"Take that Blueblood!"

Absolutely not. Joining a weaker conference is the wrong idea. Patience, Wilcox & Company just got here. Give them a chance.

Go Bears!

When your grammar and spelling improve.

I remember in fall 2006 reading Stanford students' opinions that maybe they should drop football.

I wish they did.

sonofabear51 said:

---

Absolutely not. Joining a weaker conference is the wrong idea. Patience, Wilcox & Company just got here. Give them a chance.

Go Bears!

---

Give them a chance to do what? ....better their coaching abilities for another school...better their
salaries.....better their resumes?

"Give them a chance" is the trite mantra chanted by Bear fans for the many of Cal head coaches and staff.

okaydo said:

---

I remember in fall 2006 reading Stanford students' opinions that maybe they should drop football.

I wish they did.

---

I remember that too. But, you know what, the furd administration listened and eventually adapted.

Our admin adapted too, just a little differently.

When things weren't going their way, they got rid of Bruce Snyder.

The next time something good happened, they allowed tree sitters to remain long enough to severely damage recruiting, damage the program, and damage Tedford.

ddc_Cal said:

---

Our admin adapted too, just a little differently.

When things weren't going their way, they got rid of Bruce Snyder.

The next time something good happened, they allowed tree sitters to remain long enough to severely damage recruiting, damage the program, and damage Tedford.

---

Yes...that's my point...you're a very astute fan.......

CaliforniaEternal said:

---

Get a clue. Even if Cal never won another conference game for the next hundred years it would be better to collect the checks and keep the program going for whatever benefit it provides. Kind of like Vanderbilt, Kansas, Rutgers, etc...

---

Yes, you are so correct. This is an inherent entrenched weakness of a public institutions, not
so much private ones.

This kind of talk has been going on since the 1950s, when Cal was losing football games, and was on NCAA probation for recruiting violations, . Back then Cal and a number of fans were suggesting Cal (and Stanford) join the Ivy League, because that would be about the right speed for us. Now we are just losing, but at least we've been clean for a while. Let's stay in the PAC for a while, and see what Wilcox can do. Let's not wimp out. Suck it up. We can handle it.

SFCityBear said:

---

This kind of talk has been going on since the 1950s, when Cal was losing football games, and was on NCAA probation for recruiting violations, . Back then Cal and a number of fans were suggesting Cal (and Stanford) join the Ivy League, because that would be about the right speed for us. Now we are just losing, but at least we've been clean for a while. Let's stay in the PAC for a while, and see what Wilcox can do. Let's not wimp out. Suck it up. We can handle it.

---

"Since the1950s" isn't that long enough for you? Wilcox might do great things like you and I hope, but
so what? Cal's system is not conducive to retain such a potentially successful person. This wouldn't
matter if Cal was in the MWC or Ivy League.

No thanks. We'd be expected to be the top tier program, but would wind up getting Skull-Drug by:Boise St., San Diego St., Colorado St., and sometimes Navada. Too much pressure.

Join the MWC? [or a conference where Cal can otherwise be consistently successful] A stupid suggestion, even considering the source.[Ouch!...nice oink!] There are other sports than football that Cal does well in, but that is not an excuse for this argument. [Remember now...we're only a'talkin' football....OMG, here it comes!] Cal has a long a rich tradition at the major college level [...not in football, it doesn't.] and would never drop to a lesser league just because of a bad stretch of football for a few years. [uh!..."a few years"? Try going on 58 years!] Were you even conscious when Oregon St. was experiencing a very long string of bad years [Sure...I think their program is still rivaling Cal's for the worst and they're doing a pretty good job at that, too.] , a much worse record than Cal has had at any time. [...and still do....so?] Or Northwestern? [Huh? I really don't care about that school.] Neither team dropped out of their league. [Yeah, but image if they did...you know...like the MWC?] Maybe this is an attempt at humor, although I doubt it. [No, not humor. How about just plain fed up!] I'm really tired of the OP's posts and another poster here who is relentlessly negative. [Too bad, but what is there about Cal football to be "relentlessly" positive?] This is a rebuilding year with still a chance to squeak out a few more wins [It seems to me that I've heard this before?], with positive steps being made by a staff that I think is on the right track.[I agree...but it's still iffy to me.] I've been going to Cal games for over 50 years [...then you poor soul haven't ever seen Cal play in the Rose Bowl. You do know that is what Cal has been ultimately playing for in the conferences that the Bears have been members in, don't you?] and have seen all the ups and downs in that time. [I just bet you have...but don't you ever get tired of watching all those "ups and downs" always coming up short? I hate to say it, but the furd apparently has by going to the Rose Bowl 3 out of the last 5 years! Hell, if it wasn't for ucla, Cal wouldn't even have heard of the Rose Bowl let alone know where it is! ] I've been loyal and plan to stay so, and there are thousands of Cal fans who feel the same way. Go Bears! [Good for you!...I unfortunately believe there are thousands of fans that do feel the same as you...ugh!...I guess maybe
I should be asking "what's wrong with me, anyway!"]

I'm glad the internet did not exist for all the years going back to when I started watching Cal football because it would have been over 50 years of complaints rather than however many it has been. Hey, if you wanted a winning football team go to USC instead of Cal.

Larno said:

---

I'm glad the internet did not exist for all the years going back to when I started watching Cal football because it would have been over 50 years of complaints rather than however many it has been. Hey, if you wanted a winning football team go to USC instead of Cal.

---

Darn.....it's too late for me...I took Chem 1A at Cal and I couldn't afford going to u$C. I guess you attended Cal
because you knew Cal would be a mediocre football program for years on end?

I'm not sure where people are getting this "long tradition of success in football". Or did you mean in sports overall. I think this applies to rugby. But not really anything else. If some posters are talking about football - we haven't been successful since the 40s to mid 50s. And the tradition of winning came from the 20s.

The sports that posters are talking about in terms of winning or traditions of winning are the very sports we are likely to eliminate because of the financial mess we are in. When it comes to money - tradition is probably going to go out the window.

I'm not advocating for joining the MWC. And any move would mean a loss in our "stature" as being in a major conference. Do we want to stay in the P12 and have a couple winning seasons in 5-6 years and be bowl eligible for the Fabreze Bowl that costs more to go to than the payout? Or do we lose our status and join the MWC and compete for a lesser title? I don't know the answer. All I know is we better start winning or they're going to turn the lights off on everything.

Cal is not leaving to go to any other conference. Talk about overreacting. And yes, it was football that actually got me to come to Cal. My friends took me to games in the 60's and even though most of the teams were mediocre I knew that this was the place for me. It was also indicated to me at that time that Rose Bowls and dominant winning teams were for the USC's of the world. I have not been able to forget that. But I am a very loyal person and I always will be. Cal just could not compete due to any number of factors. Many on this board are young and don't know that back then there was either no restriction on scholarships or at least a very high one, like over 100, so teams like USC could recruit good players with no intention of playing them just to keep them from other teams. That was a very common practice for the top teams.

Cal is not leaving to go to any other conference. [I know; I'm saying the Bears should. What's the harm? Cal's rep is not defined by how well it does in football.] Talk about overreacting. [I'm a fan. What else is there to do? I obviously do not believe, as you do, for Cal to remain inert.] And yes, it was football that actually got me to come to Cal. My friends took me to games in the 60's and even though most of the teams were mediocre I knew that this was the place for me. It was also indicated to me at that time that Rose Bowls and dominant winning teams were for the USC's of the world. [Ahh, so you accepted what other people told you, i.e., you were a serf so you knew your place.] I have not been able to forget that. [You should of known me while you were at Cal. I could have helped you forget.] But I am a very loyal person and I always will be. [I can respect that to a point. I just hope you don't mean like Bannon and Miller are to Trump.] Cal just could not compete due to any number of factors. Many on this board are young and don't know that back then there was either no restriction on scholarships or at least a very high one, like over 100, so teams like USC could recruit good players with no intention of playing them just to keep them from other teams. That was a very common practice for the top teams. [Ahh, I know what you mean.....]

At least the posters on these boards, including some of the bigger donors seem to agree that the problem is the admin, and always has been.

I hope so, anyway.

Blueblood said:

---

SFCityBear said:

---

This kind of talk has been going on since the 1950s, when Cal was losing football games, and was on NCAA probation for recruiting violations, . Back then Cal and a number of fans were suggesting Cal (and Stanford) join the Ivy League, because that would be about the right speed for us. Now we are just losing, but at least we've been clean for a while. Let's stay in the PAC for a while, and see what Wilcox can do. Let's not wimp out. Suck it up. We can handle it.

---

"Since the1950s" isn't that long enough for you? Wilcox might do great things like you and I hope, but
so what? Cal's system is not conducive to retain such a potentially successful person. This wouldn't
matter if Cal was in the MWC or Ivy League.

---

One advantage of age is that many of us seniors have much less short term memory, and the events of our lives from the distant past become more vivid and seem like they occurred not so long ago. As a little kid, I was first indoctrinated by a Cal Alum father who had been to every Thunder Team game, and then taken to games of Pappy's teams, and listening to three Rose Bowl losses on the radio. A few years later, we went to the Rose Bowl again with Joe Kapp, and were clobbered. By the way, it was 100 degF on the field on January 1, 1959, long before the current belief in runaway global warming.

I'm not particularly a glass half full guy, but all I really remember well of the next 50 years is the '75 team. Snyder's teams were starting to look pretty good. Other than that, it is pretty much a blank. I can remember some players, but not so many teams. I don't obsess over Cal losing, largely because I was fortunate enough to see some good teams. I do feel for Cal fans who have never seen success in Cal football.

You may realize that Cal once was in the MWC, or rather in a weaker conference like that. It came in a time when most of the teams in the old Pacific Coast Conference were caught cheating in recruiting, and were put on probation by the NCAA. The entire conference was disbanded and reformed into the AAWU. Gradually the conference grew into the PAC8, but the early years were dismal for all the teams. Cal went to the Rose Bowl in 1959, with an awful coach in Pete Elliot, a QB with a will to win, and not much else (The left tackle was Pat Newell at 175 lbs, and the right tackle was Frank Sally at 220 lbs. The Iowa star tackle was Mac Lewis, 305 lbs. matched up against Newell. Elliot refused to at least try Sally against Lewis, and Iowa ran for 1000 yards on Cal). Anyway, we fans knew no better, and were very excited that Cal had won the conference, in a really, really down year for the conference.

Every team was hit hard by the NCAA sanctions, and there were few good players in the conference. Recruiting was really difficult, followed by years of Cal campus unrest. Such foolishness did not occur at USC, nor much at UCLA and Washington, and those schools were able to recruit better players than Cal for the next few years. So if schools continue to stretch the rules recruiting and bribing players, sooner or later, some will get caught, and the cycle will likely start over again, with the PAC12 becoming much weaker.

This isn't just about Wilcox, or about Cal. Successful football (and basketball) programs get that way by being borderline corrupt, and the most corrupt are too often the most successful. I am not willing to accept Cal becoming corrupt enough to win the PAC12 and get to the Rose Bowl. I still look at college football as an amateur sport, and if we have to start paying to see more wins, we are corrupt. I am lucky to have seen Cal win games prior to the corruption of the sport, so I can dwell on those times.

Speaking of corruption, is the MWC a weak enough conference to still play their games on Saturday afternoons, unlike the freezing late night games in Strawberry Canyon? If so, then I vote for joining the MWC. College football is Saturday afternoon in Memorial. College basketball is Friday and Saturday night games in Haas. If my old man was around today, he'd think the whole world has gone mad.

Blueblood said:

---

"Take that Blueblood!"

---

It looks like you are all ready to join the MWC. We will miss you and look forward to your regular update.

I'm pretty sure the OP was just trolling. But at any rate there is zero chance that Cal leaves the P12, and the reason isn't any of those mentioned by other posters. It's simple - football funds all those non-revenue sports that the Cal AD refuses to give up.

So on the positive side, all those non-revenue sports do have a benefit for football! Their blood sucking existence guarantees continued Cal football participation in a P5 TV contract attractive conference. They still have the bad side of course - they continue to suck resources from football that other P12 schools (with the exception of Stanford) do not have to handicap themselves with.

Don't kid yourself, the worst thing in the world for the long (and medium) term prospects for Cal football would have been if we had won 1 or 2 of the last three games. Wilcox going on to finish 8-4 or something like that would have made it a lock that Nebraska or Texas A&M would have poached him and his staff. Cal has zero financial ability to sustain a long term competitive position in football. Our best outcome is to let an above average HC and his staff get established over a couple of years, get to .500 and then get extremely lucky one year before everything gets poached. Or get rid of 75% of the non-revenue sports. But the AD doesn't have the balls to do that.

SFCityBear said:

---

You may realize that Cal once was in the MWC, or rather in a weaker conference like that. It came in a time when most of the teams in the old Pacific Coast Conference were caught cheating in recruiting, and were put on probation by the NCAA. The entire conference was disbanded and reformed into the AAWU. Gradually the conference grew into the PAC8, but the early years were dismal for all the teams. Cal went to the Rose Bowl in 1959, with an awful coach in Pete Elliot, a QB with a will to win, and not much else (The left tackle was Pat Newell at 175 lbs, and the right tackle was Frank Sally at 220 lbs. The Iowa star tackle was Mac Lewis, 305 lbs. matched up against Newell. Elliot refused to at least try Sally against Lewis, and Iowa ran for 1000 yards on Cal). Anyway, we fans knew no better, and were very excited that Cal had won the conference, in a really, really down year for the conference.

---

I know the AAWU (which was the interim between the PCC and Pac-8, as you suggest) sounds 2nd tier, but I would have a hard time calling it a MWC clone. The 5 members at first were USC, UCLA, Cal, Stanford and UW. WSU (then WSC) joined 3 years later and then the Oregon schools. UDub won the Rose Bowl in 1960 and 1961 and finished 6th and 8th in the country. UCLA finished 16 in the country after the 1961 season and went to the Rose Bowl, in 62, USC won the national championship. I'd hardly call that a "dismal" performance.

77Bear said:

---

.

---

Blueblood is clearly a troll and/or is mentally handicapped. [I prefer the term "troll", you sap.] At a minimum he might have a sliver of credibility if he at least knew the difference between "whose" and "who's."[Ohh, won't you clowns ever let that go! Oh, the shame....]

If Cal left the Pac-12 they would lose the $21 Million per team Pac-12 TV distribution and would instead receive the MWC $1.1 Million per team distribution. Also, if Cal left the Pac-12 Cal's Under Armour contract of $3.5 cash per year plus product would likely turn into a product-only contract.[So, Nike would pick up Cal in a minute like they do for San Diego State!] Thus, Cal's current $19 Million annual AD deficit would turn into a $42+ Million deficit, would will wipe out Cal's ability to field any NCAA sport and would still saddle Cal with the CMS debt payments.

Blueblood said:

---

---

77Bear said:

---

Blueblood is clearly a troll and/or is mentally handicapped. At a minimum he might have a sliver of credibility if he at least knew the difference between "whose" and "who's."

If Cal left the Pac-12 they would lose the $21 Million per team Pac-12 TV distribution and would instead receive the MWC $1.1 Million per team distribution. Also, if Cal left the Pac-12 Cal's Under Armour contract of $3.5 cash per year plus product would likely turn into a product-only contract. Thus, Cal's current $19 Million annual AD deficit would turn into a $42+ Million deficit, would will wipe out Cal's ability to field any NCAA sport and would still saddle Cal with the CMS debt payments.

.

---

This is such a big waste of time, with the OP pretending to know what the other Pac-12 teams will waive or not waive and what Nike will pay or not pay for a MWC team with no rivals. Why bother? But I am looking forward to the OP leaving for the MWC. He desperately wants to join that conference, so I think we should just recommend couple of teams for him to support in that conference and wish him well.

Until Blueblood plugs in his avatar, I will remain drenched by conspiracy theories.

you're right: Nike will pick up Cal just as they did with SDSU. How much money does SDSU get from Nike? Glad you asked: 0 dollars and 0 cents (they get gear only).

What's the over/under on number of new MWC threads you'll start if we lose to WSU?

UrsaMajor said:

---

you're right: Nike will pick up Cal just as they did with SDSU. How much money does SDSU get from Nike? Glad you asked: 0 dollars and 0 cents (they get gear only).

What's the over/under on number of new MWC threads you'll start if we lose to WSU?

---

I don't gamble. You have confidence I must say using the word "if."