In reply to calumnus

calumnus said:

---

TheDuke!!! said:

---

Big C said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

calumnus said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

You know when the offensive line started to decline at Cal was when there was philosophical switch to get smaller more mobile lines. I think that caused us to have more injury issues from it too. Tedford and Mihalchek (I know I tortured the spelling) knew how to build and recruit offensive line. Dykes and the line of O'line coaches he hired were so bad at coaching, I'll never forget their philosophy of "Lose slowly" and watching our guys get ran over lol.

---

I thought we all agreed it was our defense that was bad under Dykes? Offense was Top 10, with our QB going #1 in the draft, then we lead the PAC-10 on offense again the next year with Davis Webb.

This will be Wilcox's 8th year. Dykes' guys are long gone. Wilcox has had plenty of time to install his preferred OL strategy.

---

Wilcox and Dykes have nothing in common really, except that both lines have performed poorly but for different reasons. Dykes offense was pass heavy and relied on getting the ball out in 2.5 seconds. Wilcox in general has much more fundamentally sound offensive lines and runs a balanced offense, he's just recruited poorly and I think the Pac-12 has been a lot stronger under Wilcox. Dykes guys could not block, the coaches he employed were teaching some very poor fundamentals. Under Justin they seem to be teaching the right things but his recruiting on the lines hasn't been good and so they aren't improving like we would have hoped. I think that's improving in the last year, we'll see if its a trend.

---

If Wilcox's O-lines are fundamentally better than Dyke's were and yet Wilcox's offenses in general are so much worse, that sure doesn't support that lame conventional wisdom that the offensive line is so all-important.

---

I'm not sure that Wilcox's O-lines were fundamentally better than Dykes' O-lines.

Between the two of them, neither coach had an O-line drafted in 11 years. So it would seem the improvement couldn't have been all that much (if anything).

For all of our O-line ineptitude under Dykes, his linemen did protect our QBs and RBs well enough to get a couple of them drafted. Khalfani Mohamed, Goff, Webb, Lasco.

We haven't had a single RB or QB drafted under Wilcox.

---

Wilcox has not had a single offensive player drafted at any position in 7 years. OL, QB, RB, WR, TE….zero.

Wilcox has had 6 DBs, 3 LBs and 1 DL drafted. The only DL drafted, Looney, was a Dykes guy who played for Wilcox one year.

---

Yes, but I think the main reason for this is that Wilcox and his staff haven't been particularly good at recruiting and developing football players that the NFL is interested in drafting.

In reply to TheDuke!!!

TheDuke!!! said:

---

calumnus said:

---

TheDuke!!! said:

---

Big C said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

calumnus said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

You know when the offensive line started to decline at Cal was when there was philosophical switch to get smaller more mobile lines. I think that caused us to have more injury issues from it too. Tedford and Mihalchek (I know I tortured the spelling) knew how to build and recruit offensive line. Dykes and the line of O'line coaches he hired were so bad at coaching, I'll never forget their philosophy of "Lose slowly" and watching our guys get ran over lol.

---

I thought we all agreed it was our defense that was bad under Dykes? Offense was Top 10, with our QB going #1 in the draft, then we lead the PAC-10 on offense again the next year with Davis Webb.

This will be Wilcox's 8th year. Dykes' guys are long gone. Wilcox has had plenty of time to install his preferred OL strategy.

---

Wilcox and Dykes have nothing in common really, except that both lines have performed poorly but for different reasons. Dykes offense was pass heavy and relied on getting the ball out in 2.5 seconds. Wilcox in general has much more fundamentally sound offensive lines and runs a balanced offense, he's just recruited poorly and I think the Pac-12 has been a lot stronger under Wilcox. Dykes guys could not block, the coaches he employed were teaching some very poor fundamentals. Under Justin they seem to be teaching the right things but his recruiting on the lines hasn't been good and so they aren't improving like we would have hoped. I think that's improving in the last year, we'll see if its a trend.

---

If Wilcox's O-lines are fundamentally better than Dyke's were and yet Wilcox's offenses in general are so much worse, that sure doesn't support that lame conventional wisdom that the offensive line is so all-important.

---

I'm not sure that Wilcox's O-lines were fundamentally better than Dykes' O-lines.

Between the two of them, neither coach had an O-line drafted in 11 years. So it would seem the improvement couldn't have been all that much (if anything).

For all of our O-line ineptitude under Dykes, his linemen did protect our QBs and RBs well enough to get a couple of them drafted. Khalfani Mohamed, Goff, Webb, Lasco.

We haven't had a single RB or QB drafted under Wilcox.

---

Wilcox has not had a single offensive player drafted at any position in 7 years. OL, QB, RB, WR, TE….zero.

Wilcox has had 6 DBs, 3 LBs and 1 DL drafted. The only DL drafted, Looney, was a Dykes guy who played for Wilcox one year.

---

Yes, but I think the main reason for this is that Wilcox and his staff haven't been particularly good at recruiting and developing football players that the NFL is interested in drafting.

---

That, and offensive schemes that fail to highlight them.

In reply to Big C

Big C said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

calumnus said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

You know when the offensive line started to decline at Cal was when there was philosophical switch to get smaller more mobile lines. I think that caused us to have more injury issues from it too. Tedford and Mihalchek (I know I tortured the spelling) knew how to build and recruit offensive line. Dykes and the line of O'line coaches he hired were so bad at coaching, I'll never forget their philosophy of "Lose slowly" and watching our guys get ran over lol.

---

I thought we all agreed it was our defense that was bad under Dykes? Offense was Top 10, with our QB going #1 in the draft, then we lead the PAC-10 on offense again the next year with Davis Webb.

This will be Wilcox's 8th year. Dykes' guys are long gone. Wilcox has had plenty of time to install his preferred OL strategy.

---

Wilcox and Dykes have nothing in common really, except that both lines have performed poorly but for different reasons. Dykes offense was pass heavy and relied on getting the ball out in 2.5 seconds. Wilcox in general has much more fundamentally sound offensive lines and runs a balanced offense, he's just recruited poorly and I think the Pac-12 has been a lot stronger under Wilcox. Dykes guys could not block, the coaches he employed were teaching some very poor fundamentals. Under Justin they seem to be teaching the right things but his recruiting on the lines hasn't been good and so they aren't improving like we would have hoped. I think that's improving in the last year, we'll see if its a trend.

---

If Wilcox's O-lines are fundamentally better than Dyke's were and yet Wilcox's offenses in general are so much worse, that sure doesn't support that lame conventional wisdom that the offensive line is so all-important.

---

Wilcox's lines are much better than Dykes, they are much more physical in the run game. Trust me in that what Wilcox's Offensive line coaches are teaching these guys is the same stuff they teach in the NFL and other major college programs. Dykes' guys skills would not have translated at the next level. Their pad level was too high and that seemed to be a feature and not a flaw with Dykes teams. Having your offensive line play like they're wearing skates isn't a attribute that should be copied.

edit: btw I'm not saying WIlcox is a good head coach, because you are what your record says you are. We are a below average team on a consistent basis so I think the time has come for the University to move on. I think Wilcox could be a decent coach at another program, I just think Cal is too difficult for him. Minot State should take him though.

In reply to TheDuke!!!

TheDuke!!! said:

---

calumnus said:

---

TheDuke!!! said:

---

Big C said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

calumnus said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

You know when the offensive line started to decline at Cal was when there was philosophical switch to get smaller more mobile lines. I think that caused us to have more injury issues from it too. Tedford and Mihalchek (I know I tortured the spelling) knew how to build and recruit offensive line. Dykes and the line of O'line coaches he hired were so bad at coaching, I'll never forget their philosophy of "Lose slowly" and watching our guys get ran over lol.

---

I thought we all agreed it was our defense that was bad under Dykes? Offense was Top 10, with our QB going #1 in the draft, then we lead the PAC-10 on offense again the next year with Davis Webb.

This will be Wilcox's 8th year. Dykes' guys are long gone. Wilcox has had plenty of time to install his preferred OL strategy.

---

Wilcox and Dykes have nothing in common really, except that both lines have performed poorly but for different reasons. Dykes offense was pass heavy and relied on getting the ball out in 2.5 seconds. Wilcox in general has much more fundamentally sound offensive lines and runs a balanced offense, he's just recruited poorly and I think the Pac-12 has been a lot stronger under Wilcox. Dykes guys could not block, the coaches he employed were teaching some very poor fundamentals. Under Justin they seem to be teaching the right things but his recruiting on the lines hasn't been good and so they aren't improving like we would have hoped. I think that's improving in the last year, we'll see if its a trend.

---

If Wilcox's O-lines are fundamentally better than Dyke's were and yet Wilcox's offenses in general are so much worse, that sure doesn't support that lame conventional wisdom that the offensive line is so all-important.

---

I'm not sure that Wilcox's O-lines were fundamentally better than Dykes' O-lines.

Between the two of them, neither coach had an O-line drafted in 11 years. So it would seem the improvement couldn't have been all that much (if anything).

For all of our O-line ineptitude under Dykes, his linemen did protect our QBs and RBs well enough to get a couple of them drafted. Khalfani Mohamed, Goff, Webb, Lasco.

We haven't had a single RB or QB drafted under Wilcox.

---

Wilcox has not had a single offensive player drafted at any position in 7 years. OL, QB, RB, WR, TE….zero.

Wilcox has had 6 DBs, 3 LBs and 1 DL drafted. The only DL drafted, Looney, was a Dykes guy who played for Wilcox one year.

---

Yes, but I think the main reason for this is that Wilcox and his staff haven't been particularly good at recruiting and developing football players that the NFL is interested in drafting.

---

You are right by definition I would say. Minot points out that the scheme is in line with what is being played in the NFL, which is great, but let's see someone get drafted like even 6th or 7th round?

In reply to MinotStateBeav

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Big C said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

calumnus said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

You know when the offensive line started to decline at Cal was when there was philosophical switch to get smaller more mobile lines. I think that caused us to have more injury issues from it too. Tedford and Mihalchek (I know I tortured the spelling) knew how to build and recruit offensive line. Dykes and the line of O'line coaches he hired were so bad at coaching, I'll never forget their philosophy of "Lose slowly" and watching our guys get ran over lol.

---

I thought we all agreed it was our defense that was bad under Dykes? Offense was Top 10, with our QB going #1 in the draft, then we lead the PAC-10 on offense again the next year with Davis Webb.

This will be Wilcox's 8th year. Dykes' guys are long gone. Wilcox has had plenty of time to install his preferred OL strategy.

---

Wilcox and Dykes have nothing in common really, except that both lines have performed poorly but for different reasons. Dykes offense was pass heavy and relied on getting the ball out in 2.5 seconds. Wilcox in general has much more fundamentally sound offensive lines and runs a balanced offense, he's just recruited poorly and I think the Pac-12 has been a lot stronger under Wilcox. Dykes guys could not block, the coaches he employed were teaching some very poor fundamentals. Under Justin they seem to be teaching the right things but his recruiting on the lines hasn't been good and so they aren't improving like we would have hoped. I think that's improving in the last year, we'll see if its a trend.

---

If Wilcox's O-lines are fundamentally better than Dyke's were and yet Wilcox's offenses in general are so much worse, that sure doesn't support that lame conventional wisdom that the offensive line is so all-important.

---

Wilcox's lines are much better than Dykes, they are much more physical in the run game. Trust me in that what Wilcox's Offensive line coaches are teaching these guys is the same stuff they teach in the NFL and other major college programs. Dykes' guys skills would not have translated at the next level. Their pad level was too high and that seemed to be a feature and not a flaw with Dykes teams. Having your offensive line play like they're wearing skates isn't a attribute that should be copied.

edit: btw I'm not saying WIlcox is a good head coach, because you are what your record says you are. We are a below average team on a consistent basis so I think the time has come for the University to move on. I think Wilcox could be a decent coach at another program, I just think Cal is too difficult for him. Minot State should take him though.

---

Again, I respectfully disagree. The O-lines were about the same. Dykes' OL techniques were fakakta. But at the end of the day their protection was good enough to get multiple skill players drafted.

Like Dykes, Wilcox hasn't had a single OL drafted. So I just don't see our OL being night and day different. They've been pretty bad under both coaches.

Dykes has had a (couple?) Cal OL in the NFL (though not drafted). Jordan Rigsbee comes to mind.

In reply to MinotStateBeav

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Big C said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

calumnus said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

You know when the offensive line started to decline at Cal was when there was philosophical switch to get smaller more mobile lines. I think that caused us to have more injury issues from it too. Tedford and Mihalchek (I know I tortured the spelling) knew how to build and recruit offensive line. Dykes and the line of O'line coaches he hired were so bad at coaching, I'll never forget their philosophy of "Lose slowly" and watching our guys get ran over lol.

---

I thought we all agreed it was our defense that was bad under Dykes? Offense was Top 10, with our QB going #1 in the draft, then we lead the PAC-10 on offense again the next year with Davis Webb.

This will be Wilcox's 8th year. Dykes' guys are long gone. Wilcox has had plenty of time to install his preferred OL strategy.

---

Wilcox and Dykes have nothing in common really, except that both lines have performed poorly but for different reasons. Dykes offense was pass heavy and relied on getting the ball out in 2.5 seconds. Wilcox in general has much more fundamentally sound offensive lines and runs a balanced offense, he's just recruited poorly and I think the Pac-12 has been a lot stronger under Wilcox. Dykes guys could not block, the coaches he employed were teaching some very poor fundamentals. Under Justin they seem to be teaching the right things but his recruiting on the lines hasn't been good and so they aren't improving like we would have hoped. I think that's improving in the last year, we'll see if its a trend.

---

If Wilcox's O-lines are fundamentally better than Dyke's were and yet Wilcox's offenses in general are so much worse, that sure doesn't support that lame conventional wisdom that the offensive line is so all-important.

---

Wilcox's lines are much better than Dykes, they are much more physical in the run game. Trust me in that what Wilcox's Offensive line coaches are teaching these guys is the same stuff they teach in the NFL and other major college programs. Dykes' guys skills would not have translated at the next level. Their pad level was too high and that seemed to be a feature and not a flaw with Dykes teams. Having your offensive line play like they're wearing skates isn't a attribute that should be copied.

edit: btw I'm not saying WIlcox is a good head coach, because you are what your record says you are. We are a below average team on a consistent basis so I think the time has come for the University to move on. I think Wilcox could be a decent coach at another program, I just think Cal is too difficult for him. Minot State should take him though.

---

Wilcox's lines in all 7 years? Or just 2023 with Bloesch? Because I think we all saw a noticeable improvement last year from previous years. Pretty sure it is the main reason Bloesch got promoted.

End of the day, you need your OL to be good enough to run your offense.

Cal National Ranking Offense (Yards per play)
2010 #76
2011 #58
2012 #65

2013 #98
2014 #33
2015 #6
2016 #56

2017 #101
2018 #120
2019 #110
2020 #125
2021 #67
2022 #75
2023 #78

I used yards per play rather than points or total offense which include pace and would be far more in Dykes' favor.

Wilcox's offenses have overall been the worst in the PAC-12 over his tenure. Holmoe's were better.

Yards per Rushing Attempt National Ranking
2010 #48
2011 #54
2012 #33

2013 #108
2014 #79
2015 #55
2016 #60

2017 #109
2018 #83
2019 #114
2020 #112
2021 #36
2022 #100
2023 #51

I think this last stat, yards per rushing attempt (including sacks), gets more at the what you are focused on. In which case I would say Wilcox's has had two years with lines that performed better than Dyke's, including the most recent season. However, 5 out of 7 years were bad, with 4 horrible, with rankings over 100 as bad as Dykes' first year.

The good news is we looked solidly average/above average last season.

In reply to calumnus

calumnus said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Big C said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

calumnus said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

You know when the offensive line started to decline at Cal was when there was philosophical switch to get smaller more mobile lines. I think that caused us to have more injury issues from it too. Tedford and Mihalchek (I know I tortured the spelling) knew how to build and recruit offensive line. Dykes and the line of O'line coaches he hired were so bad at coaching, I'll never forget their philosophy of "Lose slowly" and watching our guys get ran over lol.

---

I thought we all agreed it was our defense that was bad under Dykes? Offense was Top 10, with our QB going #1 in the draft, then we lead the PAC-10 on offense again the next year with Davis Webb.

This will be Wilcox's 8th year. Dykes' guys are long gone. Wilcox has had plenty of time to install his preferred OL strategy.

---

Wilcox and Dykes have nothing in common really, except that both lines have performed poorly but for different reasons. Dykes offense was pass heavy and relied on getting the ball out in 2.5 seconds. Wilcox in general has much more fundamentally sound offensive lines and runs a balanced offense, he's just recruited poorly and I think the Pac-12 has been a lot stronger under Wilcox. Dykes guys could not block, the coaches he employed were teaching some very poor fundamentals. Under Justin they seem to be teaching the right things but his recruiting on the lines hasn't been good and so they aren't improving like we would have hoped. I think that's improving in the last year, we'll see if its a trend.

---

If Wilcox's O-lines are fundamentally better than Dyke's were and yet Wilcox's offenses in general are so much worse, that sure doesn't support that lame conventional wisdom that the offensive line is so all-important.

---

Wilcox's lines are much better than Dykes, they are much more physical in the run game. Trust me in that what Wilcox's Offensive line coaches are teaching these guys is the same stuff they teach in the NFL and other major college programs. Dykes' guys skills would not have translated at the next level. Their pad level was too high and that seemed to be a feature and not a flaw with Dykes teams. Having your offensive line play like they're wearing skates isn't a attribute that should be copied.

edit: btw I'm not saying WIlcox is a good head coach, because you are what your record says you are. We are a below average team on a consistent basis so I think the time has come for the University to move on. I think Wilcox could be a decent coach at another program, I just think Cal is too difficult for him. Minot State should take him though.

---

Wilcox's lines in all 7 years? Or just 2023 with Bloesch? Because I think we all saw a noticeable improvement last year from previous years. Pretty sure it is the main reason Bloesch got promoted.

End of the day, you need your OL to be good enough to run your offense.

Cal National Ranking Offense (Yards per play)
2010 #76
2011 #58
2012 #65

2013 #98
2014 #33
2015 #6
2016 #56

2017 #101
2018 #120
2019 #110
2020 #125
2021 #67
2022 #75
2023 #78

I used yards per play rather than points or total offense which include pace and would be far more in Dykes' favor.

Wilcox's offenses have overall been the worst in the PAC-12 over his tenure. Holmoe's were better.

Yards per Rushing Attempt National Ranking
2010 #48
2011 #54
2012 #33

2013 #108
2014 #79
2015 #55
2016 #60

2017 #109
2018 #83
2019 #114
2020 #112
2021 #36
2022 #100
2023 #51

I think this last stat, yards per rushing attempt (including sacks), gets more at the what you are focused on. In which case I would say Wilcox's has had two years with lines that performed better than Dyke's, including the most recent season. However, 5 out of 7 years were bad, with 4 horrible, with rankings over 100 as bad as Dykes' first year.

The good news is we looked solidly average/above average last season.

---

How Ott played into last year is the wild card. How much better does he make an offensive line....

In reply to mbBear

mbBear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

Big C said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

calumnus said:

---

MinotStateBeav said:

---

You know when the offensive line started to decline at Cal was when there was philosophical switch to get smaller more mobile lines. I think that caused us to have more injury issues from it too. Tedford and Mihalchek (I know I tortured the spelling) knew how to build and recruit offensive line. Dykes and the line of O'line coaches he hired were so bad at coaching, I'll never forget their philosophy of "Lose slowly" and watching our guys get ran over lol.

---

I thought we all agreed it was our defense that was bad under Dykes? Offense was Top 10, with our QB going #1 in the draft, then we lead the PAC-10 on offense again the next year with Davis Webb.

This will be Wilcox's 8th year. Dykes' guys are long gone. Wilcox has had plenty of time to install his preferred OL strategy.

---

Wilcox and Dykes have nothing in common really, except that both lines have performed poorly but for different reasons. Dykes offense was pass heavy and relied on getting the ball out in 2.5 seconds. Wilcox in general has much more fundamentally sound offensive lines and runs a balanced offense, he's just recruited poorly and I think the Pac-12 has been a lot stronger under Wilcox. Dykes guys could not block, the coaches he employed were teaching some very poor fundamentals. Under Justin they seem to be teaching the right things but his recruiting on the lines hasn't been good and so they aren't improving like we would have hoped. I think that's improving in the last year, we'll see if its a trend.

---

If Wilcox's O-lines are fundamentally better than Dyke's were and yet Wilcox's offenses in general are so much worse, that sure doesn't support that lame conventional wisdom that the offensive line is so all-important.

---

Wilcox's lines are much better than Dykes, they are much more physical in the run game. Trust me in that what Wilcox's Offensive line coaches are teaching these guys is the same stuff they teach in the NFL and other major college programs. Dykes' guys skills would not have translated at the next level. Their pad level was too high and that seemed to be a feature and not a flaw with Dykes teams. Having your offensive line play like they're wearing skates isn't a attribute that should be copied.

edit: btw I'm not saying WIlcox is a good head coach, because you are what your record says you are. We are a below average team on a consistent basis so I think the time has come for the University to move on. I think Wilcox could be a decent coach at another program, I just think Cal is too difficult for him. Minot State should take him though.

---

Wilcox's lines in all 7 years? Or just 2023 with Bloesch? Because I think we all saw a noticeable improvement last year from previous years. Pretty sure it is the main reason Bloesch got promoted.

End of the day, you need your OL to be good enough to run your offense.

Cal National Ranking Offense (Yards per play)
2010 #76
2011 #58
2012 #65

2013 #98
2014 #33
2015 #6
2016 #56

2017 #101
2018 #120
2019 #110
2020 #125
2021 #67
2022 #75
2023 #78

I used yards per play rather than points or total offense which include pace and would be far more in Dykes' favor.

Wilcox's offenses have overall been the worst in the PAC-12 over his tenure. Holmoe's were better.

Yards per Rushing Attempt National Ranking
2010 #48
2011 #54
2012 #33

2013 #108
2014 #79
2015 #55
2016 #60

2017 #109
2018 #83
2019 #114
2020 #112
2021 #36
2022 #100
2023 #51

I think this last stat, yards per rushing attempt (including sacks), gets more at the what you are focused on. In which case I would say Wilcox's has had two years with lines that performed better than Dyke's, including the most recent season. However, 5 out of 7 years were bad, with 4 horrible, with rankings over 100 as bad as Dykes' first year.

The good news is we looked solidly average/above average last season.

---

How Ott played into last year is the wild card. How much better does he make an offensive line....

---

True. Similarly a running QB like Garbers that can avoid sacks and turn them into gains or extend plays makes the OL look better than it is. Or a QB that throws the ball away (incomplete pass) instead of taking a sack (negative run) can make the OL look better (and himself worse).

That is why I say the ultimate measure is how good your offense is. You just need an OL that is good enough for your scheme, one that lets you move the ball and score points. By that measure, Dykes' OL were FAR more effective than Wilcox's have been. Dykes had Top 10 nationally ranked offenses. He lead the PAC-12 in offense. Wilcox has had the worst offenses in the PAC-12 on average during his 7 years tenure thus far.

The good news is the OL looked much better last year. Ott lead the conference in rushing and Mendoza generally had enough time to complete passes. The question was whether that was scheme or actual improved line play. Most people on this board thought it was Bloesch and the line. Unfortunately that all fell apart in the bowl game. Our run game was stuffed and Mendoza was under constant pressure. While the official excuse was "finals" it sure looked like we missed Spavital. Because I do not think we will ever have an OL than can physically dominate P4 opponents which is what is needed with conservative, predictable playcalling. A school like Cal can only be successful with an innovative scheme and creative, smart playcalling that involves some form of misdirection or otherwise creates mismatches. That is what makes the OL look good. Sure you want them to be big, fast and strong enough to hold their own with an opposing DL, or dominate when they are taking on a LBer, but you cannot expect them to dominate when taking on both at the same time which is what happens with predictable playcalling.

In reply to mbBear

mbBear said:

---

How Ott played into last year is the wild card. How much better does he make an offensive line....

---

Huh. Usually we talk about how an O-line makes a RB look better. I had never thought of it the other way.

I am not sure if it can be reversed as you say. Typically if a RB makes a bunch of amazing moves in the backfield and picks up a first down despite a flood of D-line pushing back his blockers, we don't say "wow, the O-line is really improved this year."

But I need to give it some more thought.

It seems as though Wilcox is very secure in his position so long as Knowlton is the AD. We have some powerful donors giving enough money with Wilcox in place that it gives Knowlton cover to keep him at the helm.

So that being said - what do we think happens first? A Cal O-Lineman gets drafted or Wilcox gets fired?

I don't see Wilcox getting fired anytime soon. But I think the chances of an OL getting recruited, developed and then drafted under Wilcox are even smaller.

In reply to TheDuke!!!

TheDuke!!! said:

---

This one is tricky because a lot of college o-linemen switch their positions around quite a bit.

Once again, just one yabbo's opinion.

First Team:

Center: Alex Mack
Guards: Aaron Merz, Mike Gibson
Tackles: Langston Walker, Mitchell Schwartz


Second Team:

Center: Marvin Philip (absolute stud. We don't laud him enough b/c of how good Mack turned out to be)
Guards: Scott Tercero, John Romero
Tackles: Ryan O'Callaghan, Mark Wilson


Third Team:

Center: Brian Schwenke (apologies to Addison Ooms)
Guards: Jonathan Giesel, Noris Malele
Tackles: Mike Tepper, Jordan Rigsbee (apologies to Steven Moore and Matt Summers-Gavin)

---

Told Addison about your picks. He said glad to not be forgotten at least…

As much as I love Mitch Schwartz putting him over OCallaghan is ludicrous.
Hell, putting anyone over Ryan beside maybe Mack and Gibson is ludicrous.
In terms of on field performance at Cal (not pros) OCallaghan was far and away imho the best lineman we've had over the past 25 years

In reply to Goobear

Goobear said:

---

TheDuke!!! said:

---

This one is tricky because a lot of college o-linemen switch their positions around quite a bit.

Once again, just one yabbo's opinion.

First Team:

Center: Alex Mack
Guards: Aaron Merz, Mike Gibson
Tackles: Langston Walker, Mitchell Schwartz


Second Team:

Center: Marvin Philip (absolute stud. We don't laud him enough b/c of how good Mack turned out to be)
Guards: Scott Tercero, John Romero
Tackles: Ryan O'Callaghan, Mark Wilson


Third Team:

Center: Brian Schwenke (apologies to Addison Ooms)
Guards: Jonathan Giesel, Noris Malele
Tackles: Mike Tepper, Jordan Rigsbee (apologies to Steven Moore and Matt Summers-Gavin)

---

Told Addison about your picks. He said glad to not be forgotten at least…

---

Seriously?!? I'm tickled pink. Please tell him I loved watching him drive fools off the ball!

In reply to CNHTH

CNHTH said:

---

As much as I love Mitch Schwartz putting him over OCallaghan is ludicrous.
Hell, putting anyone over Ryan beside maybe Mack and Gibson is ludicrous.
In terms of on field performance at Cal (not pros) OCallaghan was far and away imho the best lineman we've had over the past 25 years

---

I clearly disagree. But we both agree that O'Callaghan was a fantastic o-lineman!

In reply to TheDuke!!!

TheDuke!!! said:

---

mbBear said:

---

How Ott played into last year is the wild card. How much better does he make an offensive line....

---

Huh. Usually we talk about how an O-line makes a RB look better. I had never thought of it the other way.

I am not sure if it can be reversed as you say. Typically if a RB makes a bunch of amazing moves in the backfield and picks up a first down despite a flood of D-line pushing back his blockers, we don't say "wow, the O-line is really improved this year."

But I need to give it some more thought.

---

I'm just asking the question, certainly not giving it as a blanket statement one way or the other. But has Cal had a recent running back who had the speed to bounce it outside when there were no holes between the tackles to the same degree as Ott can?
If your overall premise is that very few good RB's succeed without (at least) good O-lines, I can't argue with that. But does the definition of "good oline" also involve schemes that make sense, play calling that makes sense?

In reply to mbBear

mbBear said:

---

TheDuke!!! said:

---

mbBear said:

---

How Ott played into last year is the wild card. How much better does he make an offensive line....

---

Huh. Usually we talk about how an O-line makes a RB look better. I had never thought of it the other way.

I am not sure if it can be reversed as you say. Typically if a RB makes a bunch of amazing moves in the backfield and picks up a first down despite a flood of D-line pushing back his blockers, we don't say "wow, the O-line is really improved this year."

But I need to give it some more thought.

---

I'm just asking the question, certainly not giving it as a blanket statement one way or the other. But has Cal had a recent running back who had the speed to bounce it outside when there were no holes between the tackles to the same degree as Ott can?
If your overall premise is that very few good RB's succeed without (at least) good O-lines, I can't argue with that. But does the definition of "good oline" also involve schemes that make sense, play calling that makes sense?

---

It is a really interesting idea. I am still mulling it over.

In reply to TheDuke!!!

TheDuke!!! said:

---

Goobear said:

---

TheDuke!!! said:

---

This one is tricky because a lot of college o-linemen switch their positions around quite a bit.

Once again, just one yabbo's opinion.

First Team:

Center: Alex Mack
Guards: Aaron Merz, Mike Gibson
Tackles: Langston Walker, Mitchell Schwartz


Second Team:

Center: Marvin Philip (absolute stud. We don't laud him enough b/c of how good Mack turned out to be)
Guards: Scott Tercero, John Romero
Tackles: Ryan O'Callaghan, Mark Wilson


Third Team:

Center: Brian Schwenke (apologies to Addison Ooms)
Guards: Jonathan Giesel, Noris Malele
Tackles: Mike Tepper, Jordan Rigsbee (apologies to Steven Moore and Matt Summers-Gavin)

---

Told Addison about your picks. He said glad to not be forgotten at least…

---

Seriously?!? I'm tickled pink. Please tell him I loved watching him drive fools off the ball!

---

Hi Goobear. I hate to impose further upon your Ooms connection. But do you think there is any chance he could weigh in on the overall rankings?

I am just an internet yabbo whose major expertise involves being recruited by a handful of D-3 schools for the OL and from coaching OL in Freshmen HS football for a year. I would love to hear what an actual legend with knowledge and experience thinks of my rankings.

I assume he has forgotten more about what it takes to play OL at Cal than I have ever known or can ever hope to know.

In reply to TheDuke!!!

TheDuke!!! said:

---

TheDuke!!! said:

---

Goobear said:

---

TheDuke!!! said:

---

This one is tricky because a lot of college o-linemen switch their positions around quite a bit.

Once again, just one yabbo's opinion.

First Team:

Center: Alex Mack
Guards: Aaron Merz, Mike Gibson
Tackles: Langston Walker, Mitchell Schwartz


Second Team:

Center: Marvin Philip (absolute stud. We don't laud him enough b/c of how good Mack turned out to be)
Guards: Scott Tercero, John Romero
Tackles: Ryan O'Callaghan, Mark Wilson


Third Team:

Center: Brian Schwenke (apologies to Addison Ooms)
Guards: Jonathan Giesel, Noris Malele
Tackles: Mike Tepper, Jordan Rigsbee (apologies to Steven Moore and Matt Summers-Gavin)

---

Told Addison about your picks. He said glad to not be forgotten at least…

---

Seriously?!? I'm tickled pink. Please tell him I loved watching him drive fools off the ball!

---

Hi Goobear. I hate to impose further upon your Ooms connection. But do you think there is any chance he could weigh in on the overall rankings?

I am just an internet yabbo whose major expertise involves being recruited by a handful of D-3 schools for the OL and from coaching OL in Freshmen HS football for a year. I would love to hear what an actual legend with knowledge and experience thinks of my rankings.

I assume he has forgotten more about what it takes to play OL at Cal than I have ever known or can ever hope to know.

---

Will ask him but he may not know the old line up