The Novel: UCLA

I. Intro

We spent weeks trying to steel ourselves for this possibility, trying to remember the progress we’ve made as a program this year, keeping a bowl as a bonus and not a baseline.

In the end, though, the season ticked right on out in familiar fashion – the Bears fell a game short of bowl qualification, plagued by a whole host of errors, some self-inflicted, and some not. The comparisons to the 2014 season get even more eerie when you realize that the play-in game involved Cal facing an opponent missing their quarterback – Christian Stewart replaced a hurt Taysom Hill, and Devon Modster did the same for Josh Rosen in the second half.

When zoomed in that far, it would appear that Cal is starting to flat-line as a program after yet another 5-7 year, and hiring Justin Wilcox is far short of the defibrillator we hoped for.

Breathe. Now zoom out.

And then remember that this season began to fall apart with injuries as early as week 2. The defensive heart of the team was gone in 7, its springy, long framed young stud in the making linebacker after 9, and alongside countless others: a right guard kicked off the team, a left tackle who transferred to another Power 5 school, a contender at safety, the top wide receiver on the team. No statistical model or professional pundit – outlets that tend to balance out the undying optimism of our fanbase – expected the Bears to be competitive in damn near every effort, upset a top 10 ranked team, or to be fighting for bowl eligibility on the final week.

Those 2014 and 2016 Bear teams felt like they underachieved, relative to their talent level.

That was not the case here -- it is more than fair to suggest that this team was completely maxed out, which is fine for year one. The trajectory of the program is still on course, despite lacking that tangible achievement of December football.

Now, holding this long term view and being disappointed in the game on Friday are not mutually exclusive. The Bears should have taken this, and they should be heading to a bowl right now – UCLA being in a state of chaos and Josh Rosen going out in the second half gave them ample opportunity to come out and get the points needed to win.

They didn’t.

And that sucks.

But if this program is headed where we think it can be with the guy we hired – consistently difficult to deal with, regular bowls bids, and potentially more – then this is also the last time we should be here for a while, hanging our heads and tallying missed opportunities after week 12.

Can’t wait.

II. Assorted Thoughts

A lot of attention was paid to the empty 4th and 3 call that resulted in a sack for Jaelan Phillips, and we’ll have to go back and figure out what was happening. I think the individual decision to go for it, I’d take, mostly because Anderson has been far from a sure thing all year – he missed another field goal to start the game on Friday – and I would want my team to feel like we could get three yards without issue to play and win the game. It’s three yards, and Laird ran without too much trouble.

Ultimately, it’s not even that 4th and 3 that was an issue. It was the generally struggling every time we got inside the 40, with false starts and ill-timed holds that nuked several potential touchdown drives. Compound that with the inability to throw the deep ball whatsoever, an open secret since the second game of the year, and you have an offense that chugs along but cannot face any setbacks whatsoever. We were who we were going to be, right to the very end. It fit our ethos.

1 point loss to Arizona off a 2 point attempt. 3 point loss to Stanford. 3 point loss to UCLA. 0-3 in games decided by a touchdown or less, and of the other losses: choked to death by USC’s talent, blown off the field against UW, ran over by Oregon, no show at Colorado…many are typical of a team at this point in their rebuild. The only one I thought was tough to swallow was Colorado, since most of the others could be explained to some degree.

At the time of writing this, Beau Baldwin may or may not be the Oregon State head coach in waiting, and he may or may not still be the offensive coordinator at Cal. If he leaves, it will be earlier than I expected him to, given the relatively lackluster results this year, but Oregon State is a fine step up for him. It will give him some leeway to build a program, the expectations aren’t impossible to win with, and they have some money, too, after Gary Andersen gave back his buyout. Best of luck to him (if true), except for when the Bears play Oregon State, of course.

It is currently also rumored that he will be taking Nick Edwards, who fell a little short of the new Peeler I hoped he would be, but did coax acceptable production from a really limited unit.

That leaves likely at least two coaches to be replaced, which sucks. If there’s anything that could derail our vibes, it is the cold reality of this being a business, the same force we were met with when Tosh Lupoi stepped down MLK weekend all those years back. To this, I can only offer the following – Wilcox had to know this was a possibility when assembling a staff this experienced last winter. I am hopeful that he is prepared to replace them.

III. Offense (Poor)

In his good games, Ross Bowers has been decisive, accurate, and capable of ushering the offense along on schedule. In his bad ones – and despite the lack of turnovers, this was a bad game from him – he is indecisive, plus consistently missing guys or refusing/unable(?) to run for yardage. The second half play was better, and his increased comfort was aided by increasing RPO usage the last month of the season (as well as the no huddle), but man…at least in the fanbase, most people don’t think this thing is locked up for him next year yet.

Positive: he made huge strides in an offseason just to get this far, so there’s that.

Obligatory Laird congratulations note goes here. I am making sure to mention his transition from walk on to starter. I am marveling in awe of his production yet again. Writing more things about Laird. The same things I have been writing all year. I am now done with this note.

We should have run more. Yes, even more. 23-16 run-pass in first half, 19-25 in the second to catch up, but had we run more in the first, perhaps we are eke out another first down, rather than incompletions.

Another positive: Jordan Duncan flashing a couple key grabs in the second half to keep the hopes alive. He’s a guy we haven’t seen a lot of all year, but will be needed going forward. This offense’s ceiling is handicapped by its wide receiver production almost as much as the quarterback play. Nobody’s open, and nobody’s a deep threat, which makes all the throws tougher than they could be. Should be, even.

It did not feel like Kanawai Noa caught 7 balls, because usually those are accompanied with him breaking free of someone in the open field. Quieted mostly by Meadors, despite the numbers. Same with Wharton. These guys need help and they didn’t get enough of it. Next year, with a real tight end in Hudson (maybe), or Demetris Robertson back, you might see something different emerge.

Might have given Vic a couple more carries on this night. He did run well, forward, and downhill. Thanks for the memories, big guy. We’ll always have Wazzu. And also, the near-fumble at Texas. Which wasn’t one.

A few weeks ago, we wrote about how we needed Clark, Echols, Hawkins, Duncan, and Singleton to become playmakers with D-Rob and Tre gone. The closest of that bunch was probably Hawkins and Duncan, and they’ll remain some of the key guys heading into 2018, regardless of coordinator. .

The production from the line was great running the ball and gave plenty in pass pro, too. But nobody was open – as evidenced by Bowers backpedaling, rather than running for yardage – and UCLA knew all of our usual safety valves well. A few of those Laird passes out into the flat were met with multiple defenders, and nobody was coming clear in the middle of the field short or on slants, either. No, the larger gripe from them was mostly penalty related. Poor, avoidable errors.

You can’t move the ball as efficiently as they did and only get 27 points on 8 trips into the 40. That’s terrible.

IV. Defense (Poor)

The Havoc rate was very, very good, but most of that was generated in the field half. In the second, they only recorded 2 Havoc plays: a deep loss on Stephens, and a sack on Modster, out of 36. 5%. That’s a function of us lacking depth, their talent differential, UCLA adjustments to play well behind their backup, and just not coming up with the play when we needed them.

Bad, bad night for Cam Bynum, who I tried to keep an eye on early vs Lasley. By my unofficial count – without going back and checking the tape – he only forced an incompletion vs Lasley once in direct coverage. Every other ball (at least 6 of them) was a catch. Don’t ask me about the yardage. The less you ask me, the better for everyone. This does little to dampen my enthusiasm about him for future years, but it was rough. It was rough. It might have been worth trying to swap matchups or players against Lasley, but the options were kind of thin too. The secondary had already lost Ashtyn Davis to a target, too.

The defensive MVP was Funches, who had two TFLs, but seemed generally everywhere in the passrush. That he only had three tackles is rather surprising, given his omnipresence. Strong games also from Allensworth, who was violently disruptive out of the slot – he’s taken a lot of the time there away from Drayden and Beck as of late, who were struggling and or injured – Davison and Kunaszyk, too. You can tell Allensworth and Davison in particular wanted one more game together. They’ll really be missed as leaders and vets.

Great job patrolling the middle against the Bruins. The one run by Stephens would be their only major one of the night, but Cal just couldn’t slow them down in the air at all. And by them, I mostly mean Jordan Lasley. No other Bruin receiver even got as far as 40 yards.

I’m not sure if there’s anything else to say here beyond that. Just kind of disappointing, although this game was lost more on the offense than the defense. The pass rush recorded four sacks, forced some long situations, but didn’t seem consistent enough to really bother Modster either – the backup finished with a nearly identical line to Rosen: 14-18 for 191, while Rosen went 13-18 for 202, with two touchdowns as the difference. Some credit goes to them too, I suppose.

V. Unofficial Advanced Stats

YPP – This doesn’t feel right, but it’s the balance that’s struck when UCLA was torching us through the air and not able to run worth a damn the rest of the time. (Passes at 20+ yards is the definition I usually use but they had several more fall in the 16-18 yard range). As for the Bears, well, they middle along but took too much of the game to really roll – 6.5 YPP in second half compared to 4.6 and 4.2 in the first two quarters, while UCLA, without Josh Rosen, matched us at 6.6 as well.

3rd down – With the average 3rd down at 6 yards, it’s a little disappointing we failed to convert on a few of these:

7:36 1Q: 3rd and 4, 3 yard gain marked short, 3 and out (less of consequence since it was 1Q and in our own territory)

00:31 1Q: 3rd and 5, throws check down to Noa vs Meadors, wrapped up with no chance for YAC

13:36 3Q: 3rd and 7, run no gain

12:05 4Q: 3rd and goal at 2, INC

Meanwhile, conversions of: 16 (UCLA would punt later in drive), 13, 10 were all given up, if we even managed to get that far in the first place. Didn’t get enough points during an 0 of 7 on 3rd down stretch, though. The Bruins figured it out by then.

Plays in opponent territory – 56% to 34% and we still only managed 27 points. That’s the immensely disappointing part of it all – not to mention almost all those field goals were set up by negative gains that an offense lacking playmakers cannot afford. One sack on 4th and 3, one missed field goal…one field goal against Stanford, one 2 point throw against Arizona…Almost every close loss comes down to those marginal plays, and winning key categories like these. If you’re talented enough, you can dodge them and win anyway, but they’re indicative of – in fact, strongly correlated with – winning behaviors, and we just did not have enough talent to get away with being bad in this category. We had to execute better.

That all sounds like coach speak, but coaches aren’t lying when they do mention execution and things of that nature.

Havoc – How could you watch Bowers backpedaling ferociously, or waiting, waiting, waiting, waiting for a receiver to come open – nobody did – only to throw it away harmlessly, or try the safest percentage deep shot and not think that was UCLA wreaking havoc on the offense? In this case, they did not need a pass rush or disruption. You can get a lot done if you can make the offense beat themselves.

VI. Special Teams (Poor+)

A little good, a little bad:

-Running into our own guy on returns, twice

-Missed field goal

-No major returns given up to UCLA in either phase

-3 of 4 punts by Klumph landed inside the 20, which was good. 2 of them even went for 50+, which is also good.

-Long punt return by Wharton

-All FGs made from inside 40

VII. Closing

Let’s keep it short and sweet for ’17.

Thanks for reading this year. We’ll be back. Go Bears forever.

The end.