uh oh...

[hatvol96]

I just don't see the Cal game as being such a monumental litmus test that it will dictate the fate of our season. Cal is a good team that will provide a tough test in the opener . . . nothing more; nothing less. We could win and end up 7-5 and we could lose and end up 10-2. If you want a litmus test, I think how we play is almost as important as whether we win or not.

Cal is wildly overrated. A loss in that game will be a predictor of many more to come. UF, LSU and UGA are all markedly better than the Bears. Alabama, South Carolina, and what will be a much improved Arkansas team are comparable. There's no way a team that can't beat Cal navigates our schedule with fewer than 4 losses.

 

[MachiaVolli]

There's no way a team that can't beat Cal navigates our schedule with fewer than 4 losses.

Will you please lay your cards down for me next? I'm anxious to see what will happen these next few days.

 

[holdemvol]

Cal is wildly ove . A loss in that game will be a predictor of many more to come. UF, LSU and UGA are all markedly better than the Bears. Alabama, South Carolina, and what will be a much improved Arkansas team are comparable. There's no way a team that can't beat Cal navigates our schedule with fewer than 4 losses.

Cal is "wildly" ove ? Comparable to Arkansas? Don't you think that is a bit of a stretch?

 

[hatvol96]

Cal is "wildly" ove ? Comparable to Arkansas? Don't you think that is a bit of a stretch?

You won't be asking that question come November.

 

[jakez4ut]

Cal is wildly overrated. A loss in that game will be a predictor of many more to come. UF, LSU and UGA are all markedly better than the Bears. Alabama, South Carolina, and what will be a much improved Arkansas team are comparable. There's no way a team that can't beat Cal navigates our schedule with fewer than 4 losses.

i would say Alabama and USC and Arkansas are all capable of beating us this year, but that doesn't remove the fact that i think we should win those games.

Cal might be overrated, time will tell, but it ain't like playing Inept Tech either. there are alot of programs that could go thru our schedule with 4 losses, that's not an indictment on that program, but props to the conference we play in.

Cal is a good opening game. they will test our D, and their D is supposed be littered with good atheletes. While i won't say a win bolsters us to top 10 material, it would do wonders for the confidence dept. I would dare say that Cal will most certainly be ranked ahead of us when we play.

 

[dan4vols]

the biggest difference I see is the SEC uses its best athletes on defense as opposed to the the pac-10. Im gushing that Cal is overatted, if they are, and if they are, its an easier win with bigger perks. IMO it comes down to this........even after the fact were at home, the opener, and we're on a ''out to prove to the world we don't suck'' mission....Can the offensive line control the line of scrimmage? If everyting else is goin good and we cant move the chains...we lose. The big uglies who never get any highlight time control the game, like it or not.

 

[jakez4ut]

the biggest difference I see is the SEC uses its best athletes on defense as opposed to the the pac-10. Im gushing that Cal is overatted, if they are, and if they are, its an easier win with bigger perks. IMO it comes down to this........even after the fact were at home, the opener, and we're on a ''out to prove to the world we don't suck'' mission....Can the offensive line control the line of scrimmage? If everyting else is goin good and we cant move the chains...we lose. The big uglies who never get any highlight time control the game, like it or not.

that is the biggest question mark right now, and you are exactly right....if we don't have holes to run thru or give the qb time, we could have the best skill position players around, and it wouldn't make any difference.....

let's hope they get that figured out and gain some depth quick. :cross:

 

[kptvol]

Collegefootballnews.com has some pretty interesting articles, but I don't put too much faith in their evaluations or predictions. They seem to get it wrong more often than not. I've noticed they also seem to pump up the Pac-10. Over the past two years, they make every Pac team that faces USC seem like they have a real shot at victory. Even when USC didn't play well, they still would destroy Pac teams by 21, at least. I think CFN might just be trying to arouse some more interest with some hype.

But in reality... the last two games Cal played againtst even halfway decent non-conference foes involved a beatdown by Texas Tech and a loss to BYU. If Cal plays well in Neyland, I'll be ready to hand them some credit. Until then, they've still got a lot to prove. (Not that UT doesn't have something to prove this year, as well).

 

[volinbham]

I agree with GAVol on this one. Cal is one game on our schedule -- a game against a good team (not great but good).

Winning it assures nothing just as losing it assures nothing. Even if Cal is on par with Bama, SC and Ark it in no way indicates those as losses or even struggles. We and every other team out there wins games against superior and inferior talent and loses them as well. So many variables come into play.

In short, I'd hate to see a loss to Cal but it would not determine the rest of the season.

 

[LadyinOrange]

you should do it "on the 7s" like the local forecast on the Weather Channel.

In West Tennessee we get our weather on the 8's.

:hi:

 

[tidwell]

yeaah, same here LiO, and I would know... I love some Weather Channel.

 

[jakez4ut]

I agree with GAVol on this one. Cal is one game on our schedule -- a game against a good team (not great but good).

Winning it assures nothing just as losing it assures nothing. Even if Cal is on par with Bama, SC and Ark it in no way indicates those as losses or even struggles. We and every other team out there wins games against superior and inferior talent and loses them as well. So many variables come into play.

In short, I'd hate to see a loss to Cal but it would not determine the rest of the season.

that sums it up quite nicely...well stated bham.

 

[GenNeyland9]

Three things:

1) That season preview sounds almost as rosy as UT's last year. Wow. Cal sounds awesome on paper. Maybe we shouldn't even show up. Studs and All-Americans on defense, "sack machines," NFL talent, a RB that should get 2,000 yards and be a Heisman canidate, and an unsettled/uncertain QB situation. . . After last season, I'll never judge a team by how good they look in the preseason articles.

2) Neyland better be rockin--I'll be there, and I'll be loud as hell. We have to re-establish it as one of the toughest places to win in college football. All you people that are going to be loud the first two defensive plays of the game, but then sit down and turn silent after Cal gets a first down or two--just do us a favor, and stay at home. Go to Jordan-Hare, the Swamp, or Tiger Stadium and see how consistently loud they are. We have more people, so we should be louder. It just makes sense. I've been to games (Florida in '98) where it seems like playing at Neyland is worth 14 points. That's what it should be like this year. We have to start intimidating people again.

3) Whether you think Cal is good or not, or whether the Pac-10 is "soft" or not, Cal will score points. They always have a good offense, and Tedford is a good offensive coach. Bottom line, we won't win by playing offense like we did last year--by scoring less than 20 a game. Cut and the O better be ready to go, cause Cal is going to score on us, guys. It scares me to think that our secondary is supposed to be the strength of the D this year, because I haven't seen our secondary play consistently well in a long, long time.

Agree that this game is not make or break, but what a great way to see right off the bat whether we're a different team from last year.

 

[mattvols]

they look to be a whole lot harder then we thought.