Blogging with the Bares - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Blogging with the Bares (/thread-16828.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Blogging with the Bares (/thread-16828.html)
Blogging with the Bares - Hank 91 - 11-16-2018
Here's the newest.
https://www.gomightycard.com/2018/11/blogging-with-the-enemy-california-golden-bears.html
I'll add this note -- I had to do a TREMENDOUS amount of editing of the Cal blogger's responses. To be fair, the opposing bloggers don't usually do a great job of editing, simply because they're sending me an email and not posting an article to their site, but this was... revealing. There were tons of missing apostrophes, struggles with subject-verb agreement, stuff like that. Kind of a shame. Aside from that, the analysis is pretty good.
Oh, here's another pet peeve of mine. It seems like ALL of the opposing bloggers want to capitalize positions, like this: Our Linebackers have been playing well lately. It makes me cringe every time. Okay, class dismissed.
RE: Blogging with the Bares - Austroturf - 11-16-2018
(11-16-2018, 01:45 PM)Hank 91 Wrote: Here's the newest.I read your contribution on California Golden Blogs. Very thorough and complete, as usual. I do think, however, that you are being a bit bold with your score prediction. 34-22 Cardinal? Well, we now have two weeks to see who is healthy for this game (JJ, Herbig, Toner perhaps). In any case, I think we will have a tough time scoring more than 30 points against the Cal defense. I suspect this game ends up in the low 20s, maybe mid-20s, and it will probably be closer than two scores.
https://www.gomightycard.com/2018/11/blogging-with-the-enemy-california-golden-bears.html
I'll add this note -- I had to do a TREMENDOUS amount of editing of the Cal blogger's responses. To be fair, the opposing bloggers don't usually do a great job of editing, simply because they're sending me an email and not posting an article to their site, but this was... revealing. There were tons of missing apostrophes, struggles with subject-verb agreement, stuff like that. Kind of a shame. Aside from that, the analysis is pretty good.
Oh, here's another pet peeve of mine. It seems like ALL of the opposing bloggers want to capitalize positions, like this: Our Linebackers have been playing well lately. It makes me cringe every time. Okay, class dismissed.
RE: Blogging with the Bares - Hank 91 - 11-16-2018
I agree with you, actually. I think I was too bold. I made that prediction in haste, and the score was based mainly on a "same old Bears" way of thinking. When I was getting ready to write my own preview and looked more deeply at how things had been going for them, specifically the last three weeks, I realized that scoring 34 points looked like kind of a stretch. I thought about revising my prediction, but alas, it was already written in stone over there, so I decided to stick with it. First team to twenty probably wins.
RE: Blogging with the Bares - JJJ - 11-16-2018
(11-16-2018, 03:16 PM)Hank 91 Wrote: I agree with you, actually. I think I was too bold. I made that prediction in haste, and the score was based mainly on a "same old Bears" way of thinking. When I was getting ready to write my own preview and looked more deeply at how things had been going for them, specifically the last three weeks, I realized that scoring 34 points looked like kind of a stretch. I thought about revising my prediction, but alas, it was already written in stone over there, so I decided to stick with it. First team to twenty probably wins.
34 is bold? I entered a final score of 42-21 predicting KJ will go wild, airing out 6 TDs to all his tall targets. Now the extra time makes my prediction more likely as the banged-up guys heal :)
RE: Blogging with the Bares - Hank 91 - 11-16-2018
(11-16-2018, 05:19 PM)JJJ Wrote:(11-16-2018, 03:16 PM)Hank 91 Wrote: I agree with you, actually. I think I was too bold. I made that prediction in haste, and the score was based mainly on a "same old Bears" way of thinking. When I was getting ready to write my own preview and looked more deeply at how things had been going for them, specifically the last three weeks, I realized that scoring 34 points looked like kind of a stretch. I thought about revising my prediction, but alas, it was already written in stone over there, so I decided to stick with it. First team to twenty probably wins.
34 is bold? I entered a final score of 42-21 predicting KJ will go wild, airing out 6 TDs to all his tall targets. Now the extra time makes my prediction more likely as the banged-up guys heal :)
Yes, a fully operational Deathstar bodes well.
RE: Blogging with the Bares - BostonCard - 11-16-2018
(11-16-2018, 06:12 PM)Hank 91 Wrote:(11-16-2018, 05:19 PM)JJJ Wrote:(11-16-2018, 03:16 PM)Hank 91 Wrote: I agree with you, actually. I think I was too bold. I made that prediction in haste, and the score was based mainly on a "same old Bears" way of thinking. When I was getting ready to write my own preview and looked more deeply at how things had been going for them, specifically the last three weeks, I realized that scoring 34 points looked like kind of a stretch. I thought about revising my prediction, but alas, it was already written in stone over there, so I decided to stick with it. First team to twenty probably wins.
34 is bold? I entered a final score of 42-21 predicting KJ will go wild, airing out 6 TDs to all his tall targets. Now the extra time makes my prediction more likely as the banged-up guys heal :)
Yes, a fully operational Deathstar bodes well.
The way this year is going,three more guys will become injured between now and then. :/
BC
RE: Blogging with the Bares - JJJ - 11-17-2018
(11-16-2018, 08:16 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(11-16-2018, 06:12 PM)Hank 91 Wrote:(11-16-2018, 05:19 PM)JJJ Wrote:(11-16-2018, 03:16 PM)Hank 91 Wrote: I agree with you, actually. I think I was too bold. I made that prediction in haste, and the score was based mainly on a "same old Bears" way of thinking. When I was getting ready to write my own preview and looked more deeply at how things had been going for them, specifically the last three weeks, I realized that scoring 34 points looked like kind of a stretch. I thought about revising my prediction, but alas, it was already written in stone over there, so I decided to stick with it. First team to twenty probably wins.
34 is bold? I entered a final score of 42-21 predicting KJ will go wild, airing out 6 TDs to all his tall targets. Now the extra time makes my prediction more likely as the banged-up guys heal :)
Yes, a fully operational Deathstar bodes well.
The way this year is going,three more guys will become injured between now and then. :/
BC
So how do I delete my comment? You (and woofing gods) will note that I was laughing at myself when I made the comment.
RE: Blogging with the Bares - JPR36 - 11-17-2018
(11-16-2018, 05:19 PM)JJJ Wrote:(11-16-2018, 03:16 PM)Hank 91 Wrote: I agree with you, actually. I think I was too bold. I made that prediction in haste, and the score was based mainly on a "same old Bears" way of thinking. When I was getting ready to write my own preview and looked more deeply at how things had been going for them, specifically the last three weeks, I realized that scoring 34 points looked like kind of a stretch. I thought about revising my prediction, but alas, it was already written in stone over there, so I decided to stick with it. First team to twenty probably wins.
34 is bold? I entered a final score of 42-21 predicting KJ will go wild, airing out 6 TDs to all his tall targets. Now the extra time makes my prediction more likely as the banged-up guys heal :)
Hope you're right, but if Air Minshew can only put up 19 against them (and it took a last gasp drive to even do that) I have a hard time seeing us get 42.
RE: Blogging with the Bares - CornFed - 11-17-2018
Reading Bear threads I was struck by the fact that they are unwavering in their coarse, bloviating strut. After a decade or so of less than mediocre results you'd think a little humility might creep into their comments. At some point they will be right and that one instance of being right will reinforce their myopic outlook for another decade or two. Just pitiful.
RE: Blogging with the Bares - Austroturf - 11-17-2018
(11-17-2018, 08:04 AM)CornFed Wrote: Reading Bear threads I was struck by the fact that they are unwavering in their coarse, bloviating strut. After a decade or so of less than mediocre results you'd think a little humility might creep into their comments. At some point they will be right and that one instance of being right will reinforce their myopic outlook for another decade or two. Just pitiful.Yes, CornFed, the Bear faithful are an interesting dichotomy of unrealistic expectations and despondent reality. One Cal blogger at the outset of the year predicted that Cal would 1) end up 2nd in the North behind Washington with a 10-2 regular-season record; 2) boast victories over Washington (prescient on that one) and Stanford; 3) produce the best rusher in the conference (Patrick Laird) and 4) be ranked in the top 20 at the end of the year. Then when reality set in, there was rampant wailing and gnashing of teeth, with outcries of how much suffering a Cal fan has to endure in his/her pitiful existence. But, to be fair, some do possess an excellent gallows humor which makes for pleasurable reading.
In the course of this eight-game winning streak, I have never seen a Cal fan board NOT claiming that the streak would end that particular year, that they would finally cut down the tree and regain the Axe. And, as you state, one year they will be right. Which just goes to prove that arrogance, if maintained long enough, will ultimately be rewarded with the object of its haughtiness. I guess, if you are Cal, you just have to have sufficient patience.
RE: Blogging with the Bares - OutsiderFan - 11-17-2018
"unrealistic expectations and despondent reality"
This actually does define Cal fans to a T. I've marveled at how even given Stanford has been the far better team over the last decade, Stanford fans are far more circumspect about the Cardinal than Cal fans are about the Bears. They get all excited at the first sign of competence, and then project seemingly unrealistic results. Then, when they lose, it's like "I'm done, I can't support this program any more, fire the coach." The reality is if they were more objective, they would be more grounded and not get so worked up about losing, because their expectations would be more realistic.
Now I know all fan bases can be fickle, and all want to make changes when they don't get what they want, but I've never seen one that can swing so wildly between overvaluing a team and hating on it. They had people flying in from all over the country because they are so confident they were going to win today. Maybe they would, especially given the absurd injury list Stanford has, but I would think a team that has beaten you 8 times straight would warrant a little less hubris.
RE: Blogging with the Bares - winflop - 11-17-2018
Hank you had me at the helmet graphic :)))))
Great blog as usual, but I worry you may have to update it for the reschedule. I expect us to be MUCH healthier and that will change things especially on D.
RE: Blogging with the Bares - Redrum - 11-17-2018
(11-17-2018, 09:36 AM)winflop Wrote: Hank you had me at the helmet graphic :)))))
Great blog as usual, but I worry you may have to update it for the reschedule. I expect us to be MUCH healthier and that will change things especially on D.
Wellll ummm.... Doesn't that assume no further attrition at the hands (paws) of the Bruins?
RE: Blogging with the Bares - BostonCard - 11-17-2018
(11-17-2018, 07:32 AM)JPR36 Wrote: Hope you're right, but if Air Minshew can only put up 19 against them (and it took a last gasp drive to even do that) I have a hard time seeing us get 42.
Cal has a very good defense, and could well frustrate us. I certainly wouldn't predict scoring 42 points against them.
That being said, I think Cal's defense matches up well against WSU and is well-designed to limit the scoring of the Air Raid. I think what Cal does really well: tackling in space, limiting YAC, and forcing turnovers, are exactly what you need to do to beat WSU. To the extent that our defense struggled, it was that way too often we failed to tackle the WSU receivers when we had a chance to limit the damage of a completion to a short gain or loss, and instead allowed the receiver to elude one tackler and gain 10+ yards before being brought down.
Our offense doesn't rely on short throws and gaining yards after the catch. So, while I expect Cal to challenge us (and it will be our OL's biggest challenge to date to keep Costello clean), their success against WSU wouldn't necessarily predict that they will be able to shut down our big receivers.
BC
RE: Blogging with the Bares - Goose - 11-17-2018
(11-17-2018, 05:02 PM)BostonCard Wrote: I think what Cal does really well: tackling in space, limiting YAC, and forcing turnovers, are exactly what you need to do to beat WSU.I think you are exactly correct. What they also did that can be a problem for us is have the DL that are not getting through their blocks throw their hands up in the passing lanes. They knocked quite a few down. That could be a problem for us. Interestingly, contrary to what some on this board expected, Cal did not blitz WSU much. They had exactly one sack. Tackling in space was there their MO. The WSU receivers are not nearly as big as our receivers (in general), so that may be more of a challenge against us, although as you point out we throw longer passes and tend not to rely on YAC, although naturally we will take it.
RE: Blogging with the Bares - JPR36 - 11-17-2018
(11-17-2018, 05:02 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(11-17-2018, 07:32 AM)JPR36 Wrote: Hope you're right, but if Air Minshew can only put up 19 against them (and it took a last gasp drive to even do that) I have a hard time seeing us get 42.
Cal has a very good defense, and could well frustrate us. I certainly wouldn't predict scoring 42 points against them.
That being said, I think Cal's defense matches up well against WSU and is well-designed to limit the scoring of the Air Raid. I think what Cal does really well: tackling in space, limiting YAC, and forcing turnovers, are exactly what you need to do to beat WSU. To the extent that our defense struggled, it was that way too often we failed to tackle the WSU receivers when we had a chance to limit the damage of a completion to a short gain or loss, and instead allowed the receiver to elude one tackler and gain 10+ yards before being brought down.
Our offense doesn't rely on short throws and gaining yards after the catch. So, while I expect Cal to challenge us (and it will be our OL's biggest challenge to date to keep Costello clean), their success against WSU wouldn't necessarily predict that they will be able to shut down our big receivers.
BC
Yeah, well, whatever the secret to stopping Wazzu's offense is Arizona sure doesn't have it. The Cougs have put up 28 in a little over a quarter against them.
RE: Blogging with the Bares - Goose - 11-17-2018
(11-17-2018, 09:53 PM)JPR36 Wrote: Yeah, well, whatever the secret to stopping Wazzu's offense is Arizona sure doesn't have it. The Cougs have put up 28 in a little over a quarter against them.Basically, Arizona hasn't had a defense all year. In the last two games, they played surprisingly well. This is a return to form. They are really out-manned.