Man, I hope we don't do something like this

2,877 Views | 33 Replies | Last: 3 mo ago by southseasbear
okaydo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
okaydo said:




If Stanford had gone to the ACC and not taken us with them, leaving us as part of the PAC-3, I'd hope we would have done that too.
bearsandgiants
How long do you want to ignore this user?
For ARCH rivals, I guess it's fine if that's what they want to do. If Furd had done to us, and the Pac12 what UW did to WSU and the Pac12 though, I don't know that I'd want a part of it. The fact that the Furd supported us through the ACC thing actually built even more respect. There's just no (pardon the pun) apples-to-apples comparison here, though. On a sort of similar, non-arch-rival thing, though, I sure as hell don't want this with U$C and FUCLA. Hell no .
BearSD
How long do you want to ignore this user?
The future Apple Cup games will be in September. So it's now a local non-conference game, like Colorado vs. Colorado State, instead of a big conference rivalry.

This shows why the likes of David Shaw are so off-base when they say the Pac will eventually re-form. It won't. Washington and Oregon are going to widen the gap even more between themselves and their in-state counterparts. That's exactly what they want. They've probably wanted it for a very long time. They're not going back.
golden sloth
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearSD said:

The future Apple Cup games will be in September. So it's now a local non-conference game, like Colorado vs. Colorado State, instead of a big conference rivalry.

This shows why the likes of David Shaw are so off-base when they say the Pac will eventually re-form. It won't. Washington and Oregon are going to widen the gap even more between themselves and their in-state counterparts. That's exactly what they want. They've probably wanted it for a very long time. They're not going back.


I think you are missing the point in David Shaw's argument. He is saying that the money in sports media is shrinking, which means the television deals will shrink as well, and that the big contracts will disappear by the 2030's. If there is no longer big money, why would there still be national conferences.
golden sloth
How long do you want to ignore this user?
As an aside, I'd still like to play UCLA every year, or schedule an annual game against sdsu in LA every year.

I think playing in LA helps recruiting too much.
southseasbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
golden sloth said:

As an aside, I'd still like to play UCLA every year, or schedule an annual game against sdsu in LA every year.

I think playing in LA helps recruiting too much.
We have not been successful against them. (Surprisingly, we have found more success against SC). Our record is 34-58-1.

Since 2011 we beat them 3 times.

I say we let them go.
philly1121
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearSD said:

The future Apple Cup games will be in September. So it's now a local non-conference game, like Colorado vs. Colorado State, instead of a big conference rivalry.

This shows why the likes of David Shaw are so off-base when they say the Pac will eventually re-form. It won't. Washington and Oregon are going to widen the gap even more between themselves and their in-state counterparts. That's exactly what they want. They've probably wanted it for a very long time. They're not going back.
Its a rivalry that goes back 123 years. And you're complaining that they're playing it in September rather than November? You better believe that Wazoo wants this to continue. Question is now whether Oregon-OSU will continue.

I do think the PAC will reform but of course nothing like we used to know it. Just as a general rule, its better to have the PAC name than MWC.
okaydo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
golden sloth said:

As an aside, I'd still like to play UCLA every year, or schedule an annual game against sdsu in LA every year.

I think playing in LA helps recruiting too much.

I'd be fine with the next time Cal and UCLA meet will be to mark the 100th anniversary of their first ever meeting. But that's it.
AndyHogan14
How long do you want to ignore this user?
golden sloth said:

As an aside, I'd still like to play UCLA every year, or schedule an annual game against sdsu in LA every year.

I think playing in LA helps recruiting too much.
Not me, the next time we play those traitorous southern branchers it will be too soon. I actually blame them for the collapse of the Pac-12 more than SCI firmly believe that if they had stayed, SC would have ended up coming back hat-in-hand just like they did last time they threatened to leave the conference.

With that said, I do recognize the importance of recruiting in LA so I think it would be a really good idea to have neutral site games at Sofi with some regularity.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
golden sloth said:

As an aside, I'd still like to play UCLA every year, or schedule an annual game against sdsu in LA every year.

I think playing in LA helps recruiting too much.


I want to play UCLA and SDSU and not just for recruiting (and parents of recruits). Partly for engaging SoCal alumni. Partly for asserting "California" as our brand. Recruiting California students period. Increasing awareness in the half of our state with the majority of the population. In the case of UCLA, there are just so many friends on each side. Great tailgates. It is a natural rivalry.
BearSD
How long do you want to ignore this user?
golden sloth said:

BearSD said:

The future Apple Cup games will be in September. So it's now a local non-conference game, like Colorado vs. Colorado State, instead of a big conference rivalry.

This shows why the likes of David Shaw are so off-base when they say the Pac will eventually re-form. It won't. Washington and Oregon are going to widen the gap even more between themselves and their in-state counterparts. That's exactly what they want. They've probably wanted it for a very long time. They're not going back.


I think you are missing the point in David Shaw's argument. He is saying that the money in sports media is shrinking, which means the television deals will shrink as well, and that the big contracts will disappear by the 2030's. If there is no longer big money, why would there still be national conferences.


Shaw is the one who misses the point. The teams going to the Big Ten are gaining a huge edge in athletic prestige and media attention over their in-state rivals. They are not going to give that up even if the TV revenue decreases in the future.
Chabbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"With that said, I do recognize the importance of recruiting in LA so I think it would be a really good idea to have neutral site games at Sofi with some regularity. "

Sofi stadium is half the distance from UCLA compared to the Rose Bowl. It would not be a neutral site. I don't think playing in LA can ever be a neutral site.
AndyHogan14
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Chabbear said:

"With that said, I do recognize the importance of recruiting in LA so I think it would be a really good idea to have neutral site games at Sofi with some regularity. "

Sofi stadium is half the distance from UCLA compared to the Rose Bowl. It would not be a neutral site. I don't think playing in LA can ever be a neutral site.

Not against UCLA, never against them. If would want to do a neutral site game at Sofi against a team that doesn't want (or is unable) to do a home-and-home: Notre Dame, SEC opponent, etc.
Cal88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
An SEC opponent would not view a game in SoCal vs Cal as a neutral venue.

We could play UCLA around 4 times per decade, and weave in SDSU at similar rates, for a game in SoCal roughly every other year.

I think SJSU is going to be a very popular opponent for the 4 B1G defectors, they will want a NorCal presence, especially Oregon and UW.
JimSox
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Yes to UCLA. No to SC. If I never hear that band again that will be too soon.
golden sloth
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AndyHogan14 said:

Chabbear said:

"With that said, I do recognize the importance of recruiting in LA so I think it would be a really good idea to have neutral site games at Sofi with some regularity. "

Sofi stadium is half the distance from UCLA compared to the Rose Bowl. It would not be a neutral site. I don't think playing in LA can ever be a neutral site.

Not against UCLA, never against them. If would want to do a neutral site game at Sofi against a team that doesn't want (or is unable) to do a home-and-home: Notre Dame, SEC opponent, etc.


I would think the 4-corner schools would also want the same kind of exposure in LA and would be great candidates for some OOC neutral site games in LA. I'd think the Arizonas in particular since they rely on the southern California for both students and atheletes.

When we drop to 8 conference games I was hoping to adapt an A - B - B - C schedule, but I can get talked into an A - A - B - C if one of the A's is an old Pac-12 school in LA.
fight4california
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Apparently there are people here willing to cut off their nose to spite their face.

Continuing to play the LA schools is just as important as it was when all 4 schools insisted on it after the North/South split. Important to the athletes, the recruits, the students, the alumni, the fans. If they are amongst the premier football programs on the West Coast, it's better that we're playing them regularly.

If we somehow think we're punishing them by not playing them... we are woefully delusional about the impact of this "punishment".
okaydo
How long do you want to ignore this user?
fight4california said:

Apparently there are people here willing to cut off their nose to spite their face.

Continuing to play the LA schools is just as important as it was when all 4 schools insisted on it after the North/South split. Important to the athletes, the recruits, the students, the alumni, the fans. If they are amongst the premier football programs on the West Coast, it's better that we're playing them regularly.

If we somehow think we're punishing them by not playing them... we are woefully delusional about the impact of this "punishment".

Los Angeles will have 2 Big 10 schools and one Big 12 school. I'd prefer having a rivalry with the Big 12 school.
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
golden sloth said:

AndyHogan14 said:

Chabbear said:

"With that said, I do recognize the importance of recruiting in LA so I think it would be a really good idea to have neutral site games at Sofi with some regularity. "

Sofi stadium is half the distance from UCLA compared to the Rose Bowl. It would not be a neutral site. I don't think playing in LA can ever be a neutral site.

Not against UCLA, never against them. If would want to do a neutral site game at Sofi against a team that doesn't want (or is unable) to do a home-and-home: Notre Dame, SEC opponent, etc.


I would think the 4-corner schools would also want the same kind of exposure in LA and would be great candidates for some OOC neutral site games in LA. I'd think the Arizonas in particular since they rely on the southern California for both students and atheletes.

When we drop to 8 conference games I was hoping to adapt an A - B - B - C schedule, but I can get talked into an A - A - B - C if one of the A's is an old Pac-12 school in LA.


Wrapping up SDSU in a long term series would be strategic as much to give us access and block others.

If we don't play UCLA, I'd like us to have a long term series with Hawaii where we play there every other year the Saturday after Thanksgiving (the California Hawaii Game sponsored by C&H) . In those years we can play a 13th game in week zero. That would be a great neutral site game in LA, either at Sofi or Anaheim in an agreement with Disney/ESPN (College Game Day on Main Street?). Saturday night game, fireworks. If it is before school starts a lot of Cal students could attend. Free tickets to SoCal high school football ball teams and seniors with UC eligibility.
golden sloth
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

golden sloth said:

AndyHogan14 said:

Chabbear said:

"With that said, I do recognize the importance of recruiting in LA so I think it would be a really good idea to have neutral site games at Sofi with some regularity. "

Sofi stadium is half the distance from UCLA compared to the Rose Bowl. It would not be a neutral site. I don't think playing in LA can ever be a neutral site.

Not against UCLA, never against them. If would want to do a neutral site game at Sofi against a team that doesn't want (or is unable) to do a home-and-home: Notre Dame, SEC opponent, etc.


I would think the 4-corner schools would also want the same kind of exposure in LA and would be great candidates for some OOC neutral site games in LA. I'd think the Arizonas in particular since they rely on the southern California for both students and atheletes.

When we drop to 8 conference games I was hoping to adapt an A - B - B - C schedule, but I can get talked into an A - A - B - C if one of the A's is an old Pac-12 school in LA.


Wrapping up SDSU in a long term series would be strategic as much to give us access and block others.

If we don't play UCLA, I'd like us to have a long term series with Hawaii where we play there every other year the Saturday after Thanksgiving (the California Hawaii Game sponsored by C&H) . In those years we can play a 13th game in week zero. That would be a great neutral site game in LA, either at Sofi or Anaheim in an agreement with Disney/ESPN (College Game Day on Main Street?). Saturday night game, fireworks. If it is before school starts a lot of Cal students could attend. Free tickets to SoCal high school football ball teams and seniors with UC eligibility.


I love the idea of playing hawaii every year and playing @hawaii the week of thanksgiving. It's a winnable game, with solid recruiting connections, in a game that you can sell to recruits, in nice weather and Cal gains the week zero game. There is also potential for some tv exposure as Cal could be the first college football game every year (due to week zero) and the last regular season game @hawaii (other than army navy, which is it's own thing). Its also a nice offset for Stanford's scheduling with Notre Dame.
Oski87
How long do you want to ignore this user?
golden sloth said:

calumnus said:

golden sloth said:

AndyHogan14 said:

Chabbear said:

"With that said, I do recognize the importance of recruiting in LA so I think it would be a really good idea to have neutral site games at Sofi with some regularity. "

Sofi stadium is half the distance from UCLA compared to the Rose Bowl. It would not be a neutral site. I don't think playing in LA can ever be a neutral site.

Not against UCLA, never against them. If would want to do a neutral site game at Sofi against a team that doesn't want (or is unable) to do a home-and-home: Notre Dame, SEC opponent, etc.


I would think the 4-corner schools would also want the same kind of exposure in LA and would be great candidates for some OOC neutral site games in LA. I'd think the Arizonas in particular since they rely on the southern California for both students and atheletes.

When we drop to 8 conference games I was hoping to adapt an A - B - B - C schedule, but I can get talked into an A - A - B - C if one of the A's is an old Pac-12 school in LA.


Wrapping up SDSU in a long term series would be strategic as much to give us access and block others.

If we don't play UCLA, I'd like us to have a long term series with Hawaii where we play there every other year the Saturday after Thanksgiving (the California Hawaii Game sponsored by C&H) . In those years we can play a 13th game in week zero. That would be a great neutral site game in LA, either at Sofi or Anaheim in an agreement with Disney/ESPN (College Game Day on Main Street?). Saturday night game, fireworks. If it is before school starts a lot of Cal students could attend. Free tickets to SoCal high school football ball teams and seniors with UC eligibility.


I love the idea of playing hawaii every year and playing @hawaii the week of thanksgiving. It's a winnable game, with solid recruiting connections, in a game that you can sell to recruits, in nice weather and Cal gains the week zero game. There is also potential for some tv exposure as Cal could be the first college football game every year (due to week zero) and the last regular season game @hawaii (other than army navy, which is it's own thing). Its also a nice offset for Stanford's scheduling with Notre Dame.
This is the way.
LunchTime
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I think we should maintain all Pac8 rivalries for the next 5 years.
southseasbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cal88 said:

An SEC opponent would not view a game in SoCal vs Cal as a neutral venue.

We could play UCLA around 4 times per decade, and weave in SDSU at similar rates, for a game in SoCal roughly every other year.

I think SJSU is going to be a very popular opponent for the 4 B1G defectors, they will want a NorCal presence, especially Oregon and UW.
Good point, but would the defectors be willing to schedule home-and-home or just invite SJSU to travel to them? If the latter (which I think is more likely) how does that give them a NorCal presence?
southseasbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

golden sloth said:

AndyHogan14 said:

Chabbear said:

"With that said, I do recognize the importance of recruiting in LA so I think it would be a really good idea to have neutral site games at Sofi with some regularity. "

Sofi stadium is half the distance from UCLA compared to the Rose Bowl. It would not be a neutral site. I don't think playing in LA can ever be a neutral site.

Not against UCLA, never against them. If would want to do a neutral site game at Sofi against a team that doesn't want (or is unable) to do a home-and-home: Notre Dame, SEC opponent, etc.


I would think the 4-corner schools would also want the same kind of exposure in LA and would be great candidates for some OOC neutral site games in LA. I'd think the Arizonas in particular since they rely on the southern California for both students and atheletes.

When we drop to 8 conference games I was hoping to adapt an A - B - B - C schedule, but I can get talked into an A - A - B - C if one of the A's is an old Pac-12 school in LA.


Wrapping up SDSU in a long term series would be strategic as much to give us access and block others.

If we don't play UCLA, I'd like us to have a long term series with Hawaii where we play there every other year the Saturday after Thanksgiving (the California Hawaii Game sponsored by C&H) . In those years we can play a 13th game in week zero. That would be a great neutral site game in LA, either at Sofi or Anaheim in an agreement with Disney/ESPN (College Game Day on Main Street?). Saturday night game, fireworks. If it is before school starts a lot of Cal students could attend. Free tickets to SoCal high school football ball teams and seniors with UC eligibility.
An ongoing home and home series with Hawaii is a brilliant idea with one fatal defect: it requires a minimally competent AD to make it happen.
Cal88
How long do you want to ignore this user?
southseasbear said:

Cal88 said:

An SEC opponent would not view a game in SoCal vs Cal as a neutral venue.

We could play UCLA around 4 times per decade, and weave in SDSU at similar rates, for a game in SoCal roughly every other year.

I think SJSU is going to be a very popular opponent for the 4 B1G defectors, they will want a NorCal presence, especially Oregon and UW.
Good point, but would the defectors be willing to schedule home-and-home or just invite SJSU to travel to them? If the latter (which I think is more likely) how does that give them a NorCal presence?

While these schools were in the P12 playing Cal/Furd every year, they had no use for playing at SJSU and scheduling home-and-homes with them. Not the case today. They -especially Oregon and UW- need to have a presence in NorCal for their recruiting.
JB was a Chieftain
How long do you want to ignore this user?
golden sloth said:

calumnus said:

golden sloth said:

AndyHogan14 said:

Chabbear said:

"With that said, I do recognize the importance of recruiting in LA so I think it would be a really good idea to have neutral site games at Sofi with some regularity. "

Sofi stadium is half the distance from UCLA compared to the Rose Bowl. It would not be a neutral site. I don't think playing in LA can ever be a neutral site.

Not against UCLA, never against them. If would want to do a neutral site game at Sofi against a team that doesn't want (or is unable) to do a home-and-home: Notre Dame, SEC opponent, etc.


I would think the 4-corner schools would also want the same kind of exposure in LA and would be great candidates for some OOC neutral site games in LA. I'd think the Arizonas in particular since they rely on the southern California for both students and atheletes.

When we drop to 8 conference games I was hoping to adapt an A - B - B - C schedule, but I can get talked into an A - A - B - C if one of the A's is an old Pac-12 school in LA.


Wrapping up SDSU in a long term series would be strategic as much to give us access and block others.

If we don't play UCLA, I'd like us to have a long term series with Hawaii where we play there every other year the Saturday after Thanksgiving (the California Hawaii Game sponsored by C&H) . In those years we can play a 13th game in week zero. That would be a great neutral site game in LA, either at Sofi or Anaheim in an agreement with Disney/ESPN (College Game Day on Main Street?). Saturday night game, fireworks. If it is before school starts a lot of Cal students could attend. Free tickets to SoCal high school football ball teams and seniors with UC eligibility.


I love the idea of playing hawaii every year and playing @hawaii the week of thanksgiving. It's a winnable game, with solid recruiting connections, in a game that you can sell to recruits, in nice weather and Cal gains the week zero game. There is also potential for some tv exposure as Cal could be the first college football game every year (due to week zero) and the last regular season game @hawaii (other than army navy, which is it's own thing). Its also a nice offset for Stanford's scheduling with Notre Dame.


Great idea! I would add on the years we don't travel to Hawaii, we travel to Texas (I know we have SMU every year). C level games against Rice, North Texas, UTSA are winnable games with recruiting advantages. Call it the Texas 2-step. Play SMU on a Thursday night then stay the week and play UTSA the next Saturday. Cuts down on travel and allows a week of recruiting in Texas.
southseasbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
JB was a Chieftain said:

golden sloth said:

calumnus said:

golden sloth said:

AndyHogan14 said:

Chabbear said:

"With that said, I do recognize the importance of recruiting in LA so I think it would be a really good idea to have neutral site games at Sofi with some regularity. "

Sofi stadium is half the distance from UCLA compared to the Rose Bowl. It would not be a neutral site. I don't think playing in LA can ever be a neutral site.

Not against UCLA, never against them. If would want to do a neutral site game at Sofi against a team that doesn't want (or is unable) to do a home-and-home: Notre Dame, SEC opponent, etc.


I would think the 4-corner schools would also want the same kind of exposure in LA and would be great candidates for some OOC neutral site games in LA. I'd think the Arizonas in particular since they rely on the southern California for both students and atheletes.

When we drop to 8 conference games I was hoping to adapt an A - B - B - C schedule, but I can get talked into an A - A - B - C if one of the A's is an old Pac-12 school in LA.


Wrapping up SDSU in a long term series would be strategic as much to give us access and block others.

If we don't play UCLA, I'd like us to have a long term series with Hawaii where we play there every other year the Saturday after Thanksgiving (the California Hawaii Game sponsored by C&H) . In those years we can play a 13th game in week zero. That would be a great neutral site game in LA, either at Sofi or Anaheim in an agreement with Disney/ESPN (College Game Day on Main Street?). Saturday night game, fireworks. If it is before school starts a lot of Cal students could attend. Free tickets to SoCal high school football ball teams and seniors with UC eligibility.


I love the idea of playing hawaii every year and playing @hawaii the week of thanksgiving. It's a winnable game, with solid recruiting connections, in a game that you can sell to recruits, in nice weather and Cal gains the week zero game. There is also potential for some tv exposure as Cal could be the first college football game every year (due to week zero) and the last regular season game @hawaii (other than army navy, which is it's own thing). Its also a nice offset for Stanford's scheduling with Notre Dame.


Great idea! I would add on the years we don't travel to Hawaii, we travel to Texas (I know we have SMU every year). C level games against Rice, North Texas, UTSA are winnable games with recruiting advantages. Call it the Texas 2-step. Play SMU on a Thursday night then stay the week and play UTSA the next Saturday. Cuts down on travel and allows a week of recruiting in Texas.
Interesting idea, but I thought I heard that we will play SMU on Thanksgiving weekend, so I don't think this could work.
SBGold
How long do you want to ignore this user?
We talk about needing games in So Cal for recruiting purposes. We do usually fall flat on our faces in those games.

Just wondering from insiders like MB, BG or SB, has a recruit ever stated that he got interested in Cal because he saw Cal play SC or UCLA down there? I've read multiple commit stories and have never heard this quote.

Same with schools in other areas getting commits from Fla. I've never heard any LSU or Ole Miss commit from Fla. note, yeah it was great to get exposed to them while they played a game in my home state.
bencgilmore
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Agree it'd be a good idea to have a regular SDSU series, and perhaps a pile of 2 - for - 1 games with SJSU along with some Davis / Sac State types. SDSU could be dangerous though... they were down this year but they probably would have beaten us in most years the last decade. To some extent we should probably copy the SEC model and play 3 nobodies per year, plus 1 team with a pulse OOC. I'm okay with SDSU being that team with a pulse, but we need some easy wins and bowl games.

My feelings on UCLA have vacillated some. On one hand I don't blame them for going to the B1G, but on the other they could have saved the conference by staying... granted, if your far-and-away #1 rival is leaving, its awful hard to stay for less money. I can't help but think if they had found a spine they could have found a way to drag us and Stanford along.

I think after some time it'd be cool to start scheduling them again. But not while we're making pennies because of a decision they made.

I do agree, there is no student body or alumni base as similar to Cal's as UCLA. Almost everyone I know applied to both (including me). And lots of Cal students grew up rooting for UCLA in socal before going north (also me). Its the same group of people. As opposed to USC and Stanford, which have some overlap but are their own distinct groups overall.

That said, this game at UCLA is pretty unlikely to go great. Our record in LA is just abysmal, even when we go in with what appears to be a superior team on paper. I don't see us scoring much on that D.
bipolarbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
southseasbear said:

golden sloth said:

As an aside, I'd still like to play UCLA every year, or schedule an annual game against sdsu in LA every year.

I think playing in LA helps recruiting too much.
We have not been successful against them. (Surprisingly, we have found more success against SC). Our record is 34-58-1.

Since 2011 we beat them 3 times.

I say we let them go.
Yeah, and where's our Calimony?
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
bencgilmore said:

Agree it'd be a good idea to have a regular SDSU series, and perhaps a pile of 2 - for - 1 games with SJSU along with some Davis / Sac State types. SDSU could be dangerous though... they were down this year but they probably would have beaten us in most years the last decade. To some extent we should probably copy the SEC model and play 3 nobodies per year, plus 1 team with a pulse OOC. I'm okay with SDSU being that team with a pulse, but we need some easy wins and bowl games.

My feelings on UCLA have vacillated some. On one hand I don't blame them for going to the B1G, but on the other they could have saved the conference by staying... granted, if your far-and-away #1 rival is leaving, its awful hard to stay for less money. I can't help but think if they had found a spine they could have found a way to drag us and Stanford along.

I think after some time it'd be cool to start scheduling them again. But not while we're making pennies because of a decision they made.

I do agree, there is no student body or alumni base as similar to Cal's as UCLA. Almost everyone I know applied to both (including me). And lots of Cal students grew up rooting for UCLA in socal before going north (also me). Its the same group of people. As opposed to USC and Stanford, which have some overlap but are their own distinct groups overall.

That said, this game at UCLA is pretty unlikely to go great. Our record in LA is just abysmal, even when we go in with what appears to be a superior team on paper. I don't see us scoring much on that D.


The problem is we did not use our political capital to try to get UCLA to take us with them, we used our political capital to try to block UCLA from going, badmouthed the whole idea as being harmful to student athletes, especially women, and if UCLA goes they have to pay us Calimony because we intended to stay. In the process we alienated the very people we needed to say "yes" when we later asked for a B1G invite. The entire thing was badly managed by Christ and Knowlton and we were lucky to be saved by Stanford, Nortre Dame, SMU and the ACC.
CALiforniALUM
How long do you want to ignore this user?
We should stop worrying about which rivalries to maintain and instead worry about what we have to do to stay relevant past the next conference consolidation. At this point we have less than a 50/50 chance of making it into the cool kids group in a few short years. We better improve drastically or the only rivalry we will be contemplating is with UC Davis.
southseasbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:

bencgilmore said:

Agree it'd be a good idea to have a regular SDSU series, and perhaps a pile of 2 - for - 1 games with SJSU along with some Davis / Sac State types. SDSU could be dangerous though... they were down this year but they probably would have beaten us in most years the last decade. To some extent we should probably copy the SEC model and play 3 nobodies per year, plus 1 team with a pulse OOC. I'm okay with SDSU being that team with a pulse, but we need some easy wins and bowl games.

My feelings on UCLA have vacillated some. On one hand I don't blame them for going to the B1G, but on the other they could have saved the conference by staying... granted, if your far-and-away #1 rival is leaving, its awful hard to stay for less money. I can't help but think if they had found a spine they could have found a way to drag us and Stanford along.

I think after some time it'd be cool to start scheduling them again. But not while we're making pennies because of a decision they made.

I do agree, there is no student body or alumni base as similar to Cal's as UCLA. Almost everyone I know applied to both (including me). And lots of Cal students grew up rooting for UCLA in socal before going north (also me). Its the same group of people. As opposed to USC and Stanford, which have some overlap but are their own distinct groups overall.

That said, this game at UCLA is pretty unlikely to go great. Our record in LA is just abysmal, even when we go in with what appears to be a superior team on paper. I don't see us scoring much on that D.


The problem is we did not use our political capital to try to get UCLA to take us with them, we used our political capital to try to block UCLA from going, badmouthed the whole idea as being harmful to student athletes, especially women, and if UCLA goes they have to pay us Calimony because we intended to stay. In the process we alienated the very people we needed to say "yes" when we later asked for a B1G invite. The entire thing was badly managed by Christ and Knowlton and we were lucky to be saved by Stanford, Nortre Dame, SMU and the ACC.
This is what happens when you have a chancellor who is out of touch, who has not joined the 20th century let alone the 21st and who thinks the worst athletic director in the county is a valued partner.
Refresh
Page 1 of 1
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.