Here’s the article from the Daily Cal. 

A few facts to point out before I begin: (1) Tedford knew of the true injury when it happened, (2) Tedford admitted that he realized that Longshore’s injury affected his ability to move around in the pocket, (3) Tedford asked Longshore many times if the injury affected his 4th quarter performance and Longshore said that it didn’t, and (4) Tedford still started Longshore despite Tedford acknowledging that Longshore’s injury affected his immobility.

Alright, what does this all mean?

Let’s start with #1.  JT knew of the injury when it first happened but lied.  Okay, so what?  Coaches lie all the time.  Why’d he lie?  So that if Longshore played, then other teams wouldn’t realize the extent of the injury.  Yup.  It’s that simple.  That’s why they also tape up both ankles, so the defense (if they can’t remember) can’t tell which ankle is messed up.  So when Longshore is in a pile, the defensive players have a 50/50 chance of choosing the right ankle to twist and contort in a purposeful effort to further injure Longshore.  I know it sounds malicious and mean, but it happens.  All types of crazy stuff goes on in piles.  Remember in 2003 when we played U$C?  Remember Echemandu saying to the refs and the media after the game that the $C players were grabbing his balls and stuff in the pile?  On one particular play you can see Ech coming out of the pile holding his crotch in pain and going to the refs to complain.  Don’t remember that?  Trust me, it happened.  So the point to take away here: JT lied to protect Longshore’s health should Longshore play again.

Okay, #2.   JT acknowledged that the injury affected NL’s mobility.  Well, at least we know that JT wasn’t blind.  We all knew that Longshore was less mobile because of the injury.  A few bold Cal fans began proposing that perhaps JT didn’t realize that.  Well, if you thought that, you were mistaken.  So the answer that JT knew it affected NL’s mobility yet NL still started begins the obvious question… which we’ll get to in #4.

But #3, Tedford asked Longshore if his 4th Quarter slump was a result of his injury, Longshore said no, Tedford concurred and that was that.  This fact has multiple issues to discuss: (a) Was Longshore’s 4th Quarter slump the result of his injury and (b) shouldn’t Tedford make the decision himself and not just ask Longshore’s opinion (which might have been biased)? 

So (a) - was NL’s 4th Quarter slump the result of his injury?  Longshore said no.  Tedford agreed.   In fact, Tedford said “I think it’s more a case of a guy trying to be too perfect, a guy trying to get things done and maybe trying too hard.”  I have to agree with JT.  If you watched the games closely, you could sort of see that Longshore was taking bigger gambles by throwing to covered WRs.  In games when we were down, and had to pass to score and win, the game was on Longshore’s shoulders.  He knew this, and tried to come through when needed.  The thing is, when you know that the game rests on your shoulders you begin to do too much.  You begin to think the others can’t do it, and only you can.  You have to take big chances to win.  This is what Longshore seems to have felt.  It’s very similar to Brett Favre.  In fact, maybe they should call it Brett Favre syndrome.  As good as that guy is, he throws wayyy too many INTs because he tries too hard.  Same deal with Longshore.  Obviously, the ankle affects his mobility but I think if you carefully watch the 4th quarter of the past few games, you’ll see the Longshore mistakes are more a product of him trying too hard against tough circumstances (QB pressure and blitzing) than Longshore merely throwing a bad ball because he can’t push off his right ankle. 

This sort leads me another subtle point.  A lot of people have immediate concluded that Longshore’s injury has affected his performance because the two have coincided with each other.  Coincidence doesn’t always mean causation.  And in this case I don’t think the injury was the majority of the cause. 

Okay, and (b) - shouldn’t Tedford make the decision regardless of Longshore’s opinion?  Yes.  But just because Tedford asked Longshore for his opinion, doesn’t mean Tedford used that information to make his decision.  If you think that he did you’re making assumptions.  Maybe did Tedford did ask Longshore, but Tedford already knew the answer.  But asking your QB is picking their mind.  You want to see how they feel about things.  It’s about respect.  Giving him the chance to see the truth.  And if he doesn’t, then you can come in and set them straight.  In this instance, Longshore’s statements matched what Tedford thought so no biggie.  No big deal that Tedford asked Longshore if his slump was a result of the injury because Tedford could have (and more than likely) already knew the reason.

EDIT: Okay, I missed a point in the Daily Cal article.  Tedford DID let Longshore make the decision on whether he should start or not.  Okay.  This I will admit, in my opinion is a mistake.  Surely you can ask your QB his opinion, but as many other writers have pointed out, most guys would say anything to continue starting because it hurts to ride pine, and they think they can do better and succeed.  Tedford should have made the decision on who to start himself, and not have left it up to Longshore.  I think Jon Wilner wrote that this shows JT’s loyalty to his players.  Which is his greatest asset and maybe also his worst.  I would more or less agree with that statement.  But let’s also get another thing straight.  While Tedford did allow Longshore to make the decision, Tedford was okay with having Longshore start.  If Tedford truly thought that Longshore wasn’t capable of starting, then he wouldn’t have asked Longshore and would have started Riley.  Right?  So what does this mean?  We’ll get to it below. 

Finally, the biggie, #4 -  Tedford still started Longshore despite knowing that Longshore’s injury affected his mobility.  Most fans are really upset about this one.  It’s understandable, but I think most fans are sort of overlooking a big possibility. 

Most Cal fans who wanted Riley would say: "it’s obvious that Longshore’s injury is the result of his 4th Quarter slump (not entirely true), and Riley gives us a better chance to win."  Hmm… really?  Riley gives us a better chance to win? 

Okane has a big time gold nugget on his blog, here’s what he conveyed: "Tedford went on to reiterate what he has said all year, that although the injury may have an effect on Longshore’s mobility, it’s not enough to knock him out of the lineup because of his intangibles and grasp of the offense."

What does this mean?  It means this:  Longshore with bum ankle > healthy Riley. 

So for all the Riley lovers out there… sorry, gonna have to wait another year unless Longshore leaves. 

As we all know, or should know, "grasp of the offense" = experience.  Tedford loves having experienced QBs in his system.  The playbook is huge, the defenses are complex, defenses mask coverages, experience slows the game down.  Longshore has much more experience, a better grasp of the offense, and calmer nerves because of his experience.  That’s why Longshore still played instead of Riley.

And about Riley.  I’m about to say some stuff, and don’t get me wrong, I like Riley and I think he has big time potential to be as good as Aaron Rodgers but let’s get a few things straight.  As a friend of mine once pointed out, our opinion on Riley is based off of essentially two escaped sacks, one short TD throw, and four deep throws (which included the long TD pass to Hawk).  Period.  People remember this deep huge clutch throws against Oregon State but forget that Riley wasn’t quite "in the zone" for everything prior to that.  He was very hit and miss.  More miss than hit to start the game.  So my point here is this: we’ve only seen Riley for 1 game, and he only had one good quarter.  We all love him.  We all think he’s the next Aaron Rodgers.  BUT, our opinions of him are very much biased and overly focused on that last drive.  So let’s come back down to Earth a little bit on Riley. 

And a lot of people have been criticizing Tedford for saying he doesn’t have the foresight to see that Longshore isn’t the QB to lead us to an undisputed Pac-10 Championship or a BCS game.  Maybe Longshore isn’t the guy, but do you really want to criticize Tedford?  Face it.  We’re all couch QBs and coaches.  Even me.  We don’t know horse manure compared to Tedford.  And do we really want to say that Tedford is mistaken?  Maybe Tedford realizes that Longshore isn’t the guy, but realizes Longshore still gives us a better chance than Riley.  I think most people fail to make that realization. 

Remember what Tedford’s quote means?  Here’s the quote again: "Tedford went on to reiterate what he has said all year, that although the injury may have an effect on Longshore’s mobility, it’s not enough to knock him out of the lineup because of his intangibles and grasp of the offense."

It means:  Longshore with bum ankle > healthy Riley.  It means although Riley beats Longshore in the physical attributes department, Longshore beats Riley in the mental attributes department and does so by a bigger margin than he loses to Riley in the physical attributes.  Longshore with bum ankle > healthy Riley

Learn to live with it.  Let’s not question Tedford.  As much as he’s a God, he can also make mistakes, but I don’t think this is one of his mistakes.  A friend of mine reminded me that Tedford is a guy who has put multiple college QBs into the NFL (how they perform in the NFL is another matter and hardly any fault of Tedford’s).  Tedford KNOWS what he’s doing when it comes to QBs.  He knows who has it and who doesn’t.  He knows who gives us the best chances at winning.  We’re just fans.  We only see the QBs in games.  We don’t see the QBs in practice 4 times a week.  Let’s stop thinking we know more than Tedford.  Trust the man.  In Tedford we trust.  If Tedford thinks Longshore with bum ankle gives us a better chance to win than Riley, then let’s go with it. 

Capiche?
  

So…basketball?  By now, Cal fans know better than to let one of Ben Braun’s teams get their hopes up too soon.  Still, the Bears are now 5-0, the best start of any of Braun’s teams at Cal, and the last few wins have been over some good, though not great, teams that you’ve almost certainly heard of:  San Diego State, Nevada, and now Missouri.  Sure, we don’t yet know whether these Bears will be able to make some noise in what is looking to be a very tough Pac-10, and yes, we all know (painfully so!) how deceptive a 5-0 start can be.  However, I’m going on record that the 2007-08 Cal Bears basketball team is one that warrants your attention.

And so what’s next for these Bears?  Well, they’ve got a big game at Kansas State on Sunday, featuring one of the most exciting freshman in the country, 6-9 power forward Michael Beasley.  But first, they get what can only be considered a ‘chump’ game at home on Wednesday night against Jackson State.  Listen, if you’re playing ‘X State’ and ‘X’ is not a state, you’d better not get beat.  Just look at how much grief Michigan got over the App State loss.

So, is Jackson State any good?  Probably not.  Oh, they were good last year.  Last year out of conference, they played almost exclusively on the road, and they managed to win at places you’ve probably heard of, like Rutgers and UTEP.  They then finished second in their conference (the SWAC), winning 21 games in the process, and ran through the conference tournament to win a trip to the Big Dance, where they were rewarded with a 14 seed and a first round matchup with the defending national champions, Florida.  That didn’t go so well, but then, no one else was able to beat the Gators in March either.

However, last year they were led by SWAC player of the year Trey Johnson, who was second in the country in scoring average at 27.1 points per game.  He was Jackson State’s offense, taking 752 shots last year.  The next highest player had 244.  They’ve got some players coming back, but no one of that caliber.  Grant Maxey and Jeremy Caldwell are talented forwards, but I don’t expect them to overpower either DeVon Hardin or Ryan Anderson.  Here’s an excerpt from the Blue Ribbon Preview of Jackson State (ESPN Insider access required):

With Maxey’s flexibility, he could very easily be used at small forward, which is more his natural position than the four, which he played last year.

Now that’s big.

Oh, you think that’s big?  Cal will counter with 5 players 6′ 10" or taller, and 3 more who check in at 6′ 8".  And yes, Stanley Turner sounds like a very big man, but his average of 2.0 ppg this year, while more than double last year’s total, just isn’t going to cut it.

Looking at Jackson State’s statistics, it’s clear that they haven’t found any sort of go-to guy, or even a steady lineup.  Grant Maxey leads the team with 14.5 ppg, 5.5 rpg and 25.6 minutes per game, numbers which would make him a solid contributer on the Bears, but by no means a team leader.  8 players play at least 14 minutes per game, and another 7 average at least 5, indicative of a team that’s throwing everybody out there just to see who sticks.

And their record this year?  1-7, with the lone win coming against Iona in the Las Vegas Invitational.  Yes, they’ve played only 2 home games, and while losses to Baylor, Louisville and BYU are hardly anything to be ashamed of, they’ve struggled to even be competitive, with all 7 losses coming by at least 12 points.  Indeed, both Baylor and BYU dropped 100 on them, which is highly unusual in the college game, and two other teams have topped 80.  I don’t want to predict a blowout, not with Braun’s tendency to slow things down, but I can easily see Cal topping 80 against these guys.

Indeed, it appears that the Tigers (yes, another team from the South that uses the ‘Tigers’ mascot.  Off the top of my head, I can think of LSU, Missouri, Auburn and Clemson.  Just how many tigers are there in the South?) will be overmatched against Cal, and I don’t expect a very close game.  Still, if you do decide to go to the game, I think you’ll be in for an entertaining time.  These Bears can score in a bunch of different ways, they play D, and they even throw in some transition offense.  Indeed, this may be my favorite Cal team at least since the Shipp-Weathers days, and maybe even further back.

If you could possibly want more info on Jackson State, here’s another season preview on them, which I think is pretty good.  Bonus: it’s also free!

A few days ago, in a suburb not far away…

When we left our hero CBKWit, the rebel Golden Bears had suffered their first loss in 6 years to the evil Stanfurdic empire.  With seemingly all lost after a defeat at the hands of an invincible 3-8 opponent, Cal fans cling to their only hope: a sophomore point guard with an uncanny resemblance to George Michael Bluth…

And let’s kill this parody before it gets any stupider.  Basically, after watching the all too expected ending come to fruition (with a surprising twist: one of my favorite bears, the Hawk, does a great impression of one of my least favorite bears, LaShaun Ward), I walked back to my car a half mile away (20 boutiques long, using Stanford metrics) and halfheartedly insulted Stanford undergrads to pass the time.  (Calling out furd students for being spoiled and privileged only works so well when you’re wearing an Eddie Bauer Pea coat.).  It was my first Big Game loss, and I was looking to the Cal/Missouri basketball game to help take the sting away, but even that looked bleak when we heard the halftime score: Cal down 8.

I didn’t have tickets to the game, but by the time we made it back to Berkeley, 2/3 of the game was over and we decided to charm our way in.  My guest had played with Anderson and Randle in the RSF (“they were a lot better than everyone else”), and was attempting to distract himself from his disgust for Cal football (“I’m done with Cal, they suck – they suck!”).  The initial ticket agent was unsympathetic but her supervisor relented, and in the process dropped a very interesting nugget of information: “the second half has started, they can come in.”  Cal fans, it may be difficult to justify paying to see a whole Cal game considering recent seasons, but you only have to sit through half a game for free!

Cal was down 7 with 13 minutes left when we found seats.  Hardin sat for a good chunk of the first half with foul trouble, forcing Braun to go to a zone and allowing Mizzou to shoot 65%.  That will put any team in a hole, and it underscores how important DeVon is to the team, even if he isn’t leading the conference in scoring (just rebounding).  From the moment we sat down, though, Cal looked fantastic, and outscored Missouri by 21 the rest of the way to win by 14.  Even my dour guest admitted “they look pretty good; I might have to put my energy into Cal basketball from now on.”  As more Big Game attendees filed in, Haas grew louder and more enthusiastic.  The senior mic man, who looked devastated when I talked to him at Stanford Stadium, lead almost desperate cheers for a very receptive crowd.  In fitting irony, we were looking for redemption.

The comeback:

-    Braun preaches that defense sets the tone, and in this instance he was exactly right.  Cal’s perimeter defense was wonderful, as Braun went with a lineup of Knezevic, Randle, and Christopher (that’s right, all 3 of our scholarship guards) to counter Mizzou’s press.  A lot of man-to-man defense is effort, and without any subs to spell them, Cal’s guards (especially Nikola and Christopher) were playing their Asses off.

-    While Cal’s defense focused on taking away the three pointer and preventing penetration (a tall order to do both, but the perimeter defense really was that good), Mizzou ran a persistent full court press and traps in the half court.  When Cal would eventually break the press, (and they were generally successful with the 3 guard lineup), Mizzou used ball pressure in an effort to create turnovers.  It didn’t work, and Nikola wreaked havoc by beating his man off the dribble and getting into the lane.  He drew fouls, dished as the defense collapsed, and even showed off a slick jumper from the top of the key.  Randle hit a beautiful 3 to give Cal the lead for good after dribble penetration and a kick out.  When Cal focused on entry passes to the low post instead, Hardin and Anderson received the ball in good position and were able to finish.  When Christopher had the ball, he was able to score pretty much at will.  It was fun to watch, and when was the last time you said that about Cal basketball?

I’m thirteen, awkward, and play great perimeter defense.

-    Continuing with our celebration, Cal’s rebounding was also strong, though on multiple occasions two Cal players attempting to retrieve the ball knocked it out of bounds.  The problem is that Hardin is so athletic he can go after boards that seem completely out of reach, and the player with better position loses the ball when Hardin comes out of nowhere.  You want to say “just let the big man tear it down!” but Cal needs a little better communication when collecting defensive rebounds.

-    I could go on about other great displays (it’s easy to gush when you outscore the opposition by 20 points in just over 10 minutes), but the thing that really stands out is the chemistry of the team.  Everyone on the floor was hustling, focused, and playing selflessly.  Players on the bench were enthusiastic.  The stars of the team (Hardin, Anderson, and Christopher) seem humble and happy.  This is probably throwing salt in the wound, but it’s easy to compare the bball team to the football team and come away with a very favorable impression (then again, I remember feeling pretty good about the football team at 5-0, too).

-    The one lingering negative I took away was our lack of depth.  We only have walk-ons behind the aforementioned guards, and Harden and Anderson are on the floor the whole game because they’re so vital.  Against weaker teams (welcome Jackson St!), look for Cal to seem pretty sloppy and uninspired as Braun plays the limited bench and saves the starters for PAC-10 play.

In summary, there’s hope!  Maybe this cal basketball odyssey (Οδύσσεια, for you greeks) will turn out to be as successful as my odyssey so far (again, metaphors = good writer).