Cal's Glorious Football Weekend Ends in Disappointment

Golden Bears let a 25-point lead slip away against No. 8 Miami, ruining what had been a storybook Saturday

Miami receiver Joshisa Trader (center left) and receiver Xavier Restrepo (center right) celebrate Miiami's win over Cal / Darren Yamashita-Imagn Images

Cal was about to put the cherry on top on what would be the greatest weekend in recent memory for Golden Bears football, possibly a transformational Saturday for the Cal football program.

Calgorithm, Cal’s online community, had become a national phenomenon with its influence and satirical humor this week. The first ESPN College GameDay ever at Cal had been a huge success Saturday morning, with thousands of students lining up in the middle of the night to attend the popular show, with a Cal kid winning $100,000 for making a field goal. Record donation amounts were pouring into the Cal NIL collective.

And here was Cal on Saturday night, before its first home sellout crowd for a non-Big Game in 11 years, with a ton of recruits in attendance, holding a 35-10 lead with 8:06 left in the third quarter against eighth-ranked Miami, in position for a huge upset.  It would be Cal’s first victory over a top-10 team since Cal defeated No. 8 Washington State 37-3 in 2017. But it seemed bigger than that because this was Miami, a football giant that had won five national titles, is located 2,600 miles away, was led by Heisman Trophy contender Cam Ward, and was a 10-point favorite.

And the hero of this monumental Cal win would be quarterback Fernando Mendoza, who had completed four passes of more than 50 yards, and no one knew when or if a Cal quarterback had ever done that before. And Mendoza was from Miami, had attended University of Miami football camps as a high school player, hoping to get a scholarship offer from Miami, then coached by Manny Diaz, only to be told that maybe he could walk-on.

Yet Mendoza refused to bad mouth the Hurricanes.

He had joined forces this year with a Berkeley restaurant to establish the Mendoza Burrito, with proceeds going to the National MS Society because multiple sclerosis had stricken his mother, who, along with Mendoza’s father, had made the trip from Miami to attend Saturday night’s game.

Everything had lined up.

Then the story had a surprise ending, a tragic ending for Cal players, coaches and fans.

Miami outscored Cal 29-3 the rest of the way, scoring the go-ahead touchdown with 26 seconds left. Cal lost 39-38, and the crowd and Cal players and coaches were stunned.

“What is the mood?” Cal coach Justin Wilcox said afterward. “As bad as you can imagine.”

You can look at the fourth-quarter stats to explain it, because in that quarter Miami outgained Cal 276 yards ro 26, had 11 first downs to two for the Bears, was 2-for-4 on third downs and 2-for-2 on fourth downs while Cal was 0-for-4 on third downs and 0-for-1 on fourth down in the quarter.

The overall stats for the game indicated Miami had outplayed Cal. The Bears finished with just 47 rushing yards, including 2 rushing yards by Jaydn Ott.

But Ott had scored on a 66-yard pass reception on a gutsy fourth-and-1 play from the Cal 34-yard line midway through the second quarter that helped Cal to a 21-10 halftime lead.

And by the time Cal’s Nohl Williams turned his fifth interception of the season into a touchdown and backup quarterback Chandler Rogers scored on a 9-yard touchdown run, the Bears held that 25-point lead seven minutes into the third quarter.

Yet they lost, partly because of the wizardry of Ward, who enhanced his Heisman bid, and partly because Cal could not complete its magical weekend.

If the Bears’ 14-9 loss to Florida State in their previous game was a gut punch, this one was a Mike Tyson left hook to the jaw that flattened Cal, who will need all its will to get off the canvas for next week’s game at Pittsburgh.

And to make matters worse controversy invaded Cal’s loss.  For the second week in a row a controversial officiating decision in the closing minutes helped Miami stay unbeaten.  This time it was a possible targeting call that was not made.

On a third-and-12 play from the Cal 42-yard line with two minutes remaining, Mendoza scrambled for 4 yards before being dealt a vicious hit by Miami’s Wesley Bissainthe.  When replays on the big screen in the stadium suggested Bissainthe might have delivered a targeting blow to Mendoza, who was injured on the play, the crowd roared with the expectation of a penalty that would give Cal a first down at the Miami 39-yard line with 1:50 remaining.

But a video review indicated that targeting was not evident, and Miami scored the game-winning touchdown after receiving Cal’s resulting punt.

Awful no-call. Just awful. @CalFootball pic.twitter.com/cgwL84sijC

— Damon Bruce (@DamonBruce) October 6, 2024

Brock Osweiler, who was the color commentaror for ESPN in Saturday night's game, disagreed withthe call:

“Back-to-back weeks Miami is in a situation where it comes down to replay and you question if the officials are getting the calls correct,” Osweiler said on the broadcast. “I do not know by the definition of the rulebook, how that is not targeting… By definition that is 100 percent targeting.”

See below for the NCAA rule on targeting

The non-call elicited an avalanche of conspiracy theories via Twitter, which have little or no merit, but that officiating decision was symbolic of the Bears’ late-game problems that ruined what seemed destined to be a  happy ending to a glorious weekend.

Cal performed far better against Miami than most people expected, nearly pulling off a major upset. That was not the sentiment afterward, though.

“Football is a humbling game,” Wilcox said.

-----------------------------------------

Below is the NCAA rule on targeting:

Targeting and Making Forcible Contact With the Crown of the Helmet

ARTICLE 3. No player shall target and make forcible contact against an opponent with the crown of their helmet. The crown of the helmet is the top segment of the helmet; namely, the circular area defined by a 6-inch radius from the apex (top) of the helmet. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting (See Note 1 below). When in question, it is a foul. (Rule 9-6) (A.R. 9-1-3-I)

 Targeting and Making Forcible Contact to Head or Neck Area of a Defenseless Player

ARTICLE 4. No player shall target and make forcible contact to the head or neck area of a defenseless opponent (See Note 2 below) with the helmet, forearm, hand, fist, elbow or shoulder. This foul requires that there be at least one indicator of targeting (See Note 1 below). When in question, it is a foul (Rules 2-27-14 and 9-6). (A.R. 9-1-4-I-VI)

Note 1: “Targeting” means that a player takes aim at an opponent for purposes of attacking with forcible contact that goes beyond making a legal tackle or a legal block or playing the ball. Some indicators of targeting include but are not limited to:

-- Launch. A player leaving their feet to attack an opponent by an upward and forward thrust of the body to make forcible contact in the head or neck area.

-- A crouch followed by an upward and forward thrust to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area, even though one or both feet are still on the ground.

-- Leading with helmet, shoulder, forearm, fist, hand or elbow to attack with forcible contact at the head or neck area.

-- Lowering the head before attacking by initiating forcible contact with the crown of the helmet.

Note 2: Defenseless player (Rule 2-27-14). When in question, a player is defenseless. Examples of defenseless players include but are not limited to:

--A player in the act of or just after throwing a pass. This includes an offensive player in a passing posture with focus downfield.

--A receiver attempting to catch a forward pass or in position to receive a backward pass, or one who has completed a catch and has not had time to protect themselves or has not clearly become a ball carrier.

--A kicker in the act of or just after kicking a ball, or during the kick or the return.

--A kick returner attempting to catch or recover a kick, or one who has completed a catch or recovery and has not had time to protect themselves or has not clearly become a ball carrier.

--A player on the ground.

--A player obviously out of the play.

--A player who receives a blind-side block.

--A ball carrier already in the grasp of an opponent and whose forward progress has been stopped.

--A quarterback any time after a change of possession

--A ball carrier who has obviously given themselves up and is sliding feet first.

 PENALTY—[ARTICLE 3 and ARTICLE 4]—15 yards. For dead-ball fouls, 15 yards from the succeeding spot. Automatic first down for fouls by Team B if not in conflict with other rules. For fouls in the first half: Disqualification for the remainder of the game. For fouls in the second half: Disqualification for the remainder of the game and the first half of the next game (See Rule 2-27-12). If the foul occurs in the second half of the last game of the season, players with remaining eligibility shall serve the suspension during the postseason or the first game of the following season.

If a player receives a third Targeting foul within the same season, disqualification for the remainder of the game and that player will receive an automatic one-game suspension in their team’s next scheduled game. Targeting fouls subsequent to the player’s third Targeting foul within the same season, disqualification for the remainder of that game and the player will receive an automatic one-game suspension in their team’s next scheduled game. If the foul occurs in the last game of the season, players with remaining eligibility shall serve the suspension during the postseason or the first game of the following season.

The disqualification must be reviewed by Instant Replay (Rule 12-3-5). [S38, S24 and S47]

When the Instant Replay Official overturns the disqualification:

If the targeting foul is not in conjunction with another personal foul by the same player, the 15-yard penalty for targeting is not enforced. If the player commits another personal foul in conjunction with the targeting foul, the 15-yard penalty for that personal foul is enforced according to rule. (A. R. 9-1-4-VII-VIII)

For games in which Instant Replay is used:

If a player is disqualified in the second half, the conference has the option to consult the national coordinator of football officials who would then facilitate a video review. Based on the review, if and only if the national coordinator concludes that it is clearly obvious the player should not have been disqualified, the suspension will be vacated. If the national coordinator supports the disqualification, the suspension for the next game will remain.

-------------------------------

Follow Cal Sports Report on Twitter: @jakecurtis53

Find Cal Sports Report on Facebook by going to https://www.facebook.com/si.calsportsreport