YEAH! AIM IT HIGH AND FIRE!
Let’s say an average performance is within 20 rating points of the mean, a better performance is 20 or more above, and a worse performance is 20 or more below. In this case, Longshore only had two average performances (both slightly below average against UW and Stanford, our two closest wins). He had seven better performances (Cal was 7-0) and four worse performances (Cal was 1-3). So to say that he was more erratic with control and delivery is a bit of an understatement. And actually Longshore struggled more in the second half of 2006 than he did in 2007. The ankle injury was misfortunate, but Nate seemed to adapt better based on the quarterback rating alone.
With that, we’ll look at the 2007 stats, which show a maturer Longshore in the pocket.
Nate detractors will growl at this, but he was a far more consistent quarterback than he was in 2006. His power numbers were definitely down and he didn’t throw as many TDs, but Tedford’s offense runs a different boat and Longshore floated pretty well by it so that we came to expect what would happen. Danzig calls it a bad offense, but this is essentially closer to what Tedford ran in 2004, a power run offense with the passing game supplementing the passing game. This would obviously bring Longshore’s numbers down, but it might also provide Cal the chance to sustain longer drives and keep the ball on the offensive side while the greener defense spent its time off it.
So with the power run game being the focus of Cal’s offense in 2007, Longshore threw at about or above average for most of the season. Last year’s 5-0 start featured only two quality Longshore performances, vs. Oregon and Tennessee. In other words, he was good when he needed to be good. Despite the fact that Longshore performs worse than Arizona, he had a better QB rating than Arizona’s stingy pass defense normally allows (remember how weak USC looked against Cason and Fontenot?), giving him a slightly above average performance.
Yet despite his ankle injury, Longshore’s passer rating would be at around the mean for the majority of his performances. He threw a very strong game against UCLA’s defense where the passer rating exceeded UCLA’s pass defense rating by nearly 20 points. His Arizona State (-0.12) and USC (-1.99) performances were right at the mean, and don’t forget the conditions of that Trojan game; Longshore was about on average with any other QB that year. He was lights out against Washington. His two outright bad performances came during the Washington State game (whose simple Cover 4 sets mystify Longshore for reasons I cannot fathom) and the Stanford game (which became much easier for the Cardinal to plan for once DeSean Jackson sat out with injury).
Now the interesting numbers come based on victory and defeat. When Longshore had a passer rating 20 points above the mean performance against said defense, his team was 2-1. When he was at average, the team was 2-3. But when he was worse (Colorado State, Wazzu, Stanford), the Bears were 2-1 again.
Thus, while a definite correlation could have been made between Nate Longshore’s 2006 performances and Cal’s success on the field (i.e. if Nate threw well, Cal won, if Nate threw bad, Cal lost), no such correlation exists between the quarterback’s performances and the 2007 team based on passer rating. You could say that Longshore’s overall performance made it easier for Cal’s opponents to keep the game close though.
However, I think the issue with the common football fan is always “Well, he doesn’t make ME feel confident if he’s going to dink-and-dunk it.” Well, the ankle injury hindered his options last year, so we all know he’d have trouble airing that ball far out. Usually it would require some trickery for Longshore to get that ball deep (see the Three Fake Handoff). But considering the strength of the defenses and the location where his injury occurred, it would be difficult for me to envision him putting up big numbers. Ultimately a quarterback needs his receivers to step up (which they didn’t against USC and Stanford), his run game to back him up (which it didn’t against UCLA or Stanford), or have the run defense avoid getting gashed and torched (which it did for the entire second half of the season). It was a team collapse, not a Nate-centric issue.
To see the actual data for defensive passer rating and Nate Longshore’s pass rating, click here.
Next in the series: How Pac-10 QBs in general fared relative to the mean.
Which Tedford Team Was the Best? Cal 2004 vs. Cal 2006
After some delay, it’s time to reveal which of Jeff Tedford’s team Cal fans should be most proud of.
First Round
Cal 2007 4, Cal 2003 0
Cal 2005 4, Cal 2002 1
Semifinals
Cal 2004 4, Cal 2007 0
Cal 2006 4, Cal 2005 3
You have the most talented team playerwise in Cal 2006, which has sent around a dozen players to the NFL. They’re going up against that Cal 2004 juggernaut, who just swept a more experienced 2007 version of that team. So to say they have their work cut out for them might be a bit of an understatement.
As usual, we’re taking this shit to seven games (as it should be with any sport, who doesn’t want more football?), and this series is taken from a sample of about fifty simulated games on WhatIfSports. Again, we’re using the best of seven series, because more games are better. The 2004 team are heavy favorites–can they pull off the upset?
If Marshawn Lynch Was A Treesitter…
I tried reading this editorial in good humor, but then the writer started invoking Goodwin’s Law and my mind blanked out. Once someone analogizes Hitler massacring half of Europe to cutting down a bunch of old oak trees, you’re probably going to lose me.
Clearly this woman was speaking in some sort of nebulous third-world that the common man would never hope to relate to. So I thought to myself, “If I was a hippie, how would I legitimize the cause? How would I get the word out? How would I get this
And then it hit me. Wrong spokesperson. Let’s turn aging progressive Becky O’Malley a streetwise honey from East Oaktown. How you ask? The glories of the Internet, that’s how.
Thank me later hippies. You’ve got massive street cred now, yo.
Front Page News, dig dis:
Edito’ial, dig dis: Appeal Is de Prudent Choice In UC Decision
By Becky O’MalleyDursday July 24, 2008Today’s regular edito’ial, t’be found in its usual place in de opinion secshun, wuz written on Tuesday, befo’e da damn trial court decision on de dree lawsuits against da damn University uh Califo’nia. WORD! But Judge Barbara Miller’s decision, faxed t’atto’neys late in de day on Tuesday, puts de Berkeley City Council suddenly on de hot seat. Man! A’cuz uh de judge’s curious timin’—some angry homeys uh de oaks even call it prejudicial—plaintiffs, includin’ de City uh Berkeley, gots only some sho’t week in which t’stash deir appeals. It’s especially tough cuz’ Tuesday night wuz supposed t’have been de last City Council meetin’ befo’e da damn summa’ recess, and many oda’ members uh plaintiff groups and deir atto’neys is on vacashun, t’be ‘espected at dis time uh year. Ah be baaad…
Here’s de concrete version uh whut gots’ta be balanced, dig dis: de plaintiffs’ sunk costs fum de trial level against da damn possible added cost uh goin’ fo’ward. In dis equashun, since Judge Milla’ stuck de plaintiffs wid de lion’s share uh de ‘espenses, appealin’ only makes sense.
It’s usually snatchn fo’ granted dat da damn cost uh appealin’ be but some fracshun uh trial costs, since da damn ‘spensive presentashun uh evidence be ova’ and done wid—appeals is mostly plum writin’. An appeal be likes some lottery ticket wid much betta’ dan usual odds uh winnin’. Expuh’ienced legal commentato’s, in dis sheet and elsewhere, gots given plaintiffs some baaaad chance uh winnin’ on appeal, some notin’ some numba’ of probable erro’s in de trial reco’d.
If de city wins, it’s likesly dat da damn sunk costs uh de trial gots’ta be recouped. As poka’ players would say, ya’ gots’ta know when t’hold ’em and when t’fold ’em, and dis be not da damn time t’fold.
In de intangible catego’y, appealin’ also makes sense. De City uh Berkeley be embarkin’ on whut could be some lengdy powa’ struggle, stretchin’ upside decades, t’determine whose city dis is. One view be dat it’s crib t’mo’e dan 100,000 residents, includin’ students, employees and faculty members uh de University uh Califo’nia at Berkeley. Slap mah fro! De contrary view be dat it’s become plum one vast industrial park t’be sliced and diced at da damn behest uh de local industry, which happens t’be in de spo’ts biz at dis site.
De wo’st outcome uh dis controversy, fo’ bod city and university, and some very likesly one, be dat da damn gym gots’ta be built but da damn stadium won’t be rehabbed, cuz’ of its locashun smack dab on top uh de Hayward fault—a key part uh de trial court’s decision. ‘S coo’, bro. Dat would leave bod parties stuck wid some large new honky elephant in some locashun dat be wo’se dan awkward, snuggled right down t’an agin’ and unusable shell.
In some previous piece we used da damn German wo’d lebensraum, literally “livin’ space,” t’characterize da damn university’s desires. A yunga’ copy edito’ wuzn’t familiar wid de wo’d. It gots unpleasant associashuns wid Hitler’s ‘espansion uh Germany into Poland, but it’s some concept dat clearly describes de institushunal tendency toward infinite territo’ial ‘espansion in de dojigger uh progress.
One uh de key grounds on which environmental atto’neys say de trial decision be vulnerable on appeal be failin’ t’consida’ mo’e environmentally sound alternatives dan plum addin’ mo’e concrete t’an already compromised site. In some wo’ld dreatened by climate change, where green ideas gots suddenly gained new currency, puh’haps it’s time t’acknowledge dat we kin no longa’ plum build our way out uh problems. De City uh Berkeley now gots de ability—and da damn responsibility—to teach de university sump’n in dis regard.
And some baaaad chance t’save local taxpayers some bre’d in de bargain. ‘S coo’, bro.
Walk the Line: What Vegas Thinks About Cal and the Pac-10
I have a gambling problem. Not a gambling addiction (other than one bad incident that I deserved, I’ve been fairly frugal with my betting habits).
No, my problem is that I’m no good at gambling. I.e. I lose a lot of money. I seem to have terrible patterns at predicting who will win and even worse at identifying the trap games. While some people make it big and others lose money slowly, I lose money quickly. When it goes down, it goes DOWN. My last big gambling endeavor (the NBA playoffs) left me down a nice two Gs because I sold my soul and kept on betting Lakers in the Finals, one of the worst decisions I’ve ever made.
In other words, I’m a sportsbook’s best friend. Which is why you should take this gambling analysis column with a very tiny grain of salt. My gambling habits will probably end me up in prison one day, but there’s no reason for me not to share my foresight with all of you, right?
Cal opened up as 7 point favorites against Michigan State. That’s approximately the same line that Cal opened up with against Tennessee last year, which probably means that they put Michigan State on a similar level as us. I described in gruesome detail last year how much new beach property sportsbooks opened up last season as the gambling nutbags of the world continued to pour their money into Tedford mania. In every game the Bears played after Oregon, Cal did not cover the spread. And for anyone who remembers the numbers, we were very very public in every game we played.
Arguably, the factors like last year’s collapse will make people weary to bet heavy on Golden Bear this fall. But gamblers tend to have short memories. However, there is the advantage that Michigan State is a state school, and state schools are filled with gullible gamblers. The action could definitely split both ways.
Our supposed win total (8 is what Vegas has now) seems about even keel too. This sounds about right, given that the overall talent of our squad factored into the relative weakness of the Pac-10 this year should be enough to get us right back to where we belong (at that 8 win level), and the few tight games we played on the schedule will decide where we go. Only the Condoms (10.5 and the highest total on the board), Arizona State (8.5) and Oregon (8) are at or above that level in the Pac-10, but I’m not sure what to make of those last two win totals considering the preliminary lines Vegas has posted (more on that below).
Some of these lines attracted my keen interest.
Georgia -4.5 at ASU: This line is very very small for a team with the defensive power to obliterate Rudy Carpenter.
Cal -1 at Arizona: Oh God.
USC -10.5 at Arizona: Seems very low against a team that has not finished with a winning record in the Pac-10 in the Mike Stoops era. I’m a little confused, especially given that the Men of Troy are two TD favorites at UCLA. Even with their upset record, this seems like a game where the Trojans should be laying two TDs (a little less of note is USC -11.5 at Oregon St., which seems about right)
UCLA +10 at Oregon: The two teams of mystery in this conference. The Ducks are projected to win 8 games this year, and they are close to unbeatable at Autzen when at full strength. So this line feels a little short.
Cal +13 at USC: This line will not change considerably unless Cal starts the season 8-0. USC could lose a game or two and still be favored by double digits.
Stanford +14.5 at Cal: If we lose this game I will jam a fork down my throat.
UCLA +9.5 at ASU: Again a very short line. For a Bruins fanbase that isn’t expecting much, they’re sure getting plenty of love from the bookies. Either that or the Sun Devils aren’t as great as we think.
Oregon +1 at OSU; ASU +1 at Arizona: Alarm bells are shooting off here. What the hell’s with these lines? My only conclusion is that Vegas doesn’t think much of any of those four teams. Which leaves USC and Cal as the top two honchos again.
Of course, none of this should matter to you, intrepid Cal fan. You’re not going to bet on us and jinx our season again, are you?
What’s It Like Following A College Team?
There is always a deterministic sense of following hometown teams. I would guess that the majority of Cal fans are also Bay Area fans (or SoCal counterparts), and their emotions fall and rise with the As and the Giants, the 49ers and the Raiders, Warriors and Sharks. You associate with these teams earlier, it’ll always carry more weight. But there’s also been a traditional sense of distance you feel with these athletes. They’re pros, and they’ve already obligated themselves to something higher; we’re just amateurs watching from the stands, second-guessing our prognostications and re-defining our expectations.
For most college fans though it starts much later. Unless your parents are diehard alums, you aren’t born with the burden. It starts young. Unless you’re a school steeped in tradition, where the bandwagoners flaunt the colors and hate on each other like the posers they are, you almost certainly have to end up attending the school to stick with them.
I only have one hometown team (the Bills), and the joy I’d have for them to win a Super Bowl would be ten times what it’d be like to see Cal make a Rose Bowl. But it’s the team more so than the players that give me pride; although individuals, more than in any other sport, a team wins the title. It’s a collective spirit that drives the enterprise, a common pursuit of one goal that outweighs fame and fortune.
In college, except for the teams with so-called tradition and history, it’s something deeper–they’re our guys from the beginning. We can relate to the players because we share a common experience of entering through one place. As I begin my passage through and out of Cal, I can only stare at wonder at the work they must put in. They’re my damn age, and I have enough difficulty getting out of bed every morning. These guys are hauling ass to practice almost every day for half the year. There’s no incentive to this other than love for the game and the dreams of what lie beyond. And over 90 percent of them will never touch the NFL; their Personal Destinies lie elsewhere.
How many of them have the skills to get to the next level? Who can incorporate their game to benefit others? Which quarterbacks show the flexibility to develop their game? Which running backs are physical enough to handle the monstrous NFL linebacker? Which defenders show a knack for being at the right place at the right time? Who can follow their coaches while still displaying their own ingenuity at the same time? We ask those questions about Aaron Rodgers now, as he saddles into the position a legend once occupied.
More importantly, we contemplate the potential, the possibilities of what these individuals can do for fifteen weeks, what they can prove to their teammates and themselves. The characters change with every season, but they don’t get any less colorful or spectacular to watch. It’s like watching that first episode of Band of Brothers, and seeing everyone coalesce into a unit before shipping off to war. What they’re getting in college is basic training before parachuting into Normandy a few years later. They’re only at the start.
And the individuals around them reflected the personality that talented individuals reflect in their outward persona. Win or lose, they were an intriguing bunch that stayed out of the Fulmer Cup mix. Marshawn was just Marshawn, a character who exploded with potential and Applebees runs. There were the silent warriors like Mebane and Rulon Davis, leaders by example and by experience. Greg Van Hoesen and Daymeion Hughes earned their colors on and off the field–literally. Joe Ayoob continues to pursue the dream of making it one day, in spite of the vitriol he experienced during his time here.
There was DeSean Jackson, modelling himself into an unstoppable video game character for the next generation of Madden lovers. You had Robert Jordan, who could have been a star for perhaps any other team in the conference, but opted instead to be that steady second/third option on a team that went much further. Desmond Bishop wore his cleats to grade school; still holds onto them today. The list goes on and on. Everywhere you looked you could find individuals who played for the game without forgetting they had lives beyond it.
Well, except for Steve Levy. He might be an asshole.
What made me love Tedford’s Bears is they infused style into their play. There was always the potential for something crazy to happen. We developed a craving of the immeasurable and the unforseeable. During the dominating 2004-2007 run (ending with the Oregon State defeat), when the Bears went 33-9 it was less a matter of whether we were going to win and more a consequence of how we would win. It was an unshakable confidence, that either our running backs would take it, whether our playmakers would deliver impressive plays, whether our defense would flex their muscle and get the stops they needed. Sometimes it all came together, sometimes one element would step up more than usual, but 4 times out of 5 it’d produce victory. We’d comeback late, we’d blow teams out, we’d shut offenses down. And then we came back the next Saturday and did the same thing all over again.
And that was the saddest part of last year’s slide. Somewhere along the way style got lost and the players began fending for themselves. The O-line began missing a few more blocks than usual. The defense, a makeshift band racked up by injuries, crumbled. Longshore gimped around heroically No more of Jackson dashing around for glory, when he realized. Even the Hawk wasn’t flapping his wings as much as he used to. Once the style left, they became just another team, not the Bears that I’d followed so vigorously the past two years. And it brought out the worst in the fan, the players, and the coaches. It was a cataclysm that everyone wanted to escape.
So we’re beginning again, another season rift with possibility and promise. We begin anew, with a new cast of characters ready to usher in the next age of Cal football. One where the glory of past Bears diverge into the pathways laid out for them in the pros. One with a new set of amatuers rising to the task of leaping to glory.
Pac-10 Podcast with In the Bleachers
I was on radio for the first time ever tonight. A podcast to be precise. The second biggest college football podcast behind the impeccable EDSBS Live. I give you warning before listening to the download–I was shaking like Charlie Brown meeting that red-headed girl. Unfortunately no one here to kiss on the cheek, except maybe Lisa Horne.
[youtube hKedLEU1vfk]
I’m babbling. Since it’s my first run at this, I didn’t want anyone to listen to this live, but it should be up on ITunes soon enough and I’ll send links. I’ll be the last caller in, so I’ll be somewhere around the fifty minute mark.
Here’s the podcast link. I’ll be near the end. You can also search for “In the bleachers” at the ITunes podcast section. Enjoy.
Tedford Tournament of Champions: Cal 2005 vs. Cal 2006
And then there were three.
After the decisive 2004 beatdown on a talented yet flawed 2007 team, we’re entering what appears to be the most entertaining matchup of this tournament insofar. A stronger 2005 team angled against a developing but talented 2006 offense. The chronically maligned Joe Ayoob versus the chronically injured Nate Longshore. Marshawn Lynch dueling himself. And all of that coming into a head in a seven game series.
Who will win this battle? Find out after the jump.
Open Thread: Which Regular Season Game Are You Looking At?
We’re two months away from kickoff and Bears Necessity is kicking into full preview mode; time for the readers to open up about the upcoming season. Every Cal game is obviously a must-watch, but which one do you really have your eye on as “must-see”? There are a lot of great games on the calendar, plus the home schedule definitely is in our favor this year. The poll responses and comments could influence how much coverage this site gives to every game before the season.
Here are a few preliminary reasons one can find to look forward to a particular game.
Michigan State–Opening night always seems to have a nice touch on the tongue. The last time we beat the Spartans, it was the first good sign of things to come. Hopefully this is a similar occasion. And there’s that whole Gold thing.
at Washington State–A final of 14-6 is not out of the question. And nothing’s more football than September in Pullman.
at Maryland–East coast swing baby. Might be the only time anyone east of the Mississippi gives a crap about our team.
Colorado State–Well, there’s the potential to be ripely embarrassed, or just because this looks like the lock on the schedule. So there’s that.
Arizona State–The thought of a revamped defense knocking Rudy Carpenter to the ground puts a bit of a smile on my face.
at Arizona–Hate this game. I’m already staring at this one with mortal dread.
Oregon–Dixon and Stewart gone, our offensive stars gone. This might not be the offensive fireworks show it used to be. Oh wait, it never was an offensive fireworks show.
UCLA–Slick Rick, Norm Chow, DeWayne Walker. The Bermuda Triangle of coaching. Too bad they don’t have a quarterback to go with it.
at USC–Our chances at a Rose Bowl are quite dim, but it’s obvious who we’re going to have to beat to get there.
at Oregon State–Revenge game. Simple as that.
Stanford–Get that Axe back.
Washington–Jake Locker on the final week. Just thrilling.
Vote in the poll. and voice your opinions in the comments–which regular season game are you looking forward to the most and which ones do you want to see covered?
Note: They don’t have to just be Cal games. For general fans out there, are you already scheduling your life around USC-Ohio State? I know I can’t wait to see what happens in the Coliseum.
My Cal Preview for Michigan State Fans
Enlightened Spartan indulged me with my insipid Q&A, so I provided him with some thoughtless noninsight on his site. Note though: The site seems to have been made in 1997, because I can’t find a way to directly link to this. So you’ll have to go directly to enlightenedspartan dot com and look around in the second column from the right (right now it’s the second article down) to find it before it gets lost in the mysterious archives.
Keep in mind all the denigrating remarks are all tongue-in-cheek, just as I’m sure they were from Scott. I hope.
