This weekend is the battle of the University of California schools as the Cal and UCLA football teams meet up in Berkeley for a Pac-12 showdown. Go Joe Bruin got the skinny on Big Brother as we chatted with writers of the Cal site, California Golden Blogs.
The UCLA football team is 0-5. You know this. If you are reading this, you are dedicated and we thank you. But today you are in for a special treat as we chatted with the writers of the Cal site, California Golden Blogs.
RELATED: UCLA’s Time of Possession, Offensive Balance and Tempo
These Golden Bear writers went above and beyond and gave us a lot of detailed information on Cal. So if your Bruins expect to get a win soon, this could be the game to do it and CGB tells you why…
Go Joe Bruin: Cal is in the second year of the Justin Wilcox era… what are some of the improvements he has brought to the Bears?
Attila LS Gero: Wilcox brought his past defensive expertise to Cal. He improved the defense by a noticeable margin, especially against the pass.
Berkelium97: The turnaround on defense has been incredible. We had one of the worst defenses in the nation in 2016 and turned that into an average unit in 2017 with some deficiencies that were problematic, but not fatal. This year’s defense is on another level: #6 in the nation according to S&P+ ratings. Even if we finish in the top-25, that will be a tremendous improvement that has occurred much faster than many anticipated.
Joshua Morgan: Defense. Under Sonny Dykes, we consistently had one of the worst defenses in the nation. We hoped bringing in a defensive mind like Wilcox could help change that—and it sure has. We have reverted to a more traditional style of football and even now consider our defense to be stronger than our offense. It sure has been nice to see our defense not only make exciting plays and shut down opposing offenses but also be able to step up when we need them most.
Boomtho: Everyone has said defense already, so I won’t elaborate further here. Two other areas where Wilcox has brought significant improvement are:
- Game theory and game management: Wilcox is more aggressive than Dykes on 4th down, but not in a foolhardy way. He just consistently makes the right calls on 4th down, such as going for it near the goal line or on short-to-go downs just past midfield. Cal fans were especially frustrated with that part of Dykes’ coaching given our explosive offense in years past
- Recruiting California: You can spin this multiple ways, but Wilcox’s commitment to recruiting California—and the Bay Area—is definitely a different approach than Coach Dykes took. Dykes, to be fair, secured some commitments from very highly regarded players in Texas and the rest of the South. Wilcox has chosen to focus more on California, which feels like a better long-term strategy for Cal, given our place in the Pac-12 pecking order and strengths as a program and a school.
GJB: What are some of the things he still needs to improve on?
Attila LS Gero: Offensive consistency is one thing Wilcox and the staff on offense need to improve on. The PPG has been very consistent, but the performances on the field from playmakers are up-and-down.
More from Go Joe Bruin
- UCLA Football: It’s time for the nation to meet Dante Moore
- UCLA Football: Where are they ranked heading into week 4
- UCLA Football: Position battle breakdown for Utah showdown
- UCLA vs. Utah: Location, time, prediction, and more
- UCLA Football: Highlights from Chip Kelly’s appearance on the Jim Rome Show
Berkelium97: The defense’s unexpected rise from abysmal to top-tier has been mirrored by an offense that has plummeted from one of the best in the nation to 117th, per the latest S&P+ ratings. One of the biggest issues during his tenure has been QB play.
While we did not expect another Jared Goff to line up under center, the play by our current QBs has generally been underwhelming. Particularly troubling is that last year’s starter Ross Bowers has never matched the stellar performance from his first game as the starter in 2017; it doesn’t look like the QBs are improving, which suggests poor QB coaching.
Last week’s starter Brandon McIlwain combines moments of brilliance with some devastating turnovers. We knew this when he transferred from South Carolina, but this is his second year with the team and he is still making these mistakes. Again, QB coaching looks problematic. Beyond that, the O-line is underwhelming, we have no depth at RB (Patrick Laird has regressed badly) and our WRs can’t get separation. So in general, the offense is a mess.
Joshua Morgan: Offense. We expected huge offensive regression when Dykes left and we did see that last year. However, from last year to this year, our offense has gone from below-average to simply unwatchable. It has been a bit of a mystery as we return the same coaches and pretty much all of the offensive players that played last year—and our expectations of improvement because of this have been completely wrong. Against Oregon, we played a relatively close game other than turnovers and against Arizona, our offense gave up two defensive scores and even more turnovers that single-handedly lost us the game. If you look at our yardage totals from the past few games, it has even been that bad; it is all in the turnovers. We can’t afford to be giving up the ball and that is the main area that this team needs to work on in order to take us to the next level. Blame it on Wilcox, offensive coordinator Beau Baldwin, or the players themselves, but this is our biggest area of needed improvement.
boomtho: The offense has taken a step back, which is disappointing given it wasn’t that high-powered last year. Specifically, on offense, the most acute improvement areas are:
- OL play: The OL has been a major disappointment, given how much continuity there is from last year. The line has struggled to open holes for RB Patrick Laird. Running QB Brandon McIlwain has been called into action more than expected to give a spark to the running game
- Turnovers: Cal came into the season expecting to start QB Ross Bowers, who started all of last year. Instead, the staff has turned to a two-headed attack of throwing-QB Chase Garbers (who can still run a bit) and running-QB Brandon McIlwain (who can still throw a bit). However, neither of those QBs didn’t have meaningful game reps at Cal in this system—and so, they’ve been highly turnover-prone. Brandon McIlwain, in particular, has given up three (unless I’m forgetting one more!) defensive TDs on his turnovers in the last two games. Cal’s offense is not nearly explosive enough to survive these turnovers
- WR separation: With inexperienced QBs, it would be really helpful if we were scheming WRs wide open—or if we had WR’s who could naturally create more separation. Unfortunately, we don’t—Garbers and McIlwain are having to make throws into really tight windows.
GJB: The Golden Bear defense has been pretty solid through their first few games, what do you attribute this to?
Attila LS Gero: I would attribute the defense being so solid to Wilcox’s beautiful football brain. He has proven from his past stints at USC and Wisconsin that he excels at putting players in positions where they will succeed.
Joshua Morgan: Like I said earlier, a lot of this can be attributed to coaching. Wilcox and the rest of his great staff were able to turn around a defense even in his first year where he had basically the same players who contributed to an awful unit under Sonny Dykes. Sure, we have seen breakout players such as Evan Weaver, Cam Bynum, and others, but the defensive success can be mostly attributed to the coaching.
Nick Kranz: The most succinct answer is a sound scheme and sound coaching, two things decidedly lacking under the Dykes regime. The Cal defense is rarely caught out of position and rarely misses a tackle, so they rarely allow big plays. The magnitude and speed of the turnaround has surprised probably even the most ardent Wilcox supporter. With the possible exception of cornerback Cam Bynum, I don’t think that anybody on Cal’s defense has any meaningful NFL draft buzz and Cal lost their most disruptive edge defender when Cam Goode went down with a season-ending injury in the first game of the season. And yet Cal is playing top-25 defense (maybe even top-15 defense) by pretty much any objective measure. With players almost entirely recruited by the Dykes regime . . . well, I honestly didn’t think that this kind of turnaround—this quickly—was possible.
boomtho: The miracle of competent coaching. Wilcox, DC Tim DeRutyer, and DB coach Gerald Alexander have done an absolutely marvelous job coaching up Dykes’ talent into a highly effective defense. The defense is highly reliant on the play of our two-star ILBs, Evan Weaver and Jordan Kunaszyk. There’s really not much depth behind them, so their ability to be effective late in games, without much rest, is a key swing factor.
GJB: Does it worry you that former Cal DL coach and current UCLA DC Jerry Azzinaro knows information about the Bears?
Attila LS Gero: I am not worried about possible inside information UCLA DC Jerry Azzinaro may have schematically or based off playcall adjustments. That is usually a moot narrative and only rarely helps teams win.
Joshua Morgan: Nah. I think that this is always an overrated issue whenever something like this happens. Sure Azzinaro knows more than most about our basic schemes, but teams change these from year to year based on performance and personnel and even just by the looks of it, for better or for worse, Cal has changed things up greatly on both sides of the ball. Azzinaro won’t know much more than you could know from closely observing the Bears, so it doesn’t worry me at all.
boomtho: Not really—this year’s offense is really different, given the two new QBs and the departure of our highly-regarded WRs.
GJB: What is the biggest issue with Cal’s offense?
Attila LS Gero: The biggest issue on Cal’s offense would be scoring. The team has yet to go over 24 points against an FBS opponent so far this season.
Berkelium97: I touched on some of the issues in a previous answer, but the biggest and most recent issue is turnovers. For the first two games, Cal had a plodding, inefficient offense (mostly quarterbacked by Chase Garbers) that took advantage of turnovers forced by the defense and generally took care of the ball. During the last two games, this has been replaced by a much more efficient, productive offense (largely quarterbacked by Brandon McIlwain) that moves the ball well until it spectacularly backfires with turnovers. In the last two games, the Cal offense has allowed the opposing defense to score 28 points off pick-sixes and fumble recoveries (and somehow, both in the same play last week at Arizona). Nine turnovers in the past two games have turned two very winnable games into a couple of games that we will undoubtedly look back on with regret as we wonder “what could have been?” after the season is over. If we fail to attain bowl eligibility this year, that loss at Arizona will haunt us all offseason.
Joshua Morgan: As I mentioned above, it is all in the turnovers. While it doesn’t look pretty at times, we have been able to move the ball even against the likes of Oregon and Arizona. The only reason why this offense has been so incredibly bad—to the point that they are pretty much the sole reason for our struggles—is the turnovers. If we can take care of the ball, our offense should be decent enough to let our defense go out and win us some games.
GJB: In the last nine meetings at Memorial Stadium, UCLA has only won once. Do you think the Bruins are cursed in Berkeley?
Attila LS Gero: If the Bruins are cursed in Berkeley, then this week might be the season they break that curse. Chip Kelly and his Bruins are in desperation mode starting winless after five weeks. Something always happens when you least expect it.
Joshua Morgan: I don’t think it is a curse; I think it is just bad timing and a home-field advantage. During those years that the Bruins have come to Berkeley, the Bears usually were either a better team (Tedford Era) or the teams were relatively even. For the years where they were even, we were supposed to win those games simply because we were at home.
Nick Kranz: No more so than Cal is cursed in Los Angeles, generally. Of those eight Cal wins, Cal was the better team anyway six times, so you’d expect them to win at home. I will grant that Cal’s wins in 2000 and 2012 were pretty weird and hilarious.
boomtho: Zach Mayanrd threw four touchdowns vs. UCLA at home, so clearly the answer is yes.
GJB: Washington LB Ben Burr-Kirven said that UCLA had the best offense they have seen all season. Is that a shock considering how poor the Bruins’ offense played in the previous four games?
Attila LS Gero: I would not say its a shock that Kelly is leading a team with an impressive offense. Obviously, the product on the field doesn’t seem like it would be complementary, but Kelly is a mad-scientist type when it comes to offensive plays.
Joshua Morgan: Yes and no. I mean technically, the Bruins did score the most points against Washington than any other team this season, but I simply find it hard to believe that they come even close to Auburn in reality—and are probably below Utah, Arizona State, and BYU as well.
Nick Kranz: Interesting. This comment has caused me to go back and look at the offenses UW has played and it’s true that they’re generally pretty bad. By S&P+, ASU is actually the only offense UW has faced ranked in the top half in the country. So I’m going to go ahead and say that UCLA’s offense played UW’s defense better than anybody else has, although I don’t think that one game makes the unit better on the whole than ASU or ahead of similar offenses like Utah. It is probably fair to say that UCLA might have more upside since they’re learning to play and execute a new scheme.
boomtho: It’s not a shock for me, but that’s because I’m explicitly weighting Chip Kelly’s history of offensive success higher than their struggles at times this year.
GJB: This game might come down to the defenses. What do you expect from both Ds on Saturday?
Attila LS Gero: I expect UCLA to run the ball effectively and for Cal to pass the ball effectively. Cal will have a strong pass rush against the Bruins feeble offensive line and UCLA could limit the outside receiver’s impact.
Joshua Morgan: I expect Cal’s defense to play well against a UCLA offense that I believe isn’t very good. I also expect UCLA’s defense to play well, but that might be more due to Cal’s bad offense than a good UCLA defense. I do think it will be a battle that comes down to the defenses, but it really is whether the Cal defense plays better than the Cal offense allows UCLA’s defense to play.
Nick Kranz: Cal’s defense has not allowed more than 10 non–garbage time points to any offense they have faced this season except for Oregon. Granted, all of the non-Oregon offenses that Cal has faced have been pretty bad. Unfortunately for Chip Kelly, I think his UCLA offense so far is much more similar to Arizona and North Carolina than it is to Oregon. If Cal’s defense doesn’t hold UCLA below 20 points I’ll be disappointed.
As for the UCLA defense, based on my glance at their stat profile, they appear to be running a relatively ineffective bend-but-don’t-break style, as they’re preventing big plays, but generally failing to be disruptive in any way (low sack rate, 111th in turnovers forced, 121st in overall havoc rate, etc.). For that reason, I’m inclined to think that Cal will be able to sustain drives with their running game and the short passing game often enough to get points and the main question will be whether or not UCLA can force (or Cal can avoid) catastrophic, game-changing turnovers. I’ll be very interested to see how Cal may or may not change their offensive strategy to address ball security considering what has happened in the last two games.
boomtho: Cal’s defense is very solid, but not explosive. To me, that means that Cal’s players are often in the right place, have been very solid tacklers, and have made good plays on balls in the air. However, Cal doesn’t really have any disruptive pass rushers (which can really help get opposing offenses behind the sticks) and Cal has taken away many fewer turnovers in recent games vs. the first two games of the season.
GJB: If Cal beats UCLA, does that put them back in the race for the Pac-12 North?
Attila LS Gero: I would absolutely put them back in the race for the North. If they can win out the rest of the season and claim at least one upset wins over Washington or Stanford, it would seal their chances.
Berkelium97: If we had come out of Tuscon with a win, I’d say we had a narrow, outside shot at the North. But now I think there is no chance whatsoever. In addition to having two conference losses already, this team has made it abundantly clear that it cannot currently operate with the consistency necessary to compete for the division. The only thing a win on Saturday will put us in contention for is bowl eligibility—and even that will be a slog when we face our November schedule.
Joshua Morgan: I do not think so. I think with two losses before even playing Colorado, Stanford, or Washington, we are already out. However, I do think that a win here could put us back on the right track for making a bowl game, whereas a loss would basically end all bowl hopes.
boomtho: Sadly, I think we’re clearly a step behind UW, Oregon, and Stanford—if not more.
GJB: What is your prediction for the game?
Attila LS Gero: Score Prediction: 42–27 Cal wins behind Patrick Lairds biggest career rushing total (which would have to be over 214 yards).
More from Go Joe Bruin
- UCLA Football: It’s time for the nation to meet Dante Moore
- UCLA Football: Where are they ranked heading into week 4
- UCLA Football: Position battle breakdown for Utah showdown
- UCLA vs. Utah: Location, time, prediction, and more
- UCLA Football: Highlights from Chip Kelly’s appearance on the Jim Rome Show
Berkelium97: If the Cal team from the first three games shows up, the Bears will largely suffocate the Bruins offense and force a couple turnovers to help Cal build something like a 17–3 or 21–3 lead. And then we’ll probably allow this to fall back into a one-score game late in the fourth, just to add some unnecessary anxiety before holding onto the win (that exact scenario unfolded against UNC and BYU). If the Cal team from last week shows up, we can win 35–7 if we don’t turn the ball over (please contain your laughter). But if we continue to turn the ball over at this rate, the Cal offense will amass 400+ yards but only score a couple TDs, the defense will allow a single TD, and the UCLA defense will score a TD or two. So the game ends 21–20 with someone claiming victory. Who that someone is depends entirely on who wins the turnover battle.
Joshua Morgan: I think (or hope) that Cal’s offense will at the very least play more conservatively and hopefully that can result in us being able to reduce the number of turnovers committed. I think that if we are in fact successful in taking care of the ball, Cal will easily win this game. If Cal fails to do so, this game could get close very fast. My overall prediction is that Cal’s offense protects the ball just enough to take care of business and come out with a 27–21 win.
boomtho: I think UCLA wins, but I really attribute that to years of Chip Kelly just running through Cal defenses. I don’t think I can be fully objective and logical about this!