Fine. My point, however, was the change in philosophy. UCB has improved dramatically under Wilcox. They were a joke under Dykes.
Now I’m not sure that translates to 9-4. Because they don’t have a viable QB. But the arrow is up. And the style is what propelled Stanford.
Read that article. I had reached Lombardi ‘s conclusion beforehand. And you are right on the Athletic. Well worth it.
Now I’m not sure that translates to 9-4. Because they don’t have a viable QB. But the arrow is up. And the style is what propelled Stanford.
(09-14-2019, 11:22 AM)d4cohn Wrote: Can we see the Bears match Shaw's worst season in 9 years as HC (8-5) before
we praise Cal and Wilcox too much? Yes, the win against UW in Seattle was nice, but they
clearly benefited from playing in an empty stadium after a multi-hour rain delay.
Last time I watched Cal play, they were finishing up the Cheez-it Bowl embarrassment
and playing totally unwatchable offensive football.
Read that article. I had reached Lombardi ‘s conclusion beforehand. And you are right on the Athletic. Well worth it.
(09-14-2019, 11:08 AM)yvonne Wrote: Stanford could have continued that style if it had recruited for it. The past few years, the offensive recruiting emphasis has been on receivers, not on OL and big running backs.
As for the switch between Stanford and Cal, Dave Lombardi wrote about that in the Athletic. You can see the discussion on this thread: https://thecardboard.org/board/showthread.php?tid=18119
The Athletic presents old-fashioned sportswriting like Sports Illustrated did. It's well worth a subscription.