The "best game of the bowl season other than the NCG" is under way.....

nice playaction.

<blockquote><div class="name-said">510Bear;664796 said:</div><hr>The "best game of the bowl season other than the NCG" is under way.....<hr></blockquote><br /><br />That Rose Bowl was incredible. Watching those 2 teams reminds me of how far Cal has to go.

I don't like Stanford but I like Luck That said I will root for furd over T Boone Pickens any day of the week. GO BEARS!

<blockquote><div class="name-said">Aggie Bear;664801 said:</div><hr>That Rose Bowl was incredible. Watching those 2 teams reminds me of how far Cal has to go.<hr></blockquote><br /><br />Could you imagine if we played one of those teams? The way they played today and the way we played in the holiday bowl? We would get skullf----d.

Every time a Pac 12 team loses, and that's happened a bunch this bowl season, Cal looks worse by comparison. I really can't take Cal looking any worse.

Rose Bowl was good. Now we get the Roid Bowl with Furd and OSU.

<blockquote><div class="name-said">82gradDLSdad;664806 said:</div><hr>Every time a Pac 12 team loses, and that's happened a bunch this bowl season, Cal looks worse by comparison. I really can't take Cal looking any worse.<hr></blockquote><br /><br />I agree....and don't throw $hit at me guys......

OSU qb looks horrible.

Ya never know who is gonna win the game but the Furd is making OSU look like chumps...and Weeden for some reason looks off on his throws quite a bit because during the year, he was pretty damned good with the Blackmon kid also.

Superior OL, FB and TE blocking. Notice the huge holes for the RB's and how Luck is virtually never touched so every throw is an easy throw? Impressive. <br /><br />I know it is sexy to go w/ the shotgun and spread the field with speedy WR's but I sure miss the early Tedford days when we did exactly what Furd does today.

<blockquote><div class="name-said">tequila4kapp;664829 said:</div><hr>Superior OL, FB and TE blocking. Notice the huge holes for the RB's and how Luck is virtually never touched so every throw is an easy throw? Impressive. <br /><br />I know it is sexy to go w/ the shotgun and spread the field with speedy WR's but I sure miss the early Tedford days when we did exactly what Furd does today.<hr></blockquote><br /><br />OK St demonstrates their superior WRs.

"The Cowboys just woke up from their snooze...."<br /><br />edited to add: AGAIN!

Blackmon is a freaking beast.

<blockquote><div class="name-said">Aggie Bear;664831 said:</div><hr>OK St demonstrates their superior WRs.<hr></blockquote><br /><br />About time...this is the OSU I saw during the year.....

Jokelahoma State ties it up.

<blockquote><div class="name-said">82gradDLSdad;664806 said:</div><hr>Every time a Pac 12 team loses, and that's happened a bunch this bowl season, Cal looks worse by comparison. I really can't take Cal looking any worse.<hr></blockquote><br /><br />Yep.

What to expect from WSU. Maybe not next year, but at least by the year after.

<blockquote><div class="name-said">82gradDLSdad;664806 said:</div><hr>Every time a Pac 12 team loses, and that's happened a bunch this bowl season, Cal looks worse by comparison. I really can't take Cal looking any worse.<hr></blockquote><br /><br />I would think that if Stanford won, it would make Cal look worse. Like we would be the UCLA of the Bay area.<br /><br />but what about the opposite?<br /><br />Does the SECs dominance make Vandy or Kentucky look good? absolutely not.

<blockquote><div class="name-said">cal4life;664878 said:</div><hr>Furd doesn't make any of the mistakes we do. Penalties, fumbles, blown special teams.<hr></blockquote><br /><br />Agreed. If we're grading the degree to which a team has its s--- together, furd gets an A, and we get a D-.<br /><br />It's getting to the point where I wish we could kidnap our staff, zap their memories "Men in Black"-style, and force them to watch tape of furd nonstop for 48 hours.

OSU isn't exactly making a compelling case for deserving to be in the NCS game.

<blockquote><div class="name-said">CALigulabob;664870 said:</div><hr>I would think that if Stanford won, it would make Cal look worse. Like we would be the UCLA of the Bay area.<br /><br />but what about the opposite?<br /><br />Does the SECs dominance make Vandy or Kentucky look good? absolutely not.<hr></blockquote><br /><br />We played Stanfurd pretty tough. Having them win tonight against a good team looks pretty good for us, no? I don't know how you can see it another way. If they lose do we look better? Don't see that.

<blockquote><div class="name-said">82gradDLSdad;664883 said:</div><hr>We played Stanfurd pretty tough. Having them win tonight against a good team looks pretty good for us, no? I don't know how you can see it another way. If they lose do we look better? Don't see that.<hr></blockquote><br /><br />I dont think anybody but Cal fans will think we look better if they win. People could care less about our 7-6 team playing them "tough". We were one of the 11 teams they beat, thats all they see.<br /><br />How I can see it any other way? LOL, how about not rooting for our rival whos beaten us twice in a row and have gone to 2 BCS games? Explain to me how that makes Cal "look" better?

<blockquote><div class="name-said">CALigulabob;664889 said:</div><hr>I dont think anybody but Cal fans will think we look better if they win. People could care less about our 7-6 team playing them "tough". We were one of the 11 teams they beat, thats all they see.<br /><br />How I can see it any other way? LOL, how about not rooting for our rival whos beaten us twice in a row and have gone to 2 BCS games? Explain to me how that makes Cal "look" better?<hr></blockquote><br /><br />We're irrelevant.

<blockquote><div class="name-said">CALigulabob;664889 said:</div><hr>I dont think anybody but Cal fans will think we look better if they win. People could care less about our 7-6 team playing them "tough". We were one of the 11 teams they beat, thats all they see.<br /><br />How I can see it any other way? LOL, how about not rooting for our rival whos beaten us twice in a row and have gone to 2 BCS games? Explain to me how that makes Cal "look" better?<hr></blockquote><br /><br />and you have my reasons. I never need Stanfurd to lose (except when we play them) so I feel better about Cal.

Goodness, how does OSU not punch that in?<br /><br />If nothing else, this game should end the argument that OSU should have been in the NC game.

I wonder if anyone who's rooting for furd because "we should worry about ourselves rather than our rival" is wrongly applying lessons from other parts of life to college FB.<br /><br />After all, in your job (for instance), you should think about yourself first and foremost, not think about what your rivals are doing.<br /><br />Problem is, this doesn't apply to college FB. We'll take a hit when furd inevitably finishes off OSU and gets even more praise. If you think we're irrelevant now, well, we can get even more irrelevant (imagine us losing a few more recruits to furd and hurtling towards our first 4-8 or 3-9 season under an even more burned-out Tedford....)

<blockquote><div class="name-said">CALigulabob;664889 said:</div><hr>I dont think anybody but Cal fans will think we look better if they win. People could care less about our 7-6 team playing them "tough". We were one of the 11 teams they beat, thats all they see.<br /><br />How I can see it any other way? LOL, how about not rooting for our rival whos beaten us twice in a row and have gone to 2 BCS games? Explain to me how that makes Cal "look" better?<hr></blockquote><br /><br />How about not caring who someone roots for?......rooting for either team won't change the results, the universe or anything else. What does it matter if someone wants the conference to do well? They don't need to qualify it for you, they just prefer that....so do I. I want western teams to usually beat eastern teams...I want U.S. teams to beat non-U.S. teams...sometimes things come down to regional or conference affiliations.

<blockquote><div class="name-said">510Bear;664897 said:</div><hr>I wonder if anyone who's rooting for furd because "we should worry about ourselves rather than our rival" is wrongly applying lessons from other parts of life to college FB.<br /><br />After all, in your job (for instance), you should think about yourself first and foremost, not think about what your rivals are doing.<br /><br />Problem is, this doesn't apply to college FB. We'll take a hit when furd inevitably finishes off OSU and gets even more praise. If you think we're irrelevant now, well, we can get even more irrelevant (imagine us losing a few more recruits to furd and hurtling towards our first 4-8 or 3-9 season under an even more burned-out Tedford....)<hr></blockquote><br /><br />because we now suck. They think Stanfurd is good because they are. Same thing will be true for us if and when we ever win big games again. For now all we have is thinking we don't look too bad because the teams we lost to were good and won their bowl games. I'll admit, it is weak.

<blockquote><div class="name-said">tequila4kapp;664829 said:</div><hr>Superior OL, FB and TE blocking. Notice the huge holes for the RB's and how Luck is virtually never touched so every throw is an easy throw? Impressive. <br /><br />I know it is sexy to go w/ the shotgun and spread the field with speedy WR's but I sure miss the early Tedford days when we did exactly what Furd does today.<hr></blockquote><br /><br />They are the opposite of spread, but we never did "exactly" what Stanford does today. Three TEs? We almost never play two, much less three. We always have had at least two WRs split wide. By bunching big OL/TEs all together they force the defense to also bunch up or risk just getting pushed back by superior size and numbers. However, if the defense does bunch up, that opens up a lot of green outside for the RB or for Luck to hit a TE/RB as he rolls out.

Stanfurd football team =s impressive<br />Stanfurd cheerleaders =s unimpressive

<blockquote><div class="name-said">GB54;664890 said:</div><hr>We're irrelevant.<hr></blockquote><br /><br />Exactly. Why don't we try and figure our own team out and look to play calling, QB play and special teams as the reason why we've lost to them 2 years in a row. <br /><br />Bowl wins raise the bar of the whole conference. Get over it.

<blockquote><div class="name-said">calumnus;664917 said:</div><hr>They are the opposite of spread, but we never did "exactly" what Stanford does today. Three TEs? We almost never play two, much less three. We always have had at least two WRs split wide. By bunching big OL/TEs all together they force the defense to also bunch up or risk just getting pushed back by superior size and numbers. However, if the defense does bunch up, that opens up a lot of green outside for the RB or for Luck to hit a TE/RB as he rolls out.<hr></blockquote><br /><br />I'm talking about earlier in Tedford's tenure, not now. Back then we definitely had packages with multiple TEs, the TE's were very competent blockers, we had very good FBs, we controlled the line of scrimmage, we ran first and emphasized play action pass. Philosophically we were very similar, even if we didn't use 3 TEs.

This whole game has been interesting. Two very good, evenly matched teams. Can't tell who is going to win.

i'd love a QB with a squirt gun arm that could scan the field and find a dump off pass to a RB or TE like luck can.