I did not see last night’s blowout at Haas.  From what I’ve heard, it’s much better that way.  I didn’t exactly expect the Bears to win, but I certainly didn’t expect them to lose by 21.

Anyway, I’m not here to attempt to give you an analysis of last night’s game.  Honestly, I got home last night, looked at the score on my computer, and didn’t even bother reading the recap.  I’m just not interested in that kind of masochistic activity.  However, CBKWit actually sat through the entire debacle.  Here’s what he had to say:

The game last night was awful.  It was almost identical to the Oregon game, except Oregon plays at a more breakneck pace and shoots more 3s.  Thus, they were able to score more points in the second half than WSU did.  Still, it was basically the same story – almost zero defensive stops in the second half.  There was a sarcastic cheer when we tied them up for a jump ball, ending what must have been 10 straight possessions without a stop.  With about 6 minutes left, Haas was half empty (or full, if you’re an optimist!).

Honestly, who amongst Bear fans is still an optimist at this point?  Oh, and if you’re scoring at home, that’s two 20+ point losses at home this year, and neither were to the two leading teams in the conference (though Cal lost at home to both UCLA and Stanford as well).  It used to be that the formula for success in the Pac-10 was to hold serve at home, and try and steal a few on the road.  Well, the Bears have played well in the road (4-3 in Pac-10 road games) but have been mostly abysmal at home.  They’re now 2-6 in home conference games, and they need a win Saturday against Washington to avoid their worst conference home mark since 1995.

Back in 1995, Todd Bozeman was in his first second full season of coaching the Golden Bears, Jason Kidd had just left for the NBA, Cal still played in old Harmon Gymnasium, and Cal managed a terrible 1-8 mark at home against Pac-10 competition (and that 1 win, over USC, was later forfeited because of an ineligible player).  Since then, the Bears have been very good at home, and since Haas Pavilion was finished in 1999, it has been regarded as being a significant home-court advantage.

Not this season, though.  For whatever reason, it seems the Bears have been playing worse at home.  Is it the empty seats?  Are the players having trouble with schoolwork or girlfriends that they can forget on the road?  It’s probably a multitude of things, including not being very consistent or disciplined as a team.

Perhaps Under Armour will help our Bears play well at home.  Hey, at this point, I’m willing to grasp at straws think outside the box.

As our women’s basketball team has demonstrated, people will show up at Haas to support a winner, and I think that kind of crowd imparts a significant advantage to the home team.  Can Haas Pavilion get back to being an intimidating place to play for visiting teams?  Yes, of course it can.  But fans have to show up, and they have to have a reason to show up.  I’m not assigning blame here.  I’m just saying, it’s pretty puzzling (and a little embarrassing) when the basketball team has a better record on the road than at home.

 

Yesterday was the first day to renew your football tickets for 2008.  It’s very exciting to start thinking about 2008.  2007 was a rough year for Cal football, so 2008 can’t come soon enough.  Plus, since the Big Game is in Berkeley this year, season tickets are technically cheaper (insomuch as you don’t have to buy a separate ticket for the Big Game). 

Here is the pricing: 

2008 CAL FOOTBALL TICKET PRICING
SEASON TICKETS	TOTAL PRICE
Regular Reserved	$360
Faculty/Staff Reserved	$298 (limit 2)
Young Alumni** Reserved	$298 (limit 2)
Season Parking	$140
GoldZone Reserved
Adult	$185
Youth*	$107
Senior#	$107
BlueZone Reserved
Adult	$185
Youth*	$107
Senior#	$107
*Youth are considered 1 year to Grade 12 **Young Alumni are graduation years 1999-2008 #Seniors are 65+

Here is the info on renewing and purchasing season tickets. If you do not already have season tickets, the date for purchasing new tickets is March 13. 

There appear to be some changes for this upcoming year.  BlueZone and GoldZone now have assigned seats.  Before, it was first come first serve, but now you will have actual seats.  I am not a BlueZone or GoldZone ticket holder, so I’m not sure what to think of this.  Are some BZ/GZ ticket holders not going to renew because of this change?  Plus, it looks like you now get a Big Game ticket with a BZ/GZ ticket plan.  Here’s a review of all the changes to BZ/GZ ticket plans.

Here is the FAQ regarding purchasing season tickets.  Hopefully, it can answer any questions all y’all might have. 

Finally, we here at the California Golden Blogs are hosting a Yahoo! Fantasy Sports Tournament Pick Em.  Click on this link to join the league.  If you win, you can write a 500 word rant to be posted up.  Or not.  Terms of the contest are subject to change at any time. 

As promised, today I’ll start seriously talking about how Cal is going to replace Ben Braun as the men’s basketball head coach.  It is not a given that this will happen; there are still plausible scenarios/arguments whereby, at the end of the year, Sandy Barbour expresses confidence in his coaching ability, and Braun continues his work at Cal through next year and beyond.  Still, I think the tide has turned.

Over the past few years, the grumbling and discontent about Braun have grown louder and harder to ignore, prompting me to run an entire five part series on the subject last year.  Past years have brought us excuses for his team’s failures, and so despite his track record, this year was widely viewed as a ‘put up or shut up’ sort of year for Braun.  This year’s team has been given reasonable health and reasonable expectations (compete in the top half of the Pac-10 and make the NCAA tournament), and so unless the Bears go on some sort of miracle run, I think it’s safe to say Braun will have decidedly failed to ‘put up’.  Defending him is getting to be a difficult task, and I get the sense that more and more of his ‘on the fence’ support is peeling away, perhaps deciding that to pull the Bears up out of mediocrity, a change is needed, if only to shake things up.

Anyway, I’m going to run a little exercise where I pretend to be the Athletic Director, and I decide we’re going to look at making a change regarding the men’s basketball coaching staff.  It’s a tough decision, and I’m glad I’m just writing about it on the internet instead of actually having such a weighty responsibility.

Now, instead of simply throwing around names of basketball coaches, I’d like to be a little more systematic about this process, which is why I’m going to start by laying out some standards and expectations for the basketball program.  If we’re really going to justify making a change, I think we ought to have concrete goals to measure the program up against, showing how the current head coach has failed to meet such standards, why we expect said coach will fail to meet such standards in the future, and why we expect the new coach we hire will succeed where the current coach has failed.  This can be a big, expensive process, what with contract buyouts, executive search consulting firms, and lucrative contracts aimed at luring successful coaches away from their current jobs, and so if we’re going to undertake it, we’d better be damned sure we’re ending up with a better coach than we started with.

The way I see it, there are two major factors on which to evaluate a coaching staff, and most everything falls within one of those two categories.  They are, in order of importance:

1. Representing the University
2. Competitive Performance

That’s right, competitive performance comes second.  I know not everyone feels this way, but I will not support a program whose off-court shenanigans cast a negative light on the University I love, no matter how many titles it wins in the process.  No way, no how.  It’s not worth it.

Breaking these categories down:

Representing the University
- Legal issues (crimes, misdemeanors, etc. — players AND coaches)
- Ethics issues (academic fraud, recruiting scandals)
- Scholarship issues (poor grades, failing to graduate)

The basic idea here is to avoid bringing negative attention to the University, with of course the ideal being a group of true student-athletes that are role models for the community.  I can stomach minor violations on a very occasional basis (i.e. a player caught smoking pot, or failing to make grades for a semester), but only as long as they remain isolated incidents, and there is a program and a culture in place to prevent and actively discourage such occurrences from turning into patterns of behavior.

Under Ben Braun, Cal has been very good with regards to these issues.  It is perhaps Braun’s strong suit.  Unfortunately, excelling in this area does not win you any points; it is merely a prerequisite for a successful basketball program, buying a seat at the next table, where we can begin to talk about competitive performance.

Competitive Performance
- Conference Championships
- Tournament Performance
- National Exposure/Prominence

In a general, hand-wavy sort of way, I think that most people would agree that reasonable goals for a basketball team would be to regularly compete for conference championships, have some NCAA tournament success, and gain some sort of national prominence.  These goals, of course, are rather open-ended, and leave quite a bit of grey area, where we are uncertain that certain accomplishments actually merit the term ’success’.  Ben Braun’s problem, obviously, is that his achievements at Cal sit somewhere within this grey area.

By any reasonable standard, Ben Howland has been a success at UCLA.  By the same token, there’s no way to qualify Jay John, formerly of Oregon State, as anything but a failure there.  Ben Braun?  That’s a trickier question.  How many Pac-10 wins are enough?  How many NCAA tournament appearances?  Must Cal be consistently ranked in the top 25 to be considered successful?  What’s needed is a benchmark, whereby we can say, with a reasonable degree of confidence, that a given level of achievement is successful enough.

So what’s a reasonable goal for Cal?  On one hand, Cal hardly has a storied basketball history; there’s the NCAA title in ‘59, the runner-up finish in ‘60, the brief light of the Jason Kidd era, aaaand…that’s pretty much it.  There’s been some other moderate successes along the way, but nothing most college basketball fans will remember (I’ll bet, even now, there are more people who can tell you Kareem Abdul-Jabbar’s name when he played at UCLA than can tell you where Leon Powe played his college ball, if they’ve even heard of Leon Powe).  Given our past history, there’s no justification for expecting immediate or sustained greatness.

On the other hand, Cal is a world-class university, with vast resources, a stellar academic reputation, a beautiful location, and good (though not great) local prep basketball talent.  They compete in one of the toughest conferences in the country, the Pac-10, and annually face off against storied programs such as Arizona and UCLA.  Remember, before Mike Montgomery arrived at Stanford, the Cardinal had virtually no basketball history to speak of.  There is no limiting barrier in place that says Cal cannot build a basketball program capable of competing with the best in the country.

With that in mind, I’ll now get more specific about the vague performance standards I mentioned before.  Feel free to disagree with me.  In fact, please do, as I think this can be a valuable discussion.

Regularly compete for conference championships
There are 10 teams in the Pac-10; I don’t think it’s too much to ask to win a conference championship once a decade.  I think Cal should be in the hunt* for a conference championship most years, and should be in the hunt for a top-5 conference finish virtually every year.  Barring extraordinary circumstances**, Cal should never finish last.

* ‘in the hunt’ - mathematically alive going into the final week of the season, or thereabouts
** massive injuries, everyone leaves for the NBA, etc.

Have some NCAA tournament success
Cal should make the NCAA tournament on a regular basis, something that I believe should follow from meeting the previous expectations.  Cal should win NCAA games with some regularity, and while Final Fours are tough expectations to meet, I think Cal should make a regional final at least as often as it wins the Pac-10 (once a decade).

Gain some sort of national prominence
This will follow from meeting the first two expectations, as winning the conference and making noise in the tournament will lead to national exposure.  Rankings are not everything, but Cal should be a part of them with some regularity.  Cal should also endeavor to schedule more high-profile non-conference games, which will help with exposure to recruits.  Besides, I think dropping a close game at Kansas State is worth more than blowing out Jackson State at home, both in terms of experience and NCAA tournament consideration.

If you’re scoring at home, you’ll see that Braun does poorly with regards to competitive performance.  Yes, the Bears are competitive, but it’s been a long time since they were competitive enough, and in 12 years on the job, Braun has still failed to bring home a single conference title.  Perhaps I’m expecting too much, but I don’t think so.  Some people might suggest that I’m not expecting enough.  Anyway, my next post will begin to suggest coaches who might actually be able to meet these standards while coaching at Cal.  I’ll be back in a couple days.

You may have noticed that the NFL combine began last week - and you may be asking yourself, how are our Bears looking?  The answer?  Hungry.

From Todd McShay:

• It is no secret that California WR DeSean Jackson is undersized, but few expected him to weigh in as low as 169 pounds. The lack of weight raises concerns about Jackson’s ability to take the pounding NFL receivers absorb over the course of a 16-game season. He had problems staying healthy in college, remember, and his lack of bulk also raises questions about how well he’ll be able to handle press coverage on the outside.

• Jackson’s measurements certainly weren’t the only disappointing ones of the day. In fact, eight of the 33 running backs here weigh less than 200 pounds. They are: Rutgers’ Ray Rice (5-foot-8, 199 pounds); Houston’s Anthony Alridge (5-9, 170); Cal’s Justin Forsett (5-8, 194); East Carolina’sChris Johnson (5-11, 197); Kentucky’s Rafael Little (5-8¾, 194) Oklahoma’s Allen Patrick (6-0¾, 198); Oklahoma State’s Dantrell Savage (5-8¼, 187); and West Virginia’s Steve Slaton (5-9⅛, 197).

Two thoughts: First, I feel fat at 190 pounds.  Second, I don’t know about what kind of frames THA1 and Forsett have, but it seems to me like guys looking to be professional football players can probably pack on a few more pounds.  Maybe Tedford needs to look into hiring a different nutrionist for the team.

More McShay:

While the 40-yard dash is among the most effective measuring sticks, the 20-yard split on the 40 tells scouts how quickly a prospect can get to full speed, which is critical to gaining separation from defensive backs off the line of scrimmage. Marques Colston ran a pedestrian 4.55 in the 40 at last year’s combine at nearly 6-foot-5 and 224 pounds, but his 20-yard split time (2.62 seconds) was among the best of the five receivers who ran. Considering his success as an NFL rookie maybe more stock should have been placed in his initial burst rather than his top-end speed.
Should test best: Mario Manningham (Michigan), DeSean Jackson (Cal) and Lavelle Hawkins (California)

If only the Bears had a quarterback last year that who could get off passes as quickly as our receivers got to top speed.

Craig Stevens!

Their workouts may have been overlooked because of Keller’s dominance, but Kentucky’s Jacob Tamme and Cal’s Craig Stevens represented themselves well. Tamme showed he can stretch the field by running the 40 in 4.57, while Stevens ran better than expected at 4.62. Though Tamme dropped a pass he should have caught early in the receiving drills he showed excellent body control and made a nice adjustment on a seam route on his very next chance.

He may as well have substituted "Tamme" for "Stevens" in that last sentence there.

And finally, Stevens and Mike Gibson did pretty well in all of the other physical drills as well. 

Sorry Twist.  I’m not very angry, so you won’t find a tirade in this post (let’s talk about ucla’s latest creation imitation if you really want to get me ranting).   Maybe by holding my tongue at the game, I bottled up the frustration and, like Kramer, it’s just waiting for an opportune time to come out (the men are playing in Palo Alto tonight and will almost definitely lose to Johnson & Johnson?  Sounds perfect!) 

Serenity now…insanity later

I was also subdued because early yesterday morning, I woke up hyperventilating from the worst nightmare I’ve had in a while: Tedford was leaving Cal.  I remember saying "This is all that I care about; why can’t I have it?!" before waking up, short of breath.  Alright, maybe there is such a thing as being too devoted, and hopefully this dream isn’t an accurate predictor like some of my previous ones.  Regardless, I think I was too relieved upon waking and realizing that Tedford is still our coach to get very angry about anything yesterday, even a hearbreaking two point loss to our yuppie rivals.  I also found therapy in Cal football, with a thrilling triple overtime victory over Florida State.  You’ll be happy to know that, after throwing 8 interceptions in a road loss to USC in 2008, Kevin Riley rebounds in 2009 and leads Cal in back to back victories over then undefeated and #1 ranked USC and 1 loss Florida State.  Darian Hagan also continues to impress, icing the victory while breaking his own school record with a timely interception in the third overtime.  It would have been nice to win a real game instead of an xbox one, but as a Cal fan, you’ll take what you can get.

I guess the real reason there’s no rage here is that, as opposed to the men’s game last month, there wasn’t much to be mad about.  TwistNHook did a nice job recaping the various statistical shortcomings which led to the loss; the ones which stood out to me are free throws (11-19) and three point shooting (3-18).  These issues stood out particularly in comparison to Stanford, which was 11-13 from the stripe before missing 3 in the final minute, and was 9-21 from behind the arc.  Turnovers (14) were a problem, especially for Vital who forced a number of passes into the heart of the defense, but turnovers have been a problem for Cal all year and the women actually did a better job protecting the ball yesterday than they typically do.  Boyle mentioned that she felt the team rushed its final possessions, which I agree with, but they were able to get the ball inside and draw some contact.

This is all true, but Cal lost because of soon to be all time Pac-10 leading scorer Candice Wiggins.  The score tied at 56 with 3 minutes left, Wiggins (Pac-10 POY 2005-06) stole the ball from Devanei Hampton (Pac-10 POY 2006-07) and coasted to an easy layup.  Then, with barely a minute left, Wiggins buried a tough 12 footer to put the furd up by 2 scores.  That was the game.  Simply put, Wiggins has bigger balls ovaries than anyone else on the floor.  With the game on the line, Vital missed an easy layup, Cal failed to score on numerous occasions, and Stanford missed the front end of 3 straight one-and-ones.  We can analyze the stats all we want but down the stretch, no one could produce except Wiggins.  They had a Baron, and we did not.

That said, Cal was EXTREMELY close to taking this game.  Cal was up 3 at 56-53 following a 10-0 run when Stanford nearly threw the ball into their own bench.  An impressive leap by a furd freshman saved the ball, and the ended up scoring a 3 point play on the possession (how you can call that touch foul on Dev while not calling to contact on the other end on Cal’s final possessions I don’t know, but other than that, the officials were fine.)  If that ball had ended up going out of bounds, my guess is that Cal wins.  And next year, with everyone back for Cal and Wiggins off to the (W)NBA, you have to consider Cal the Pac-10 favorite.

It sucks to lose, but if you’re a fan of the lady bears or women’s basketball in general, you have to be happy with this: there were more people at the game yesterday than at the Cal-Stanford MEN’S game at Haas.  That might say more about the differences between our men’s and women’s teams than any record or game statistic could.

 

Most people have heard of Susan B. Anthony.  But anybody who is anybody knows the money suffragist was Elizabeth Cady Stanton.  I mean when it comes to 19th century feminists, Susan B. was so first wave.  So first wave!

After going to the Cal-Stanford woman’s basketball game Saturday afternoon, one of Elizabeth Cady Stanton’s most celebrated quotes came to mind:

"Damn, where’s Baron Davis when you need him?" 

Yeah, Elizabeth Cady (or Lizzie C as I like to call her) was very intelligent.   She knew that when you are down with just a few seconds left, you gotta go to your big gun:  Baron.  And I guess that was the easiest explanation as to why Cal failed to pull it out on Saturday.  Baron Davis was out of collegiate eligibility.  And a man.

Sure, others will say it was the sloppy play (so many turnovers and traveling calls).  Some might even say it was the disastrous free throw shooting.  But we all know the truth.  I mean if Baron can do it to the Leon Powe-led Celtics, he can do it to the Leon Powe-less Stanford Cardinal!  Speaking of Powe, he is a new father.  Congratulations to Leon!

Before I get to a further discussion of the game, I just wanted to share a little story.  Saturday morning I had to drive over to El Cerrito.  My wife had been borrowing a cello from Ifshin Violins and I had to return it.  But isn’t Ifshin Violins in Berkeley, you might say?  As of this past week, no.  They have moved to El Cerrito.  While there, I talked with one of the employees as to why one of the premiere instrument shops decided to leave Berkeley.  Some of the reasons are not particularly new or novel:  Berkeley has high taxes, the new location has more space.

But the employee did mention that they had a certain problem with parking.  The meters in front of Ifshin (located on the rather busy University Avenue) were broken for like years.  Customers would get tickets no matter how short they parked there.  And Berkeley was too busy suing the school over the stadium or trying to send non-binding resolution letters to Marines instead of, yknow, FIXING AN ACTUAL PROBLEM FACING BERKELEY.  And now, for want of a few parking meters, the business exodus out of Berkeley continues. 

But enough of that.  Let’s focus on the game.  What game?

 

Oh yeah, that one.  Well, I’ll leave the analysis to CBKWit or Ragnarok, with whom I enjoyed the game.  All I know is that Elizabeth Cady Stanton would be proud to know how packed the stands were with passionate fans.  Here are some photos:

 

One of the refs took time out of her busy schedule of calling traveling on the Bears to tell the drums they were playing too much.

 

A blurry shot of some of the men’s B-Ball team.  Ryan Anderson was lurking, too, but I couldn’t get a good shot of him.  I was trying to take this shot as I walked by without revealing my "stalker" self, which is why it isnt very good.  

 

 

 

Inevitably when you have as many chances to win as Cal did, it is hard to pinpoint one aspect of Cal’s play that led to the loss.  Looking at the stats, Cal certainly had the advantage in some situations.  They snagged 10 more boards than Stanford.  But they also turned the ball over more and shot far worse at the FT line (68% to 55%). 

One clear difference was in the 3 point shooting.  Cal shot 17% (including a terrible 1-11 2nd half), while Stanford shot 43%.  The FG shooting overall was actually almost equal at about 43%.  But if you dig closer, you’ll see that it was a tale of 2 halves.  Stanford shot terrible in the first half, while Cal shot equally as terrible in the 2nd half.   

Really, as painful as the loss is, Cal can erase it from their memory with a strong end of the season.  If Cal goes farther in the tournament, nobody is going to care that they didn’t technically win the Pac10 regular season title.  Such is the joy of college basketball.  All the pain of the regular season can easily be erased.  Hopefully, Cal will erase it!

I’m sure CBKWit has a lot to say about the game.  And I’m sure that it will be the most R-Rated spiel yet.  We sat right behind two young girls, so every other word out of CBKWit’s mouth had to be "godzarnit" or "fudgetickles."  I can only assume he got home and had a 45 minute explitive filled rant to make up for his swear-free afternoon.  I look forward to hearing his thoughts on the game.  Until then, enjoy the photos, and GO BEARS! 

That was a nice win by our Bears last Saturday at Arizona State, but for some reason, it got zero coverage on this site.  The reason, of course, is that I remain thoroughly skeptical of this team and its chances to make this year interesting.  I said last week that the Bears had to get 2 out of 3 on this road trip to have a prayer, and falling at Arizona last Thursday means that they now face what is the very definition of a tall order:  a must-win game on the road against a top-10 team.  Good luck with that.

And now, we get Stanford in Maples on Sunday night.  This is not a ‘make or break’ game for the Bears.  ‘Make or break’ implies that a win would "make" their season, which is clearly not the case.  All they would get is back to .500 in the conference, with two tough but winnable games at home vs. the Washington schools next week.  Not great, but it’d be a start, with plenty of work left to do.

Sooo, Stanford.  Somehow, Ryan Anderson has to figure out how to get around the Lopez twins.  Perhaps get Brook Lopez in foul trouble again.  During their last meeting, Brook sat on the bench most of the first half, and the difference was evident.  Of course, he played excellently in the second half, scoring most of his 23 points, which led all scorers in only 19 minutes of play.

Also a problem?  Robin Lopez.  Specifically, his 10 offensive rebounds.  10!  Cal, as a team, only had 9.  That, right there, is how Cal shoots nearly 50% on the night and still loses.

Another worry from their last meeting was Mitch Johnson’s 16 points.  Mitch Johnson is not good.  He might be the worst starting point guard in the conference, and is certainly the worst example of nepotism in the Pac-10.  I still can’t believe he scored 16 points against us.

Now, Stanford is a very, very good team.  I don’t think they’re actually one of the 10 best teams in the country, but it’s hard to argue with a 21-4 record.  The Cardinal aren’t fighting for a tournament spot here.  They’re fighting for a conference championship, and if they can run the table and knock off UCLA in LA next month, they might just get it.  That said, I do think the Bears can beat them this Sunday.  It is entirely within the realm of possibility.  I just don’t think that it’s terribly likely.

So, here’s the deal I’m gonna make with you, dear readers:  if the Bears pull the upset and beat the Cardinal on Sunday, I’ll start seriously discussing the Bears’ post-season possibilities next week.  If, however, Cal falls in predictable fashion at Maples, we’ll instead start to discuss possible replacements for Ben Braun.  Sound fair?

No pressure, Ben.  No pressure.

You’ll have to pry this job from my cold, dead fingers!

Cal vs. Stanford.

Tomorrow.  1pm.  Haas Pavilion.

Pac-10 Title will go to the winner.

I’m not sure what else needs to be said besides, "Get your lazy butt down to Berkeley."  Our Cal women are currently 14-1 in the Pac-10, ranked 8th in the country, and they deserve our support.  Especially now, when they face their archrival, 13-2 Stanford, currently ranked 7th in the country.  While Stanford is the owner of more than half of the conference championships that have ever been awarded, Cal has never finished higher than 3rd.  They are in the midst of an historic season, and now they get to face Stanford at home, on Senior Day, with a chance to finally topple the Cardinal and claim the Bay Area and the Pac-10 as their own.  This is their last game at Haas this year, and if you haven’t caught them in person yet this year, you owe it to yourself to get down to Berkeley tomorrow.

Oh, you like the men’s basketball team better?  Why?  They’re currently mired in mediocrity, needing an extraordinary push over the last few weeks of the season to have a shot at the post-season.  Besides, it’s not like you’ve seen the men win a conference championship lately.  Their last title came in 1960, shortly after Castro assumed power in Cuba, when they finished first in something called the Athletic Association of Western Universities.  Given Ben Braun’s recent history of doing just enough to not get fired, we may see another 48 years pass before another conference title.

Remember how excited you were when your football season tickets arrived last year?  Perhaps you remember that, attached to them, was a voucher that could be exchanged for a free ticket to any home women’s basketball game.  Absolutely free!  My guess is, you never got around to using yours.  Well, tomorrow’s your last chance.  You don’t even have to give them money to support the basketball team.  Just cheer loudly for them.  Hiss at the Stanfurd players.  You’ve done all this before.  Except now, when you hurl inappropriate insults at Stanford athletes, everyone in the room (including lots of innocent 10-year-old girls) will be able to hear what you say.  So watch yourself.  CBKWit, I’m looking at you…

Anyway, it’s No. 8 Cal vs. No. 7 Stanford.  I can’t think of a good reason not to be there.

• Riley!  Longshore!  It’s spring drills in Berkeley, California!  Feldman blogs to say that will be the top QB battle this spring.  Honestly, I don’t know if I can handle another year of Nate "I make Drew Bledsoe look like Michael Vick - without the dogfighting" Longshore.
• The senior writer at foxsports.com, whats-his-face, gives Ryan Anderson some recognition for National Player of the Year.  Not listed - anyone I know.
• Thomas DeCoud takes the time to drop some knowledge, and gives us this fun fact: Arizona’s coaching staff = assholes.
• Lavelle Hawkins also dropped by the Worldwide Leader, and tells us that he hasn’t seen Alex Smith play wouldn’t mind playing for the 49ers.
• Stewart Mandel has our Bears making the field of 65.  I’d rather our Bears miss the postseason entirely if that’s what it takes to get Braun out.  ESPN.com has our Bears squarely on the bubble.
• Todd McShay says it’s time for THA1 to prove himself at the combine.  Since he didn’t exactly do that on the field for most of the year.
• Article from the Contra Costa Times saying he’s trying to do just that - with the help of Jerry Rice.

The second part of my evening with Tedford (and a bunch of aging, nerdy men, for whom I am a protege) consisted of a highlight montage of the new recruits laid to "sick beats" (I think that’s what the kids are saying these days).  There were the standard, interchangeable rap songs without too many expletives, a few hearty rock numbers, and my favorite, the "10% song."  I’m positive You know the 10% song.  It is used in virtually every sports montage, highlight collection, or movie trailer ("It’s 10 percent luck, 20 percent skill, 30 percent concentrated power of will," I think).  There are probably 10 different percentile groups, up to one hundred ("100 percent something something remember the name?") and then this chorus of sorts repeats, 28 times.  That’s the song.

What struck me upon hearing it this time wasn’t the usual "damn it, not this song again," or even involuntary recollections of The Rock in various inspirational roles.  I realized that the song is actually an instructional guide to those of us without much athletic ability; this is the secret on how to succeed in sports, handed down straight from either athletic champions or cynical music executives.  I could virtually picture TwistNHook preparing for his intramural badminton match by furiously taking notes on this song ("What percent concentrated power of will?  What percent???  Thank God there are 17 more cycles coming up!")

 

TwistNHook, Circa 2001

Tedford rolled the tape and, for our benefit, began commenting on the highlights.  High school highlights aren’t very useful for casual fans, because the players who move on to D1 ball are pretty much all stars of their teams and areas.  People like DeSean, Marshawn, and Jahvid certainly stand out more than usual, but basically everyone recruited by top BCS programs looks dominant on tape.  That’s why it’s nice to have Tedford there, pointing out the subtle things he looks for in recruits.  We see the interceptions and big hits; he notes things like "great leverage" and "quick hips."

DEFENSE:

Defensive linemen were the first group, and Kendrick Payne led off.  He looked good on tape, but Tedford’s quote was better: "I can’t believe how much he reminds me of Mebane."  This made me giddy.  It looks like our own HydroTech knows what he’s talking about after all.  Tedford ended the Mebane comparison by noting that Payne even has Mebane’s "big ‘ol booty."  I never really noticed Mebane’s butt (the girls all thought uberhot David Lonie had the best one), but if Tedford likes it on Payne, I like.

Trevor Guyton from my great state of Washington was next.  Tedford remarked that Guyton "has the stature to play early on."  Tedford also underscored Guyton’s fitness and athleticism by noting that, when an offensive linemen went down before the offense-defense all american bowl, Gutyon played both ways for most of the game.  When Guyton came free off the line to make a big hit, elliciting "ooohhs" from the audience, Tedford noted he looks "really good when no one blocks him."

Our last d-linemen, Aaron Tipoti is "quick," allowing him to play both "inside and outside."  I know that Tedford, Gregory, and Lupoi value versatility in their d-linemen, but I’ve heard this about a fair amount of Cal d-linemen in recent years (Alualu, Cody Jones, and Abu for starters), and none of them seem as effective as recent players who are either clearly defensive ends (Riddle) or defensive tackles (Mebane).  I’m hopeful that one of these guys will turn into a bigger Riddle or a Mebane with defensive end speed, but for now I can’t shake the feeling that they’re tweeners and good at both positions but not dominant at either.

The DBs were next, and the first clips were of our highest rated corner, Marc Anthony.  "He’ll hit you and he has great ball skills."  That sounds pretty good.  Personally, I’m just excited to see J-Lo in a pink Cal jersey.  Well, maybe if it was 2000 and you could somehow turn this into a jersey.

 

Hopefully Marc Anthony will be just as effective picking up errant passes as he is at picking up fast fading superstars.

Josh Hill, DT Kendrick Payne’s teammate, was next; Tedford mentioned that he plays with "great leverage" and that he "reminds me of D Hughes."  HydroTech, are you Tedford?

The third DB was Juco transfer Kamaron Yancy.  Tedford likes his "quick hips," and like J-Lo’s husband, he’ll "come up and hit you."

Last was Chris Little, who will play safety.  Little is a local kid and looked physically dominant (read: big and fast) in his clips.  Tedford called him "Big Chris."

Rounding out the the defense were the two linebackers, JP Hurrell and Mychal Kendricks.  Tedford called both of them "intense" and said they "could run".  He went one step farther with Kendricks ("he can really run") and called him possibly the "most athletic guy at [the] Palo Alto [Nike Camp]."  On Hurrell: "He has great instincts" and "a little nastiness" in his game.

Before moving on to the offensive, we were treated to highlights of our specialist, long snapper Matt Rios.  Watching highlights of someone snapping the ball is like watching…well, I can’t really think of an appropriate comparison in another sport.  Maybe watching highlights of a pitcher trying to pick someone off first base, only the bases happen to be empty.  To top it off, the camera angles in this amatuer footage are terrible and the image is out of focus, so you can barely see the ball, and the camera doesn’t follow the kick (since it’s trying to promote the long snapper), so you don’t find out if they make the field goal or tackle the punt returner.  Rios went to the same high school as current Cal long snapper Nick Sundberg (apparently there is a long snapping expert at some high school in Arizona) and is considered one of the best in country.  Tedford told us that the position "is important to us" so they "gave him a scholarship," which seems to imply that this is not usually done.  Regardless, we’ve got one of the best in the business coming to Cal, so look forward to some awesome long snapping highlights!

Following Great Moments in Long Snapping, the Top 25 Uncontested Inbounds Passes!

OFFENSE:

We started on the o-line with our incoming center, Dominic Galas.  Hydrotech reasonably speculated that Cal recruited Galas as an insurance policy in case Alex Mack decided to go pro.  It turns out that Galas is an insurance policy - for last year’s center recruit, Todd Huber, who has not yet recovered from a knee injury.  Sorry Hydro, you can’t win em all.

Tedford used the adjective "intense" on multiple occasions to describe Galas, which is a quality I’d like my center to have.  Tedford also noted his similarities to Mack in high school,  as both were champion wrestlers and looked similar in "flatbacking" opponents.

On offensive tackle Tyler Rigsbee, the first commit of the class: "He’s 280 pounds now, he’ll play at 320 someday.  He’s very athletic."

Tight end Spencer Ladner, one of the highest rated recruits in the class is "at 225 now, [and] needs to be at 255 to play."  He has a "great frame."  Anthony Miller, while not as highly regarded, is "more ready to play" and "can come in and compete right away."

Tedford noted that quarterback Beau Sweeney "can run a little bit."  No word yet on whether or not he can avoid back-breaking fourth quarter interceptions (zing!)

Marvin Jones (or "Marv," as Tedford called him) has "great body control and hands."  To me, he looked like the complete package - big enough, strong, fast, agile, two hands.  He also has "great range jumping" for the ball, as does Charles Satchell.  Tedford also like what Satchell does "with the ball in his hands."  (Again, note the plural hands).

Jarrett Sparks is the most physical of the 5 big receivers, and Tedford clearly envisions him "blocking and going over the middle."  Sparks has the "physical tools to contribute right away."

Verran Tucker looked the best on video (Tedford: "fluid, smooth") of all the receivers.  He was great catching the ball and making people miss after he caught it.  That’s putting it pretty simply, but it looks like a nice formula.

The last receiver was Joe Washington, and Tedford pointed out what was very evident: "he can really run [and he has] a great stride."

The last clips were of Covaughn Deboskie, the lone incoming running back.  Maybe he will help with our goal-line woes, as he is "physical for just coming out of high school," and that since enrolling in January (he and Kendrick Payne are already on campus) "he looks bigger already."  He’s also had a "nice transition academically."

So there you have it.  All 21 of our new recruits (9 Defense, 11 offense, one very long snapper) in buzzword glory.  If you want more information on this band of characters, here’s the bear insider commitment list.  If this strikes you as way too much hype and information for very uncertain results, take comfort that Ragnarok does too.  And if you want to find out what Tedford said about this season, Nasty Nate, the stadium, the lack of pass rush, new coaches, the media, who’s hurt, and which linebacker wants to play fullback, check back in a few days for my final installment on 17 year olds.

You may have noticed a distinct lack of mention on this site of Cal’s super-awesome-can-not-be-beat rugby team.  Why is that?  Why would we write post after post bemoaning the travails of our mediocre men’s basketball team, whilst our rugby team, a superior athletic program if ever there was one, warrants not a line item at the end of a post?

Well, here’s a reason:  Cal 99, Humboldt State 5.

Here’s another:  Cal 59, UCLA 0.

And another: Cal reserves 55, Cal Maritime 0.

What I’m saying is that Cal’s dominance of collegiate competition has been so awesome as to become unremarkable.  I mean, look at the scores above.  What else needs to be said?  Ok, how about this:  from January 23 to February 12, a span of 7 games, Cal outscored its opponents 380-6, including 5 shutouts.  Wow.  I mean, just, wow.  Much like Dante at the end of the Divine Comedy, my powers of description fail me in the face of such supreme hegemony.

OK, the rugby team is good.  So what?  You already knew that.  Your mother’s cousin, who’s half blind and still thinks the communists are coming to get her, already knew that.  Heck, your dog already knew that.  "What’s your point?" you might ask.

Well, dominance like this can get boring.  Even though I love it when Cal wins, it’s always nice to see a little competition.  Perhaps the outcome could be in doubt for a little while.  Not long, mind you, but a little while.  Which is why I’ve always wanted to go see Cal play their annual match with the University of British Columbia Thunderbirds.  Their annual home-and-home series is almost always the toughest competition Cal will face all year, and has often resulted in their lone defeat in an otherwise perfect season.  With such high-level athletes roaming the pitch, who wouldn’t be interested in seeing such a match?

So, why have I thus far failed to see such a match?  Because, as in year’s past, it was contested on a Wednesday at 3:30 PM.  What?  Why would Cal schedule what is arguably their most exciting, competitive opponent on a weekday afternoon, when poor schlubs such as myself are unable to attend due to the demands of the working world?

We’re now at the point of my post where I would normally give the answer to my rhetorical question, and then proceed to explain why that reason was stupid.  Except that my question wasn’t rhetorical, and I don’t have the answer.  Do you?  Why does Cal play UBC every year at a horribly inconvenient time?  Is this UBC’s decision?  What’s going on here?

Anyway, in case you’re interested, Cal won yesterday’s contest 35-17, which means they’ll take an 18-point lead north for next month’s rematch, the tail end of the so-called ‘World Cup’.  The Bears played well, and got a bit lucky when UBC couldn’t convert some penalty kicks, but from the descriptions I read online, it sounded like a fantastic match.

Here’s a little quote from the Daily Cal recap, which I think perfectly illustrates what makes Rugby so awesome:

"Trips [scrumhalf Zachary Triplett] was great today," coach Jack Clark said.  "He had one perfectly good hamstring and one that wasn’t worth anything.  And Dustin Muhn limped through scoring a try, and he made a ton of tackles."

Sounds like a good time to me.  Perhaps next year I’ll skip work to go see it in person.  I only wish I didn’t have to.

—–

* Don’t worry if you didn’t understand the Dante reference above.  I didn’t expect anyone to.  If you did read some of the Divine Comedy, you probably only read the first part, with all the interesting bits about all the creative tortures in hell and such.

A note I just wrote and sent off to our dear friends over at BruinsNation. 

Dear Nestor,

Let me first apoligize to you for all of my sins towards you regarding the Dorrell situation.  For all of my thoughts that might have been false or unjust or unclean about UCLA.  For every word spoken that ought not to have been spoken about Dorrell’s never-ending tenure.  For all the slander and the backbiting about Coach Karl. And especially this post. 

Because now we know the pain of the Guest Who Will Never Leave.  The coach who does just enough to keep his job and not enough to deserve it.  The coach who probably should have gone 3 years ago, but, like the undead, he just keeps coming back.  Every season of unyielding mediocrity has just enough for the coach’s boosters (Braunistas, to use your delightful terminology, I personally prefer Braunamaniacs, but that’s cool, that’s cool) to point to.   Who could forget this gem (I’m sure you can’t)?  Or just earlier this year, we were showcased this amazing shock.

But see, facing your own Braun, you guys fought for freedom, change, and awareness of environmental hazards!

 

Artists Rendition of Nest-or and the Bruins Nation Crew 

We saw what you did: billboards, and website registration, and driving your armored jeeps aimlessly through the streets of Westwood, gunning down Dorrellistas in fierce house to house ground battles.  Unfortunately, all of our street violence is being readied for local tree-hippies and members of the Berkeley City Council.  We need new plans.  New ideas! 

Please write back with thoughts on how we can adopt your grassroots methods for some positive regime change in Berkeley.  We can even do it Berkeley-style with a hunger strike or a "Be In."  Hopefully, we can "Be In" the tournament next year.   

HALP! 

Very Truly Yours,

T. N. Hook