downloading iPod movies
More on Longshore; Armed Forces Ticket Information
Posted by Steve | December 5, 2007 at 8:35 pm | In Games, Quarterback | 9 CommentsEDIT [12/18/2007]: Here’s a quick guide to visiting the Armed Forces Bowl, provided by ESPN Travel.
The San Francisco Chronicle ran an article today with a more complete interview of Jeff Tedford in regards to Nate Longshore. Apparently, the high ankle sprain suffered by Longshore against Oregon was much worse than just an ordinary ankle sprain:
“I didn’t get that it was a broken ankle, but Nate has talked to me about a little chip in the back of his ankle,” Tedford said. “I don’t know what the definition is for sprained, and I don’t know what the exact explanation has been for the injury, but from Day 1, that’s what it has always been.”
…
“Nate is not the most mobile guy, but one of his attributes has always been his ability to slide and make people miss and move in the pocket,” Tedford said. “There’s no question that the injury has hindered his ability to step up and move around as much as he could.
…
“I’ve asked him numerous times about whether his ankle bothers him more in the fourth quarter, and that’s not the case,” Tedford said. “It’s a case of a guy trying to be too perfect and trying too hard to get things done. The ankle has limited his mobility, but it hasn’t done anything down the stretch that hasn’t happened in the first quarter.”
…
“When you talk about the education of quarterback, it’s much more than X’s and O’s,” Tedford said. “It has to do leadership and handling media and criticism because the position is such a focal point. There’s no question that there has been some adversity there, and I’ve been impressed with how Nate’s been able to handle it.
To me, a chipped bone sounds more like a broken or fractured ankle rather than a sprain. It may not require a cast or surgery, but the affects of it I think would a little worse and take longer to heal correctly. If from Day 1, however, this was the case, why is it just coming out now? If Longshore didn’t tell Tedford the full extent of his injury (which I suspect he did), doesn’t that reflect rather poorly on Longshore? Sure, he wants to win, and wants to be the guy to lead the team to victory. But the coach has to know the status of all his players, to make the best decision for the entire team, not just the player. And if Tedford did know, why did he play him after only 2 weeks of rest? With Tedford saying that the “ability to slide and make people miss and move in the pocket” has been one of Longshore’s key attributes, one would think that a broken ankle would have at least partially sidelined him, especially against stronger pass rushes like UCLA and USC.
In regards to the last quote above… maybe the article pulled it out of context, but to me, the “education of the quarterback” isn’t just about “try, try, and try again.” If this were to have occurred in the NFL, Longshore would have been sidelined for at least a few games to give another QB a chance. Just look at Rex Grossman and the other Bears team. If a QB can’t turn things around after a game or two, which by the time we lost to Washington we could tell Longshore couldn’t, they’ve got to learn how to turn things around on the sideline. Anyway, I appreciate the job that Tedford has done since the Holmoe Era, as well as his concentration on each player’s individual growth and integrity, however this whole season he’s been tip-toeing the line between the good of a single player’s growth, and the possible good of the entire team. As he’s already slated Longshore as the definite starter of the Armed Forces Bowl come December 31st, I guess he still hasn’t crossed that line yet. We can always hope, however, that the month will give Longshore’s ankle enough time to finally fully heal, as well as for him to forget this horrible streak and regain some confidence and run through some more intense pressure drills. Otherwise, we’ll just have to hope that if Longshore shows signs of struggling during the game, Tedford will give in and at least go with some form of two quarterback system (even Stanford used a two quarterback system against us) to give our outgoing seniors (and potential early draft jumpers) a chance to end on a bright spot.
For those of you hardcore fans who are still interested in traveling to Fort Worth, Texas (TCU’s campus) for the Armed Forces Bowl against Air Force (9-3, 6-2 conference) on December 31st, tickets are now on sale through the Cal Bears website. Currently, all season ticket holders can purchase tickets, and on friday, December 7th at noon, tickets will go on sale to the general public. Tickets are $40 each for reserved seating, and there is no limit to how many tickets you can order. Hopefully those fans that have the opportunity will go, and represent our struggling Bears well no matter how they do, and give our seniors a good send-off.
9 Comments »
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Leave a comment
© 2006-08 the cal football fan Top
The injury described is in fact more likely to be like a severe sprain than a broken bone. Typically these injuries do not require casts or surgery, (except for minor scoping).
1. Comment by el caballo — December 6, 2007 @ 10:24 am #
Regardless of the diagnosis, I think the thing that was overlooked, and I’m not sure how or why, is performance. It was obvious Nate was favoring that ankle, regardless of whether or not he said he felt pain. He’s been throwing off his back foot ALOT since the injury and the result is a horrid TD-INT ratio.
So, for the coach not to clarify with Nate or the Medical staff and to keep going with him is either a horrible lapse in judgment on JT’s part or if his ego is in the way and playing Nate is his way of asserting his authority, it’s an absolutely retarded move because you’ve just jeopardized the health of your QB .
Whatever the reason, JT is definitely to blame and needs to start owning up to mistakes, rather than giving CAL fans and the media the run around. That is after all what the fans deserve!!!
2. Comment by JC — December 6, 2007 @ 1:07 pm #
You’re a fool if you think Tedford will ever own up for his mistakes, JC. Did he ever own up for his mistakes during 2005? No. Will he EVER own up for HIS mistakes this year? No.
That is not JT’s style. JT’s style is to say, ‘well we were two or three plays away from winning that one.’ Or, ‘gosh, Nate sure looked good out there aside from a few ints in the fourth.’
The man has let his own ego run out of control, and five years of Cal fans falling at his feet hasn’t helped at all. I have zero confidence in him coming clean on his mistakes this year. That just isn’t what JT does.
More likely than not we will see more of the same next year. If lucky, we will go 9-4 or 8-5. But if ANY OF YOU have any illusions about going to a Rose Bowl or, *gasp*, a national championship, it is time to put down the pipe filled with assorted illegal substances.
Thankfully I am patient. When my suspicions of Tedford are eventually proven to be fact, I will be the first to TELL EVERYONE I TOLD YOU SO!
3. Comment by I KNOW WHAT TIME IT IS — December 6, 2007 @ 3:38 pm #
There are ton of fans that love Tedford and many fans who also have their doubts. I look at it this way, players get better with each game and so do coaches. Yes, Tedford has been at it already for a few years now and of course he should have out in Riley. There is no question about that. But, Tedford is still a good coach who is having the Bears moving in the right direction. A bright spot is that this is the first time Cal has gone to five consecutive bowl games. Also, Nate is not a bad quarterback. People were loving him until the UCLA game and I remember people crying they wanted him the Oregon State game. I agree with the last comment that the starting position for the the quarterback next year should be open and I feel it will be. The most hurtful thing about this year was not the fact that we went 1-6 the last part of the season, we lost to Stanford or that Tedford didn’t play a quarterback. What hurt me was Cal’s recruiting power. I know we lost some potential big game players who were looking at program that crumbled. However, maybe these players can look beyond that and into the foreseeable future but thats hard with teenagers. Lets not forget how horrible this Cal program was before Tedford. We had Mariuchi (can’t spell his name) but he never proved consistency as we can see with the 49rs. Maybe a Rosebowl is not for us next year but don’t count us out of it yet. True Bear fans believe and I personally feel when its all said and done Tedford will not only lead but also deliver.
4. Comment by Kevin Palafox — December 6, 2007 @ 11:34 pm #
Anyone else notice that in certain pictures and angles Tim Tebow kinda looks like Joe Ayoob?
5. Comment by sittin' on dubs — December 7, 2007 @ 2:54 pm #
If you read the title of this article aloud, the first part of it sounds like what I’ve been finding myself yelling during the 4th quarter of recent Cal games. =P
6. Comment by Jeff — December 7, 2007 @ 4:39 pm #
I said this in another blog, but it is worth reposting here in light of the irrational support for Tedford.
There is far too much undeserved appreciation for Tedford. A great coach can become a bad coach. The fact is that Tedford did an incredibly terrible job coaching this year. And he should be fiercely challenged for that. Especially his juvenile decision to let Nate ruin the season, much as he allowed Ayoob to less than two years ago.
And I question the notion that Tedford ever was that great of a coach. He never led Cal to the heights that the team was capable of. With the amount of Talent present on the team, both this year and years past, he has been a colosal disaster.
If he plays Longshore in the Armed Forces Bowl I’ll have no choice but to withdrawal my substantial donations to the program. Is thit really what we as a program and school want? I assure you I am not the only donor who has taken this stance.
7. Comment by Brent Robertson — December 7, 2007 @ 4:57 pm #
Brent, might as well consider what other organization you want to contribute; Tedford has already stated his intention to start the game with Longshore.
I still think there are times (rare occasions) when it is better for a team to not accept a bowl bid, and this is one of them. So what if this sets a record of five consecutive bowls? I’d rather bypass this low-tier and possibly humiliating experience and have the team as a whole reflect on the season and emerge with better clarity and focus. The second half of the season needs to be assessed from within.
8. Comment by David — December 8, 2007 @ 9:11 am #
Yeah, I heard that Tedford is going to start Nate. I question the call but then again I am not the coach and glad because it takes mental toughness to block all the ridicule that he faces. In response to Brent, where were you putting your money before Tedford? If it was the Holmoe era then you should have pulled your money then. I have a feeling that Cal will be victorious not because of the arm of Nate but because of short passes and receivers making plays and Juatin Forsett. I want to see a better future for the football program and like David said after the bowl game a lot of internal as well as external assessment will be needed from the coaches to the players. Cal does not have that winning tradition that other schools like USC, Michigan, Notre Dame (exclude this year), LSU and so on have. They can look into the past and pull from that strength where Cal really doesn’t have that unless you track back to the 1940’s and 50’s. These teams can look into the past decade and 90’s.
We can’t change the fact that we are playing in a bowl game and have the potential to get embarrassed. The best thing I can do as a Cal fan is support and go from there. I don’t play, coach, direct the football program. In the end I want Cal to get better recruits and begin a consistent winning tradition.
9. Comment by cal fan — December 11, 2007 @ 11:53 pm #