Cal has a chance to play spoiler next week against SMU.

I agree. Having already made the ACC Championship Game, I smell a pony letdown. Maybe the Tryptophan in their turkey leftovers will help.

Somehow I booked a business trip to Texas on the first.

I have an inlaws trip from today to the 1st.

My wife says I can't fly to Dallas a day early.

If they beat SMU, Imma need a fatty Xmas gift from my MIL.

SMU clinches the playoff if they beat Miami obviously but with the batch of losses this past weekend there is an emerging opening for 2 ACC teams to get in so even with a loss to Miami they may go in at 11-2 and thus may be more locked in this Saturday than would be expected

An overconfident SMU team who might want to rest players and will be at home is still light years better than the FSU team that we lost to.

Econ141 said:

---

An overconfident SMU team who might want to rest players and will be at home is still light years better than the FSU team that we lost to.

---

Also on Senior Night whoever plays will want to ball out regardless

Nofado said:

---

Cal has a chance to play spoiler next week against SMU.

---

Spy on Jennings with the nickel back like we did against Daniels.

Strykur said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

An overconfident SMU team who might want to rest players and will be at home is still light years better than the FSU team that we lost to.

---

Also on Senior Night whoever plays will want to ball out regardless

---

Didn't SMU get most of their talent from the portal? I'm not sure how much Senior Night means to them.

I would be surprised but not shocked if we pulled the upset. Wilcox always manages to do whatever it takes to leave certain people thinking that, the next season. everything might finally come together.

Big C said:

---

Strykur said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

An overconfident SMU team who might want to rest players and will be at home is still light years better than the FSU team that we lost to.

---

Also on Senior Night whoever plays will want to ball out regardless

---

Didn't SMU get most of their talent from the portal? I'm not sure how much Senior Night means to them.

I would be surprised but not shocked if we pulled the upset. Wilcox always manages to do whatever it takes to leave certain people thinking that, the next season. everything might finally come together.

---

I was telling my Oregon buddy during the game that Wilcox cannot continue his tenure here no matter the result and he agreed, and then after the game I said Wilcox will probably do something stupid like beat SMU next week, and he literally said "oh no"

Not happening. We made a bad Stanfurd team, who SMU dominated 40-10, look competitive yesterday.

When was the last time we won a game where we were the underdogs. And I mean actual underdogs, not Auburn which was overrated coming into the season

Big C said:

---

The next season. everything might finally come together.

---

Oh, God. How many years have we heard that. As long as Wilcox is our head coach, things will never come together.

DoubtfulBear said:

---

When was the last time we won a game where we were the underdogs. And I mean actual underdogs, not Auburn which was overrated coming into the season

---

It was when we beat favored Auburn at Auburn, who just beat #20 Texas A&M

remb8888 said:

---

Not happening. We made a bad Stanfurd team, who SMU dominated 40-10, look competitive yesterday.

---

Not disagreeing with you, but it was also the Big Game. The Big Game traditionally brings out lots of emotions, if not the best in both teams.

ESPN (Mark Schlabach)
Cal Bowl
LA Bowl Cal vs. Colorado State

oski003 said:

---

DoubtfulBear said:

---

When was the last time we won a game where we were the underdogs. And I mean actual underdogs, not Auburn which was overrated coming into the season

---

It was when we beat favored Auburn at Auburn, who just beat #20 Texas A&M

---

Let me get this straight, when 1-5 Stanford beat #19 Louisville you think it's a fluke and that our quantity of wins are more impressive. But when 1-5 Auburn beats #20 TAMU it's a sign that we have a quality win and therefore a good chance to upset a top 10 team for the first time in Wilcox's pathetic career?

Big C said:

---

Strykur said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

An overconfident SMU team who might want to rest players and will be at home is still light years better than the FSU team that we lost to.

---

Also on Senior Night whoever plays will want to ball out regardless

---

Didn't SMU get most of their talent from the portal? I'm not sure how much Senior Night means to them.

I would be surprised but not shocked if we pulled the upset. Wilcox always manages to do whatever it takes to leave certain people thinking that, the next season. everything might finally come together.

---

It is still a big night for them as it is part of signaling the end of their playing career for many - and I think we've seen with Cal even one year with the team can produce lifetime highlights for players.

DoubtfulBear said:

---

oski003 said:

---

DoubtfulBear said:

---

When was the last time we won a game where we were the underdogs. And I mean actual underdogs, not Auburn which was overrated coming into the season

---

It was when we beat favored Auburn at Auburn, who just beat #20 Texas A&M

---

Let me get this straight, when 1-5 Stanford beat #19 Louisville you think it's a fluke and that our quantity of wins are more impressive. But when 1-5 Auburn beats #20 TAMU it's a sign that we have a quality win and therefore a good chance to upset a top 10 team for the first time in Wilcox's pathetic career?

---

Please do not give the
ball to smu if we win the toss our offence is actually bettervthan the defence. Lets get an early lead, kick an onside kick and go up 14-0 before they get the ball. no more Wilcoxian logic

DoubtfulBear said:

---

oski003 said:

---

DoubtfulBear said:

---

When was the last time we won a game where we were the underdogs. And I mean actual underdogs, not Auburn which was overrated coming into the season

---

It was when we beat favored Auburn at Auburn, who just beat #20 Texas A&M

---

Let me get this straight, when 1-5 Stanford beat #19 Louisville you think it's a fluke and that our quantity of wins are more impressive. But when 1-5 Auburn beats #20 TAMU it's a sign that we have a quality win and therefore a good chance to upset a top 10 team for the first time in Wilcox's pathetic career?

---

Auburn is a decent team. We beat them at Auburn. It was a good win, no matter how much the haters want to hate.
Stanfurd sucks. Thanks.

oski003 said:

---

DoubtfulBear said:

---

oski003 said:

---

DoubtfulBear said:

---

When was the last time we won a game where we were the underdogs. And I mean actual underdogs, not Auburn which was overrated coming into the season

---

It was when we beat favored Auburn at Auburn, who just beat #20 Texas A&M

---

Let me get this straight, when 1-5 Stanford beat #19 Louisville you think it's a fluke and that our quantity of wins are more impressive. But when 1-5 Auburn beats #20 TAMU it's a sign that we have a quality win and therefore a good chance to upset a top 10 team for the first time in Wilcox's pathetic career?

---

Auburn is a decent team. We beat them at Auburn. It was a good win, no matter how much the haters want to hate.
Stanfurd sucks. Thanks.

---

Of course you would think Auburn is a decent team, they are ranked third to last in the SEC just like we are third to last in the ACC. Auburn is going to get crushed by Bama next week and miss out on bowling. The fact that you can even call them a decent team means you are either blind or a troll

DoubtfulBear said:

---

oski003 said:

---

DoubtfulBear said:

---

oski003 said:

---

DoubtfulBear said:

---

When was the last time we won a game where we were the underdogs. And I mean actual underdogs, not Auburn which was overrated coming into the season

---

It was when we beat favored Auburn at Auburn, who just beat #20 Texas A&M

---

Let me get this straight, when 1-5 Stanford beat #19 Louisville you think it's a fluke and that our quantity of wins are more impressive. But when 1-5 Auburn beats #20 TAMU it's a sign that we have a quality win and therefore a good chance to upset a top 10 team for the first time in Wilcox's pathetic career?

---

Auburn is a decent team. We beat them at Auburn. It was a good win, no matter how much the haters want to hate.
Stanfurd sucks. Thanks.

---

Of course you would think Auburn is a decent team, they are ranked third to last in the SEC just like we are third to last in the ACC. Auburn is going to get crushed by Bama next week and miss out on bowling. The fact that you can even call them a decent team means you are either blind or a troll

---

I officially rate Auburn as "mediocre-to-halfway decent". To beat them on the road was pretty good. Our problem was losing those five damned games that we could have won. I can count: the losses were five times worse than the Auburn win.

Good Big Game win, but we really screwed the pooch this season. I was sooooo unbelievable high when we were up 35-10 over Miami in the third quarter. Singing "Ott to Go" until my daughter told me to stop. Then it all came tumbling down.

Big C said:

---

DoubtfulBear said:

---

oski003 said:

---

DoubtfulBear said:

---

oski003 said:

---

DoubtfulBear said:

---

When was the last time we won a game where we were the underdogs. And I mean actual underdogs, not Auburn which was overrated coming into the season

---

It was when we beat favored Auburn at Auburn, who just beat #20 Texas A&M

---

Let me get this straight, when 1-5 Stanford beat #19 Louisville you think it's a fluke and that our quantity of wins are more impressive. But when 1-5 Auburn beats #20 TAMU it's a sign that we have a quality win and therefore a good chance to upset a top 10 team for the first time in Wilcox's pathetic career?

---

Auburn is a decent team. We beat them at Auburn. It was a good win, no matter how much the haters want to hate.
Stanfurd sucks. Thanks.

---

Of course you would think Auburn is a decent team, they are ranked third to last in the SEC just like we are third to last in the ACC. Auburn is going to get crushed by Bama next week and miss out on bowling. The fact that you can even call them a decent team means you are either blind or a troll

---

I officially rate Auburn as "mediocre-to-halfway decent". To beat them on the road was pretty good. Our problem was losing those five damned games that we could have won. I can count: the losses were five times worse than the Auburn win.

Good Big Game win, but we really screwed the pooch this season. I was sooooo unbelievable high when we were up 35-10 over Miami in the third quarter. Then it all came tumbling down.

---

I think yesterday's Big Game was the kind of game Wilcox wants to play every game. He doesn't know how to maintain a lead so he prefers to play for a comeback. That he got lucky yesterday will only push him to continue down this nonsensical path, I fear.

SMU's big wins are over Duke Louisville and Pitt

So, in the land of mediocrity anyone can get lucky

DoubtfulBear said:

---

oski003 said:

---

DoubtfulBear said:

---

oski003 said:

---

DoubtfulBear said:

---

When was the last time we won a game where we were the underdogs. And I mean actual underdogs, not Auburn which was overrated coming into the season

---

It was when we beat favored Auburn at Auburn, who just beat #20 Texas A&M

---

Let me get this straight, when 1-5 Stanford beat #19 Louisville you think it's a fluke and that our quantity of wins are more impressive. But when 1-5 Auburn beats #20 TAMU it's a sign that we have a quality win and therefore a good chance to upset a top 10 team for the first time in Wilcox's pathetic career?

---

Auburn is a decent team. We beat them at Auburn. It was a good win, no matter how much the haters want to hate.
Stanfurd sucks. Thanks.

---

Of course you would think Auburn is a decent team, they are ranked third to last in the SEC just like we are third to last in the ACC. Auburn is going to get crushed by Bama next week and miss out on bowling. The fact that you can even call them a decent team means you are either blind or a troll

---

FPI has auburn at #29. Their SP+ is about the same.

So just based on paper, yes they are a good team. Whether that means anything to you is up to each individual I suppose.

But I don't think saying they are a decent team makes anyone a troll.

Sagarin has SMU at #11, and us at #55, 10th in the ACC in a tight middle pack
http://sagarin.com/sports/cfsend.htm

Who knows, if we play loose but motivated and we get a few bounces our way...

We may have to overcome a couple of bad calls as the ACC crew might favor the team with the solid playoff prospects.

DoubtfulBear said:

---

oski003 said:

---

DoubtfulBear said:

---

oski003 said:

---

DoubtfulBear said:

---

When was the last time we won a game where we were the underdogs. And I mean actual underdogs, not Auburn which was overrated coming into the season

---

It was when we beat favored Auburn at Auburn, who just beat #20 Texas A&M

---

Let me get this straight, when 1-5 Stanford beat #19 Louisville you think it's a fluke and that our quantity of wins are more impressive. But when 1-5 Auburn beats #20 TAMU it's a sign that we have a quality win and therefore a good chance to upset a top 10 team for the first time in Wilcox's pathetic career?

---

Auburn is a decent team. We beat them at Auburn. It was a good win, no matter how much the haters want to hate.
Stanfurd sucks. Thanks.

---

Of course you would think Auburn is a decent team, they are ranked third to last in the SEC just like we are third to last in the ACC. Auburn is going to get crushed by Bama next week and miss out on bowling. The fact that you can even call them a decent team means you are either blind or a troll

---

You're very generously applying the transitive argument when it suits your narrative and ignoring results when they don't

Alabama just got killed by Oklahoma. Oklahoma, which going in was similarly talented to auburn but has been very mediocre and disappointing generally. Oh, and OU and Auburn went to the wire.

Auburn has a very talented roster.. Outside of their turnover machine qb. Our win was still impressive... Any win over a team with that much talent on the road in front of 85k is. Especially how we controlled it late.

And this weekend was absolutely loaded with examples of upsets and faceplant which suggest we have a punchers chance

SMU is a favorite for a reason but to think we can't possibly be competitive is to ignore the rest of our season... We basically play up or down to whoever we play. If we were a quarter away from annihilating Miami, we can hang with smu

Well, except Syracuse, they rolled us more than the final indicated. I don't think smus qb is as good as mccord though

Cal88 said:

---

We may have to overcome a couple of bad calls as the ACC crew might favor the team with the solid playoff prospects.

---

I haven't been following the whole playoff thing at all, so is SMU even in the running for an at-large berth, or is their only path winning the ACC title game?

If the latter, then they don't really have a ton to play for, besides maybe rankings and bowl pecking order (if they lose in title game)

Not sure if that helps us or hurts us, them not quite having as much pressure on them

DoubtfulBear said:

---

When was the last time we won a game where we were the underdogs. And I mean actual underdogs, not Auburn which was overrated coming into the season

---

Pretty sure lat year Cal was about a 9-10 point underdog to UCLA and then they walked them on the field

SMU is going to blow us out! SMU has a really good coach. He went 7-6 his first year at SMU. Then 11-3 (8-0 in conference) last year, now in year 1 in the ACC he's 10-1 (7-0 in the ACC)

This is a team that last year was in the American conference, yet has won every ACC game they've played.

Meanwhile, in year 8 in Berkeley our "nice guy" coach still hasn't produced one winning conference record and is incapable of beating good teams.

We will get blown out and sent to a sad and pathetic nothing bowl that nobody watches. This is cal under Wilcox, the definition of mid.

Haters gonna hate

BearoutEast67 said:

---

Haters gonna hate

---

Hatters gonna hat?

Any given Saturday/Sunday….

Fool me once, shame on you. Fool me twice, shame on me.
Fool me 8 years...hi, my name is AD Knowlton and I love my compensation per unit of work ratio.

01Bear said:

---

Big C said:

---

DoubtfulBear said:

---

oski003 said:

---

DoubtfulBear said:

---

oski003 said:

---

DoubtfulBear said:

---

When was the last time we won a game where we were the underdogs. And I mean actual underdogs, not Auburn which was overrated coming into the season

---

It was when we beat favored Auburn at Auburn, who just beat #20 Texas A&M

---

Let me get this straight, when 1-5 Stanford beat #19 Louisville you think it's a fluke and that our quantity of wins are more impressive. But when 1-5 Auburn beats #20 TAMU it's a sign that we have a quality win and therefore a good chance to upset a top 10 team for the first time in Wilcox's pathetic career?

---

Auburn is a decent team. We beat them at Auburn. It was a good win, no matter how much the haters want to hate.
Stanfurd sucks. Thanks.

---

Of course you would think Auburn is a decent team, they are ranked third to last in the SEC just like we are third to last in the ACC. Auburn is going to get crushed by Bama next week and miss out on bowling. The fact that you can even call them a decent team means you are either blind or a troll

---

I officially rate Auburn as "mediocre-to-halfway decent". To beat them on the road was pretty good. Our problem was losing those five damned games that we could have won. I can count: the losses were five times worse than the Auburn win.

Good Big Game win, but we really screwed the pooch this season. I was sooooo unbelievable high when we were up 35-10 over Miami in the third quarter. Then it all came tumbling down.

---

I think yesterday's Big Game was the kind of game Wilcox wants to play every game. He doesn't know how to maintain a lead so he prefers to play for a comeback. That he got lucky yesterday will only push him to continue down this nonsensical path, I fear.

---

Okay, I know I'm probably missing a bit of tongue and cheek rhetoric here, but you don't really believe that do you?

RedlessWardrobe said:

---

01Bear said:

---

Big C said:

---

DoubtfulBear said:

---

oski003 said:

---

DoubtfulBear said:

---

oski003 said:

---

DoubtfulBear said:

---

When was the last time we won a game where we were the underdogs. And I mean actual underdogs, not Auburn which was overrated coming into the season

---

It was when we beat favored Auburn at Auburn, who just beat #20 Texas A&M

---

Let me get this straight, when 1-5 Stanford beat #19 Louisville you think it's a fluke and that our quantity of wins are more impressive. But when 1-5 Auburn beats #20 TAMU it's a sign that we have a quality win and therefore a good chance to upset a top 10 team for the first time in Wilcox's pathetic career?

---

Auburn is a decent team. We beat them at Auburn. It was a good win, no matter how much the haters want to hate.
Stanfurd sucks. Thanks.

---

Of course you would think Auburn is a decent team, they are ranked third to last in the SEC just like we are third to last in the ACC. Auburn is going to get crushed by Bama next week and miss out on bowling. The fact that you can even call them a decent team means you are either blind or a troll

---

I officially rate Auburn as "mediocre-to-halfway decent". To beat them on the road was pretty good. Our problem was losing those five damned games that we could have won. I can count: the losses were five times worse than the Auburn win.

Good Big Game win, but we really screwed the pooch this season. I was sooooo unbelievable high when we were up 35-10 over Miami in the third quarter. Then it all came tumbling down.

---

I think yesterday's Big Game was the kind of game Wilcox wants to play every game. He doesn't know how to maintain a lead so he prefers to play for a comeback. That he got lucky yesterday will only push him to continue down this nonsensical path, I fear.

---

Okay, I know I'm probably missing a bit of tongue and cheek rhetoric here, but you don't really believe that do you?

---

Not tongue in cheek at all. Wilcox likes low scoring defensive games. He's the opposite of Dykes who wanted high scoring shootouts. Neither of them could figure out how to maintain a lead for long against a good team.