The Latest Rumors

260,709 Views | 1901 Replies | Last: 1 yr ago by Bobodeluxe
PtownBear1
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearForce2 said:

Bobodeluxe said:

"The cupcake team of the west coast pod of a midwest based.conference"

I registered that for future concession sales.

9-2 vs B1G last 20 years minus tOSU baby.
We are more like Penn St. West minus Joe Pa pedo baby.


Well 1.) at best half our games would be against the B1G outside the supposed west coast pod and if you look at our record over the last decade against USC, UCLA, Furd, OU, and UW it's quite depressing.

And 2.) we've done well in the OOC games over the years because they're the first few games and depth is usually our biggest issue.
BearoutEast67
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I imagine the City of Berkeley might factor some. When a tiny municipality can hold sway over whether a college football game can be held or not, who wants that headache in their league. I was at the Arizona game when only 35-40 Cal players were allowed to attend - not good field play or television.
Donate to Cal's NIL at https://calegends.com/donation/
LTbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?

Cal_79
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Rushinbear said:

mirabelle said:

Maybe we belong in the Ivy League.
Assuming that is tongue-in-cheek. We spec'd about a Big Ivy from time to time and the numbers never work...at all. Cal, Furd, Rice, NW, Vander, GT, Tulane, Duke, etc., but who'd watch? Cost a bundle - all out of pocket. Maybe the Academies would up the viewership a little.

Nor would the geographic diversity of such a league help with the travel challenges.
Econ141
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearoutEast67 said:

I imagine the City of Berkeley might factor some. When a tiny municipality can hold sway over whether a college football game can be held or not, who wants that headache in their league. I was at the Arizona game when only 35-40 Cal players were allowed to attend - not good field play or television.


I think this is overblown a bit. Was there any other time where COB prevented or impacted a game as much? COVID is like a one time life event so I think we can forgive this example ... But was there more times where they meddled?
philbert
How long do you want to ignore this user?

sycasey
How long do you want to ignore this user?
fat_slice said:

BearoutEast67 said:

I imagine the City of Berkeley might factor some. When a tiny municipality can hold sway over whether a college football game can be held or not, who wants that headache in their league. I was at the Arizona game when only 35-40 Cal players were allowed to attend - not good field play or television.


I think this is overblown a bit. Was there any other time where COB prevented or impacted a game as much? COVID is like a one time life event so I think we can forgive this example ... But was there more times where they meddled?
With the stadium renovations too, they were a big blocker (the hippies in trees were a media distraction, but the real issue was with the City). But that didn't actually prevent games from being played.
Rushinbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
philbert said:



I hope that UCB and system-wide leaders aren't starting to feel sorry for UCLA with the goal of giving them a slap on the wrist.
berserkeley
How long do you want to ignore this user?
They don't have to spend any capital within the UC system IF UCLA successfully pushes for Cal's inclusion in the B1G
philbert
How long do you want to ignore this user?
berserkeley said:

They don't have to spend any capital within the UC system IF UCLA successfully pushes for Cal's inclusion in the B1G
That's by far the easiest and preferred path. Let's see if Block can make it happen.
dimitrig
How long do you want to ignore this user?
LTbear said:





Jim Knowlton isn't here either.

BTW, where is "here"?
Econ141
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dimitrig said:

LTbear said:





Jim Knowlton isn't here either.

BTW, where is "here"?



Jim's been absent for a few years now.
movielover
How long do you want to ignore this user?
philbert said:





Or that's the narrative. UCLA has framed the response of $110 Million in new debt, and choice B being eliminationg most Olympic sports.

Is the UC system going to offer to pay their debt?
WalterSobchak
How long do you want to ignore this user?
WalterSobchak said:

StillNoStanfurdium said:

WalterSobchak said:

fat_slice said:

I think our best option is to keep the pac-12 together and bring on sdst and Fresno.
This would be great for them. How would it benefit us?
I've heard the argument about San Diego State getting the Pac-12 back into the SoCal market if not LA proper. Bringing Fresno would maintain a rivalry for San Diego State.
Cal doesn't need to get "back into" the SoCal market or need SDSU to do it. We have a ton of alumni, and current students when they go home, already living down there. We could probably play some of our "home" games in LA and draw as well or better there than we do in Berkeley. Hey, now there's an idea...


calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearoutEast67 said:

I imagine the City of Berkeley might factor some. When a tiny municipality can hold sway over whether a college football game can be held or not, who wants that headache in their league. I was at the Arizona game when only 35-40 Cal players were allowed to attend - not good field play or television.


The game was in Tucson. The players who did not attend tested positive for COVID and could not fly as per FAA rules.
Bobodeluxe
How long do you want to ignore this user?
More facts tossed in to confuse the preordained message.
oskidunker
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

BearoutEast67 said:

I imagine the City of Berkeley might factor some. When a tiny municipality can hold sway over whether a college football game can be held or not, who wants that headache in their league. I was at the Arizona game when only 35-40 Cal players were allowed to attend - not good field play or television.


The game was in Tucson. The players who did not attend tested positive for COVID and could not fly as per FAA rules.
There was talk of driving them. They should have done that with a few key players.
Go Bears!
Econ141
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Oh boy - don't think SDSU will be an option for PAC 12 after this:

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-07-29/teenager-recounts-alleged-rape-by-san-diego-state-football-players?utm_source=reddit.com

oski003
How long do you want to ignore this user?
SoFi Saturdays?
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
oskidunker said:

calumnus said:

BearoutEast67 said:

I imagine the City of Berkeley might factor some. When a tiny municipality can hold sway over whether a college football game can be held or not, who wants that headache in their league. I was at the Arizona game when only 35-40 Cal players were allowed to attend - not good field play or television.


The game was in Tucson. The players who did not attend tested positive for COVID and could not fly as per FAA rules.
There was talk of driving them. They should have done that with a few key players.


Could have. Or have the game cancelled or postponed.
82gradDLSdad
How long do you want to ignore this user?
oski003 said:

SoFi Saturdays?


As a large bag holder, uh I mean shareholder, of SoFi I approve of this
southseasbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
fat_slice said:

Oh boy - don't think SDSU will be an option for PAC 12 after this:

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-07-29/teenager-recounts-alleged-rape-by-san-diego-state-football-players?utm_source=reddit.com


Hope you're right.
Fire Knowlton!
Fire Fox!
Put Wilcox in a hot seat!
oskidunker
How long do you want to ignore this user?
southseasbear said:

fat_slice said:

Oh boy - don't think SDSU will be an option for PAC 12 after this:

https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-07-29/teenager-recounts-alleged-rape-by-san-diego-state-football-players?utm_source=reddit.com


Hope you're right.
San Diego Stink'n State. To quote Dave Barr.
Go Bears!
BigDaddy
How long do you want to ignore this user?


Wishful thinking by Kliavkoff if he thinks Oregon, Washington, Stanford or Arizona are going to sign a Grant of Rights.
“My tastes are simple; I am easily satisfied with the best.” - Winston Churchill
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BigDaddy said:



Wishful thinking by Kliavkoff if he thinks Oregon, Washington, Stanford or Arizona are going to sign a Grant of Rights.


Read his statement again. It is a tautology. He said they will sign when he gets a deal in front of them that they want to sign.
juarezbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

BigDaddy said:



Wishful thinking by Kliavkoff if he thinks Oregon, Washington, Stanford or Arizona are going to sign a Grant of Rights.


Read his statement again. It is a tautology. He said they will sign when he gets a deal in front of them that they want to sign.
Exactly. The key words are THAT THEY WANT TO SIGN....basically means he needs to somehow negotiate a package that would deliver north of $50M/yr for several years, or I don't think Cal, Furd, UW, and UO will sign. Frankly, if he somehow pulls together a highly lucrative package, some of these teams might be better off staying with the Pac once one takes into account all of the travel expenses - especially for non-revenue sports.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
juarezbear said:

calumnus said:

BigDaddy said:



Wishful thinking by Kliavkoff if he thinks Oregon, Washington, Stanford or Arizona are going to sign a Grant of Rights.


Read his statement again. It is a tautology. He said they will sign when he gets a deal in front of them that they want to sign.
Exactly. The key words are THAT THEY WANT TO SIGN....basically means he needs to somehow negotiate a package that would deliver north of $50M/yr for several years, or I don't think Cal, Furd, UW, and UO will sign. Frankly, if he somehow pulls together a highly lucrative package, some of these teams might be better off staying with the Pac once one takes into account all of the travel expenses - especially for non-revenue sports.


A coast to coast superconference only really makes sense for football if at all. I think we will see non-revenue sports eventually parked in regional conferences.
gardenstatebear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

juarezbear said:

calumnus said:

BigDaddy said:



Wishful thinking by Kliavkoff if he thinks Oregon, Washington, Stanford or Arizona are going to sign a Grant of Rights.


Read his statement again. It is a tautology. He said they will sign when he gets a deal in front of them that they want to sign.
Exactly. The key words are THAT THEY WANT TO SIGN....basically means he needs to somehow negotiate a package that would deliver north of $50M/yr for several years, or I don't think Cal, Furd, UW, and UO will sign. Frankly, if he somehow pulls together a highly lucrative package, some of these teams might be better off staying with the Pac once one takes into account all of the travel expenses - especially for non-revenue sports.


A coast to coast superconference only really makes sense for football if at all. I think we will see non-revenue sports eventually parked in regional conferences.
I agree, but couldn't you also do it for men's basketball? After all, the teams are small enough to easily travel and the sport generates revenue. Aside from that, I think you're right that we'll see different conferences for non-revenue sports.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
gardenstatebear said:

calumnus said:

juarezbear said:

calumnus said:

BigDaddy said:



Wishful thinking by Kliavkoff if he thinks Oregon, Washington, Stanford or Arizona are going to sign a Grant of Rights.


Read his statement again. It is a tautology. He said they will sign when he gets a deal in front of them that they want to sign.
Exactly. The key words are THAT THEY WANT TO SIGN....basically means he needs to somehow negotiate a package that would deliver north of $50M/yr for several years, or I don't think Cal, Furd, UW, and UO will sign. Frankly, if he somehow pulls together a highly lucrative package, some of these teams might be better off staying with the Pac once one takes into account all of the travel expenses - especially for non-revenue sports.


A coast to coast superconference only really makes sense for football if at all. I think we will see non-revenue sports eventually parked in regional conferences.
I agree, but couldn't you also do it for men's basketball? After all, the teams are small enough to easily travel and the sport generates revenue. Aside from that, I think you're right that we'll see different conferences for non-revenue sports.


You definitely could and should for logistical reasons, but I think one of the reasons the B1G wants UCLA is for the basketball TV contract.
dimitrig
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

gardenstatebear said:

calumnus said:

juarezbear said:

calumnus said:

BigDaddy said:



Wishful thinking by Kliavkoff if he thinks Oregon, Washington, Stanford or Arizona are going to sign a Grant of Rights.


Read his statement again. It is a tautology. He said they will sign when he gets a deal in front of them that they want to sign.
Exactly. The key words are THAT THEY WANT TO SIGN....basically means he needs to somehow negotiate a package that would deliver north of $50M/yr for several years, or I don't think Cal, Furd, UW, and UO will sign. Frankly, if he somehow pulls together a highly lucrative package, some of these teams might be better off staying with the Pac once one takes into account all of the travel expenses - especially for non-revenue sports.


A coast to coast superconference only really makes sense for football if at all. I think we will see non-revenue sports eventually parked in regional conferences.
I agree, but couldn't you also do it for men's basketball? After all, the teams are small enough to easily travel and the sport generates revenue. Aside from that, I think you're right that we'll see different conferences for non-revenue sports.


You definitely could and should for logistical reasons, but I think one of the reasons the B1G wants UCLA is for the basketball TV contract.


Certainly it was not for their crappy football team which hasn't seen a Rose Bowl since Hector was a pup.

calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dimitrig said:

calumnus said:

gardenstatebear said:

calumnus said:

juarezbear said:

calumnus said:

BigDaddy said:



Wishful thinking by Kliavkoff if he thinks Oregon, Washington, Stanford or Arizona are going to sign a Grant of Rights.


Read his statement again. It is a tautology. He said they will sign when he gets a deal in front of them that they want to sign.
Exactly. The key words are THAT THEY WANT TO SIGN....basically means he needs to somehow negotiate a package that would deliver north of $50M/yr for several years, or I don't think Cal, Furd, UW, and UO will sign. Frankly, if he somehow pulls together a highly lucrative package, some of these teams might be better off staying with the Pac once one takes into account all of the travel expenses - especially for non-revenue sports.


A coast to coast superconference only really makes sense for football if at all. I think we will see non-revenue sports eventually parked in regional conferences.
I agree, but couldn't you also do it for men's basketball? After all, the teams are small enough to easily travel and the sport generates revenue. Aside from that, I think you're right that we'll see different conferences for non-revenue sports.


You definitely could and should for logistical reasons, but I think one of the reasons the B1G wants UCLA is for the basketball TV contract.


Certainly it was not for their crappy football team which hasn't seen a Rose Bowl since Hector was a pup.



They were 8-4 (6-3) last year. #28 in Sagarin. Invited to the Holiday Bowl. That would be a banner year for us. Tedford in his heyday. They have SIX 4-star players coming in including Justyn Martin who looks great and I was hoping would be our savior.

If they are crappy, what are we? Something far worse?
Econ141
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

dimitrig said:

calumnus said:

gardenstatebear said:

calumnus said:

juarezbear said:

calumnus said:

BigDaddy said:



Wishful thinking by Kliavkoff if he thinks Oregon, Washington, Stanford or Arizona are going to sign a Grant of Rights.


Read his statement again. It is a tautology. He said they will sign when he gets a deal in front of them that they want to sign.
Exactly. The key words are THAT THEY WANT TO SIGN....basically means he needs to somehow negotiate a package that would deliver north of $50M/yr for several years, or I don't think Cal, Furd, UW, and UO will sign. Frankly, if he somehow pulls together a highly lucrative package, some of these teams might be better off staying with the Pac once one takes into account all of the travel expenses - especially for non-revenue sports.


A coast to coast superconference only really makes sense for football if at all. I think we will see non-revenue sports eventually parked in regional conferences.
I agree, but couldn't you also do it for men's basketball? After all, the teams are small enough to easily travel and the sport generates revenue. Aside from that, I think you're right that we'll see different conferences for non-revenue sports.


You definitely could and should for logistical reasons, but I think one of the reasons the B1G wants UCLA is for the basketball TV contract.


Certainly it was not for their crappy football team which hasn't seen a Rose Bowl since Hector was a pup.



They were 8-4 (6-3) last year. #28 in Sagarin. Invited to the Holiday Bowl. That would be a banner year for us. Tedford in his heyday. They have SIX 4-star players coming in including Justyn Martin who looks great and I was hoping would be our savior.

If they are crappy, what are we? Something far worse?


Yup - not only that but they have been curb stomping us the last few times.

I am surprised that they have 6 4*s coming in ... Thought a lot of bruin fans were unhappy with chip's recruiting. One thing is clear though - he is a step up from Wilcox.
dimitrig
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

dimitrig said:

calumnus said:

gardenstatebear said:

calumnus said:

juarezbear said:

calumnus said:

BigDaddy said:



Wishful thinking by Kliavkoff if he thinks Oregon, Washington, Stanford or Arizona are going to sign a Grant of Rights.


Read his statement again. It is a tautology. He said they will sign when he gets a deal in front of them that they want to sign.
Exactly. The key words are THAT THEY WANT TO SIGN....basically means he needs to somehow negotiate a package that would deliver north of $50M/yr for several years, or I don't think Cal, Furd, UW, and UO will sign. Frankly, if he somehow pulls together a highly lucrative package, some of these teams might be better off staying with the Pac once one takes into account all of the travel expenses - especially for non-revenue sports.


A coast to coast superconference only really makes sense for football if at all. I think we will see non-revenue sports eventually parked in regional conferences.
I agree, but couldn't you also do it for men's basketball? After all, the teams are small enough to easily travel and the sport generates revenue. Aside from that, I think you're right that we'll see different conferences for non-revenue sports.


You definitely could and should for logistical reasons, but I think one of the reasons the B1G wants UCLA is for the basketball TV contract.


Certainly it was not for their crappy football team which hasn't seen a Rose Bowl since Hector was a pup.



They were 8-4 (6-3) last year. #28 in Sagarin. Invited to the Holiday Bowl. That would be a banner year for us. Tedford in his heyday. They have SIX 4-star players coming in including Justyn Martin who looks great and I was hoping would be our savior.

If they are crappy, what are we? Something far worse?

Yes, something far far worse.

Sucks about Martin, because I, too, thought he could turn this program around. We shall see.


Strykur
How long do you want to ignore this user?
dimitrig said:

calumnus said:

dimitrig said:

calumnus said:

gardenstatebear said:

calumnus said:

juarezbear said:

calumnus said:

BigDaddy said:



Wishful thinking by Kliavkoff if he thinks Oregon, Washington, Stanford or Arizona are going to sign a Grant of Rights.


Read his statement again. It is a tautology. He said they will sign when he gets a deal in front of them that they want to sign.
Exactly. The key words are THAT THEY WANT TO SIGN....basically means he needs to somehow negotiate a package that would deliver north of $50M/yr for several years, or I don't think Cal, Furd, UW, and UO will sign. Frankly, if he somehow pulls together a highly lucrative package, some of these teams might be better off staying with the Pac once one takes into account all of the travel expenses - especially for non-revenue sports.


A coast to coast superconference only really makes sense for football if at all. I think we will see non-revenue sports eventually parked in regional conferences.
I agree, but couldn't you also do it for men's basketball? After all, the teams are small enough to easily travel and the sport generates revenue. Aside from that, I think you're right that we'll see different conferences for non-revenue sports.


You definitely could and should for logistical reasons, but I think one of the reasons the B1G wants UCLA is for the basketball TV contract.


Certainly it was not for their crappy football team which hasn't seen a Rose Bowl since Hector was a pup.



They were 8-4 (6-3) last year. #28 in Sagarin. Invited to the Holiday Bowl. That would be a banner year for us. Tedford in his heyday. They have SIX 4-star players coming in including Justyn Martin who looks great and I was hoping would be our savior.

If they are crappy, what are we? Something far worse?

Yes, something far far worse.

Sucks about Martin, because I, too, thought he could turn this program around. We shall see.
The loss to the bear runts was bad, but there were plenty of games last year (Nevada, TCU, Washington, Wazzu, Oregon, Arizona) where we could have flipped the script and we're looking at a much different outlook. Hell we had a decent shot in every game last year with the exception of the stinker in Westwood.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Strykur said:

dimitrig said:

calumnus said:

dimitrig said:

calumnus said:

gardenstatebear said:

calumnus said:

juarezbear said:

calumnus said:

BigDaddy said:



Wishful thinking by Kliavkoff if he thinks Oregon, Washington, Stanford or Arizona are going to sign a Grant of Rights.


Read his statement again. It is a tautology. He said they will sign when he gets a deal in front of them that they want to sign.
Exactly. The key words are THAT THEY WANT TO SIGN....basically means he needs to somehow negotiate a package that would deliver north of $50M/yr for several years, or I don't think Cal, Furd, UW, and UO will sign. Frankly, if he somehow pulls together a highly lucrative package, some of these teams might be better off staying with the Pac once one takes into account all of the travel expenses - especially for non-revenue sports.


A coast to coast superconference only really makes sense for football if at all. I think we will see non-revenue sports eventually parked in regional conferences.
I agree, but couldn't you also do it for men's basketball? After all, the teams are small enough to easily travel and the sport generates revenue. Aside from that, I think you're right that we'll see different conferences for non-revenue sports.


You definitely could and should for logistical reasons, but I think one of the reasons the B1G wants UCLA is for the basketball TV contract.


Certainly it was not for their crappy football team which hasn't seen a Rose Bowl since Hector was a pup.



They were 8-4 (6-3) last year. #28 in Sagarin. Invited to the Holiday Bowl. That would be a banner year for us. Tedford in his heyday. They have SIX 4-star players coming in including Justyn Martin who looks great and I was hoping would be our savior.

If they are crappy, what are we? Something far worse?

Yes, something far far worse.

Sucks about Martin, because I, too, thought he could turn this program around. We shall see.
The loss to the bear runts was bad, but there were plenty of games last year (Nevada, TCU, Washington, Wazzu, Oregon, Arizona) where we could have flipped the script and we're looking at a much different outlook. Hell we had a decent shot in every game last year with the exception of the stinker in Westwood.


We had a senior laden team and the easiest schedule I can remember in a very down year for the PAC-12 powers, with no game against Utah. Last year was Wilcox's best chance for a breakthrough. This year is probably his last chance.
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.