Idiots Write About Sports

It’s easier to write these blogs when you witness a train wreck.

First off, if Joe Ayoob is an accurate passer, Cal blows out UCLA. The number of passes he blew — most memorably when he bounced a pass to a wide-open receiver on third down — would’ve transformed Cal’s first half.

Also, for the second straight year, Cal goes to L.A., outplays a team on offense and defense, and gives the game away on special teams. A punt return for a touchdown, a punt return that led directly to an easy touchdown, and an obvious fake punt situation (it was a great fake punt, by the way — excellent play calling by UCLA, but Cal should’ve seen it coming).

Let’s give UCLA credit; if the win over Oklahoma didn’t prove it (it didn’t), they certainly seem to be a good team now. One could make an argument that because Cal outgained UCLA and outplayed them in most facets of the game, that this win doesn’t prove that they’re for real. But I think that’s wrong: UCLA found a way to beat Cal despite being outplayed just as USC did last year, and does anyone dispute how great USC was?

As for Cal, this is a very depressing loss, but honestly, the first five games this year were not exactly convincing any of us that this team was among the best in the country. Ayoob’s the horse we’ve gotta ride, but he’s just not dependable. With the exception of a few series in the early third quarter, the running game was impressive. (With a minute and a half to go and UCLA rushing only three guys, I honestly think Cal had a better chance with hand-offs to Lynch and Forsett than with Ayoob passing. Ayoob’s fat interception proved that point a little too well.)

The real question now is, was this a battle between two teams headed to minor bowls, or between two quite good teams? Two games, against USC and either Oregon (Cal) or Arizona State (UCLA) will tell the tale. I still think Cal very well may have eight wins in them, but I’m not sure how 8-3 (5-3) will be anything but a ticket to Las Vegas or San Francisco (!) in December. And of course there’s the outside chance at a 7-4 or 6-5 season. Yuck.

So to put it all in perspective: Young team, lost lots of players. Not expected to seriously contend this year. Played well in their first five games against minor opponents. So should I be disappointed that they lost their first real test of the year, or should I be encouraged that they played so well, outplaying their opponent for most of the game but failing to make the right plays when it counts?

Okay, perspective’s a hard thing to grasp half an hour after watching only the third Cal loss in the last year. This kind of thing used to happen every three or four weeks! How far we’ve come that this loss, on the road to a favored team that’s ranked in the top 20, burns so much. And I realize that. But it still burns, no doubt about it.

(Addition: I’ve been so down on Pac-10 officials, I should say that the officiating on this game was actually pretty good. The Cal was-it-a-touchback play in the first quarter was even handled properly, because although it’s more likely than not that it was a touchback, there was no conclusive evidence to overturn the call. Pac-10 officiating is still horribly inconsistent, but to be fair I have to say that this game was handled just fine.)

I had the exact same thought about that final drive. Why give up on the one thing that was working (rushing) particularly against a prevent, particularly with two timeouts, particularly when 10 yard runs stop the clock.

I think the other point that you overlooked was Cal's ineffectiveness in the redzone. Turn just one of those 4 field goals into a touchdown and Cal wins the game.

I think UCLA will not finish #2 in the Pac-10 or even #3. They're not that good and proved last week they play inconsistently (today was thier good day). They'll lose to ASU, USC and one other when they make mistakes. Cal will probably lose to USC and Oregon but will win the rest to finish 8-3, 5-3, particularly since the other games (minus Stanford) are at home. Nevertheless, with the Pac-10 byes that puts Cal in 5th place behind USC (8-0 conf.), ASU (7-1/6-2), Oregon (7-1/6-2), UCLA (5-3) and then us at 5-3).

Anybody who had extra tickets to the USC game, I sure hope you recieved payment before tonight because the value of those tickets just fell through the floor.

Ken, you're absolutely right. At least two of those field goals should have been TDs. Although in some ways, discussing Ayoob's lack of accuracy is pretty much the same thing. If he had been accurate at all, they would've scored at least two more TDs.

The good news is, maybe some of the bandwagon fans will fall off the bandwagon and I'll actually have some leg room for the rest of the home games this year. I'm tryin' to find a bright spot here...

I think Cal is almost certainly looking at a Las Vegas or Emerald bowl this year. Could it be that we'll be dreaming for the days of an illustrious Holiday Bowl berth? Yuck.

By the way, I thought that extra-points were mandatory after touchdowns. But once the "here's one for the gamblers!" TD scored, everyone just fled. What about that extra point? WHO WILL THINK OF THE CHILDREN?

Posted by Jason at October 10, 2005 11:59 AM

I'm re-posting this here -- it's from my brother-in-law. --jason

What a disappointing Cal v. UCLA game.

Special teams receive an F- of course (punt return, kick return, and fake punt victims -- what else is there?). Clock management receives a D. In the last quarter, several of our possessions did not maximally exhaust the time we could, even when we had a lead. I think it is obvious that the final UCLA TD with a minute and a half left wouldn't've worked if it was the very last play. Perhaps not even with 30 seconds left. And so on. Counter-factuals suck, complexity-wise.

Speaking of that TD, defense gets a D also. At the point where Erica and I turned and smiled at each other despite UCLA driving and said "that's ok, yards are ok, FG doesn't win, they just have to stop..... DAMNIT!" That last TD was idiotic. The known UCLA playmaker catches a pass and runs down the sideline? Maybe after a few more TDs from that guy we will defend him more carefully. Further crimes: first and goal is a really REALLY frigging bad time to give up an 8-yard run. Cal did that 3 times. In fact, Cal did that EVERY time that situation came up. Kill me!

The offense gets a B-. They put up their points so they can't get a C. But our vaunted running attack only looks good to a coiffed announcer with a Republican's grasp of statistics. I winced every time they flashed the "attempts/yards/ypc" table up there after our running back broke off a 20 yard run. The announcers could barely stop crowing over the resulting double-digit YPC stat while we had three plays of 2 yard runs -- and punted. Personally, I would settle for half the YPC (say 5) with no standard deviation.

The Cal/UCLA game is why I don't like college football; there is too little leeway to have a good season. In NFL, you can lose a few with no heartbreak. But in college losing any before we meet USC -- I'm still not over it.

Posted by Jason at October 17, 2005 01:52 PM

Post a comment