Ok, I will admit I am pissed off by that game. Really pissed. I'm trying to console myself by constructing reasons why it was good for Cal. Here goes:

1. Psychology. Sure it's possible losing a heartbreaker gives Oregon motivation (and it definitely avoids complacency) but I think it's probably as likely they come in demoralized. Hell im sick after watching that and I don't even like Oregon. That's a young team with a first year head coach. Might have a hard time managing the team's psyche, Lots of examples of physically superior teams that fold once they taste adversity. See Cal in '07 or USC every other year.

2. I think we match up better against Stanford than the Ducks. We are still playing for the conference championship (in my mind we always are until we aren't). So if we are more likely to lose to the Ducks then I want the Ducks to lose as many other conference games as possible. Gives us the edge in division standings.

3. Was a hard fought game that went into OT. Their players have to be more tired and beat up than if it had been a laugher either way. Add a few sleepless nights to the mix as they go over how they blew that game in their minds and maybe they aren't at their best next Saturday.

Others?

Wont make any difference. Only hope is if we can cause Hebert to turn the ball over 4 times.

Yeah, I was really p.o.'d watching that game. The refs basically gave the game to Stanford. The double missed p.i. calls in OT were ridiculous. Watching a game like that almost makes me want to stop watching college football. That said, I know if that happened to our teams in the recent past we would likely be demoralized and have a tough time putting it behind us, at least not in a single week. That's the kind of loss that can completely derail a season (think 2007 against Oregon State).

oskidunker said:

---

Wont make any difference. Only hope is if we can cause Hebert to turn the ball over 4 times.

---

Yes! Fluky 14 pt swings are invaluable.

Sebastabear said:

---

Ok, I will admit I am pissed off by that game. Really pissed. I'm trying to console myself by constructing reasons why it was good for Cal. Here goes:

1. Psychology. Sure it's possible losing a heartbreaker gives Oregon motivation (and it definitely avoids complacency) but I think it's probably as likely they come in demoralized. Hell im sick after watching that and I don't even like Oregon. That's a young team with a first year head coach. Might have a hard time managing the team's psyche, Lots of examples of physically superior teams that fold once they taste adversity. See Cal in '07 or USC every other year.

2. I think we match up better against Stanford than the Ducks. We are still playing for the conference championship (in my mind we always are until we aren't). So if we are more likely to lose to the Ducks then I want the Ducks to lose as many other conference games as possible. Gives us the edge in division standings.

3. Was a hard fought game that went into OT. Their players have to be more tired and beat up than if it had been a laugher either way. Add a few sleepless nights to the mix as they go over how they blew that game in their minds and maybe they aren't at their best next Saturday.

---

Oregon was about two feet away from 31-7. The Rube Goldberg series of events which allowed Stanford to win was morally unjustified. Their coach is definitely Old Testament (i.e., fear and retribution). . So

calumnus said:

---

WhipItOutJoe said:

---

Yeah, I was really p.o.'d watching that game. The refs basically gave the game to Stanford. The double missed p.i. calls in OT were ridiculous. Watching a game like that almost makes me want to stop watching college football. That said, I know if that happened to our teams in the recent past we would likely be demoralized and have a tough time putting it behind us, at least not in a single week. That's the kind of loss that can completely derail a season (think 2007 against Oregon State).

---

Why is it Stanford always seems to benefit from the refs? Especially the replay booth?

---

They are mainstream system boys with lots of money behind them. Compare that to the renegade hippies from Berkeley. Yes, I'm biased but I'm also not an idiot. I've been watching CFB for many years. Certain programs get preferential treatment, when it hits the fan.

The original issue was"could it help us that Oregon lost in overtime?"

Yes! Imagine we had basically given the game away after starting strong, with the home crowd noise roaring in our ears, and then bad calls, turnovers and penalties were committed when it looked like we had a lock on the game, allowing our highlynranked opponent to come from behind and win in overtime...Yikes! Lots of finger pointing, fan anger, awkward coaches explanations, but not much thinking about next week, and on the road against another ranked opponent- and always the lingering doubt...

What I saw was a talented but poorly coached Oregon team with a weak secondary and a questionable D-line.

Agree with all that. I will add that Duck fans are some of the biggest band wagoners in the country. Had they won that game they would have been showing up to CMS in droves. With a heart breaking loss a lot of those will now stay away. Good for us for maximizing home field advantage.

Running backs in the state of Oregon need to remember ball protection when trying run out the clock when playing stanfurd...

XXXBEAR said:

---

The original issue was"could it help us that Oregon lost in overtime?"

Yes! Imagine we had basically given the game away after starting strong, with the home crowd noise roaring in our ears, and then bad calls, turnovers and penalties were committed when it looked like we had a lock on the game, allowing our highlynranked opponent to come from behind and win in overtime...Yikes! Lots of finger pointing, fan anger, awkward coaches explanations, but not much thinking about next week, and on the road against another ranked opponent- and always the lingering doubt...

What I saw was a talented but poorly coached Oregon team with a weak secondary and a questionable D-line.

---

Seriously. If we blew a 24-7 (should have been 31-7) lead and lost in OT, we would be deflated the following week. No reason Oregon is so much better than us that the same thing can't happen to them at least to some extent, and in a close game, "to some extent" helps.

Cristobal is new, so who knows how much of this might be his fault? But still, the refs gave furd a win.

I forgot that furd's win means fewer oregon fans will infest our turf next week! Since their dreams of a natty are crushed. Here's to furd for at least doing the city of Berkeley a solid.

Fyght4Cal said:

---

I was really afraid of a big OU [sic] turnout in Memorial on Saturday. Maybe not so much now. But I am really worried about the size of our crowd. We know the ESPs won't be full, which always looks horrible. The students are unreliable. And, I'm not sure what kind of walk-ups we get.

But, I'll be there. I hope all of you will too.

---

Also, we had similarly sketchy turnout for USC in 2003, thanks to an unproven team and usual Cal fan iffy-ness. That didn't stop us from winning.

Likewise for Cal-WSU last year!

510 Bear said:

---

Fyght4Cal said:

---

I was really afraid of a big OU [sic] turnout in Memorial on Saturday. Maybe not so much now. But I am really worried about the size of our crowd. We know the ESPs won't be full, which always looks horrible. The students are unreliable. And, I'm not sure what kind of walk-ups we get.

But, I'll be there. I hope all of you will too.

---

Also, we had similarly sketchy turnout for USC in 2003, thanks to an unproven team and usual Cal fan iffy-ness. That didn't stop us from winning.

Likewise for Cal-WSU last year!

---

Even though we drove up from LA, I can't blame anyone for not coming to the WSU game last year. It was an awesome win, and cemented the name Bowers into Cal lore. But, the conditions were terrible, I should have worn my expensive mask, and the game shouldn't have been played.

The kids deserve better than a sketchy crowd. However, if they win, then beat BofA, Homecoming v Southern Branch should be close to a sellout.

Fyght4Cal said:

---

Even though we drove up from LA, I can't blame anyone for not coming to the WSU game last year. It was an awesome win, and cemented the name Bowers into Cal lore. But, the conditions were terrible, I should have worn my expensive mask, and the game shouldn't have been played.

The kids deserve better than a sketchy crowd. However, if they win, then beat BofA, Homecoming v Southern Branch should be close to a sellout.

---

Oh yeah, I didn't mean Cal-WSU 2017 was an example of Cal fans being lame - the air quality situation did not sound good and everyone's health and well-being comes first.

I'm just saying it's an example of how our guys can come up with a stellar performance even if there aren't 63,000 people in the stands like during the peak Tedford days.

i doubt oregon fans who have paid for air and game tickets. are going to stayvhome. maybe some students who were going to drive will stay home.

oskidunker said:

---

i doubt oregon fans who have paid for air and game tickets. are going to stayvhome. maybe some students who were going to drive will stay home.

---

I'm not talking about the alums who would be flying in for the game. They will probably mostly come and they are fine anyway. I'm talking about the braying jackasses who live in the Bay Area and adopted Oregon as their team when they achieved national prominence. The ones who like the "cool" uniforms or have an affinity for Gumby or whatever. They would have been at CMS in force had Oregon won the Stanford game. I think a lot of them will be finding the bandwagon a little less comfy this week.

Wounded Ducks might simply want to take it out on us. I don't think they sink, but battle even harder. Added to that is the fact that Cal has generally been a tiny blip on the P12 North outcome and they will come down confident and maybe even swaggering. F the Ducks.

72CalBear said:

---

Wounded Ducks might simply want to take it out on us. I don't think they sink, but battle even harder. Added to that is the fact that Cal has generally been a tiny blip on the P12 North outcome and they will come down confident and maybe even swaggering. F the Ducks.

---

Ok I think we may need to review the rules of this particular thought experiment again . . .

Oregon fans will be less arrogant but still likely to be drunk and stupid.

I'm not sure Oregon winning or losing against Stanford makes much difference for their chances against us . . . but having to endure a war with a physical opponent the week before their first road game might.

I was pleased the Ducks loss and laughed my ass off watching it happen. At the same time, I was hoping that some of the Cardinal players would be unable to make it to their game next week against ND. Quit worrying whether the Ducks will try to take it out on us. That animus lasts about two minutes into the game, if it exists at all, and then the game goes on. Has anyone read the reaction in Eugene in any of their newspapers? I can't believe that Cristobal won't get any criticism for his decision making.

Sebastabear said:

---

Lots of examples of physically superior teams that fold once they taste adversity. See Cal in '07 or USC every other year.

---

'07 Bears lost to the Beavs (#25 AP at season's end; Emerald Bowl jugger-nots) and subsequently & repeatedly showed themselves to be mightily overrated that yr (they had been depleted w/ the losses of B. Mebane, D. Hughes, D. Bishop, OC Dunbar, M. Lynch). Current swooshies lost a close one to a legit top 10 team and playoff candidate (barrrf) and are the real mccoy (except for Pass D). SC post-sanctions has strongly tended to become better & tougher (not fold after early loss) as seasons progress and be at or near the conf. top by seasons' end. So, both are effete, mostly barren analogies.

That said, our justinistas won't fold either once they see they're in for a long backwoods bare knuckles barn fight. Last year's unrelenting Wuppins up north is upfront in our athlete's minds and they're looking for uh Reckonin', a settlement of due accounts. Our boys don't just beat the over-confident OR demoralized, submissive, former bullies; I have a feeling our justinistas will take on well-motivated current bullies and proceed to methodically demoralize them into snot-bubbling submission. Beau The Bold shall unleash everything including the kitchen sink mcmorris while DeRyuter The DeConstructor Of Worlds (or offenses) will r3tard (somewhat) the quackattack at home.

Nasal Mucus Goldenbear said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

Lots of examples of physically superior teams that fold once they taste adversity. See Cal in '07 or USC every other year.

---

'07 Bears lost to the Beavs (#25 AP at season's end; Emerald Bowl jugger-nots) and subsequently & repeatedly showed themselves to be mightily overrated that yr (they had been depleted w/ the losses of B. Mebane, D. Hughes, D. Bishop, OC Dunbar, M. Lynch). Current swooshies lost a close one to a legit top 10 team and playoff candidate (barrrf) and are the real mccoy (except for Pass D). SC post-sanctions has strongly tended to become better & tougher (not fold after early loss) as seasons progress and be at or near the conf. top by seasons' end. So, both are effete, mostly barren analogies.

That said, our justinistas won't fold either once they see they're in for a long backwoods bare knuckles barn fight. Last year's unrelenting Wuppins up north is upfront in our athlete's minds and they're looking for uh Reckonin', a settlement of due accounts. Our boys don't just beat the over-confident OR demoralized, submissive, former bullies; I have a feeling our justinistas will take on well-motivated current bullies and proceed to methodically demoralize them into snot-bubbling submission. Beau The Bold shall unleash everything including the kitchen sink mcmorris while DeRyuter The DeConstructor Of Worlds (or offenses) will r3tard (somewhat) the quackattack at home.

---

First, I don't think the word "effete" means what you think it means.

Second, are you high? Let's look at that "depleted" '07 team. Syd'Quan Thompson, Thomas DeCoud, Lavelle Hawkins, Robert Jordan, Craig Stevens, Marcus Ezeff, Cameron Morrah, Alex Mack, Tyson Alualu, DeSean F'ing Jackson, Justin Forsett, Jahvid Best, etc, etc. Oh yeah, what a group of rejects. Who possibly could have made a team out of that? And that team went 2-6 to end the season starting with the Oregon State loss? Losing to such amazing powers as the 2007 Stanford Cardinal who went 4-8 for the season and featured such amazing talent as . . . Anyone? Or maybe the amazing Washington Huskies who went 4-9 for the year or the 6-7 Bruins or . . . . Child, please. The 2007 Bears had an amazing roster. What happened in the back half of the season was an abomination.

And finally, I reserve the right to make fun of USC. Yes they typically play better in November than others, mainly because they have 5* talent at the 2 deep. Other teams don't. But in terms of under performing relative to that talent they (along with Texas) have proudly carried the banner for the last decade.

Bear8 said:

---

I was pleased the Ducks loss and laughed my ass off watching it happen. At the same time, I was hoping that some of the Cardinal players would be unable to make it to their game next week against ND. Quit worrying whether the Ducks will try to take it out on us. That animus lasts about two minutes into the game, if it exists at all, and then the game goes on. Has anyone read the reaction in Eugene in any of their newspapers? I can't believe that Cristobal won't get any criticism for his decision making.

---

You are a glass-is-half-full guy, good for you. I was sad the Cardinal won and I cried like a baby watching it happen.

Sebastabear said:

---

Second, are you high? Let's look at that "depleted" '07 team. Syd'Qyan Thomsan, Thomas Decoud, Lavelle Hawking, Robert Jordan, Craig Stevens, Marcus Ezeff, Cameron Morrah, Alex Mack, Tyson Alualu, DeSean F'ing Jackson, Justin Forsett, Jahvid Best, etc, etc. Oh yeah, what a group of rejects. Who possibly could have made a team out of that? And that team went 2-6 to end the season starting with the Oregon State loss? Losing to such amazing powers as the 2007 Stanford Cardinal who went 4-7 for the season and featured such amazing talent as . . . Anyone? Or maybe the amazing Washington Huskies who went 4-9 for the year or the 6-7 Bruins or . . . . Child, please. The 2007 Bears had an amazing roster. What happened in the back half of the season was an abomination.

---

Sebastabear said:

---

Second, are you high? Let's look at that "depleted" '07 team. Syd'Qyan Thomsan, Thomas Decoud, Lavelle Hawking, Robert Jordan, Craig Stevens, Marcus Ezeff, Cameron Morrah, Alex Mack, Tyson Alualu, DeSean F'ing Jackson, Justin Forsett, Jahvid Best, etc, etc. Oh yeah, what a group of rejects. Who possibly could have made a team out of that? And that team went 2-6 to end the season starting with the Oregon State loss? Losing to such amazing powers as the 2007 Stanford Cardinal who went 4-7 for the season and featured such amazing talent as . . . Anyone? Or maybe the amazing Washington Huskies who went 4-9 for the year or the 6-7 Bruins or . . . . Child, please. The 2007 Bears had an amazing roster. What happened in the back half of the season was an abomination.

---

And there was also a clear cause for the slide: our quarterback got hurt. The 2007 team with a healthy Nate Longshore was a serious contender. Maybe a bit overrated at #2 in the country (thanks to other teams losing in upsets), but still a legitimately strong team.

Should it have gotten that bad? No, Tedford should have sat Longshore after it became clear he was too hurt to play well. With Riley playing we probably salvage the end of the season and at least beat Washington and Stanford. But anyway, with everyone healthy, Cal was able to beat Oregon on the road and blast Tennessee at home. They were good.

Sebastabear said:

---

First, I don't think the word "effete" means what you think it means.

Second, are you high? Let's look at that "depleted" '07 team. Syd'Quan Thompson, Thomas DeCoud, Lavelle Hawkins, Robert Jordan, Craig Stevens, Marcus Ezeff, Cameron Morrah, Alex Mack, Tyson Alualu, DeSean F'ing Jackson, Justin Forsett, Jahvid Best, etc, etc. Oh yeah, what a group of rejects. Who possibly could have made a team out of that? And that team went 2-6 to end the season starting with the Oregon State loss? Losing to such amazing powers as the 2007 Stanford Cardinal who went 4-8 for the season and featured such amazing talent as . . . Anyone? Or maybe the amazing Washington Huskies who went 4-9 for the year or the 6-7 Bruins or . . . . Child, please. The 2007 Bears had an amazing roster. What happened in the back half of the season was an abomination.

And finally, I reserve the right to make fun of USC. Yes they typically play better in November than others, mainly because they have 5* talent at the 2 deep. Other teams don't. But in terms of under performing relative to that talent they (along with Texas) have proudly carried the banner for the last decade.

---

Sebasta, calm yourself down. You'll live longer. This is just silly football talk here, not Geopolitics.

You seem to be saying that losing all those next-level players I listed (look at that list again), plus as stated above having a badly Physically injured QB, carries little effect for a team like Cal, and that season's subsequent woes were all Psychological. There were a lot of big holes in that lineup, from QB, DL, LB, DB to new OC that you don't seem to acknowledge. Who needs a healthy QB? And that would be quite an extended emotional breakdown the beavs inflicted on our bears, lasting from '07 to at least '17. No deficiencies in talent and coaching whatsoever. All emotional for the last 11 yrs. Diabolical floating rodents.

Regarding SC, you really haven't been paying attention the last few years. Underdeveloped talent (mostly coaching & experience related) is not the same as talent that folds. Two different things. That hasn't been a team that folds.

"Effete" means exactly what I meant it to mean: "effete (-ft) adj. Depleted of vitality, force, or effectiveness; exhausted: the final, effete period of the baroque style." The stated analogies once surveyed are as effete as the final period of the baroque style.

Nasal Mucus Goldenbear said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

First, I don't think the word "effete" means what you think it means.

Second, are you high? Let's look at that "depleted" '07 team. Syd'Quan Thompson, Thomas DeCoud, Lavelle Hawkins, Robert Jordan, Craig Stevens, Marcus Ezeff, Cameron Morrah, Alex Mack, Tyson Alualu, DeSean F'ing Jackson, Justin Forsett, Jahvid Best, etc, etc. Oh yeah, what a group of rejects. Who possibly could have made a team out of that? And that team went 2-6 to end the season starting with the Oregon State loss? Losing to such amazing powers as the 2007 Stanford Cardinal who went 4-8 for the season and featured such amazing talent as . . . Anyone? Or maybe the amazing Washington Huskies who went 4-9 for the year or the 6-7 Bruins or . . . . Child, please. The 2007 Bears had an amazing roster. What happened in the back half of the season was an abomination.

And finally, I reserve the right to make fun of USC. Yes they typically play better in November than others, mainly because they have 5* talent at the 2 deep. Other teams don't. But in terms of under performing relative to that talent they (along with Texas) have proudly carried the banner for the last decade.

---

Sebasta, calm yourself down. You'll live longer. This is just silly football talk here, not Geopolitics.

You seem to be saying that losing all those next-level players I listed (look at that list again), plus as stated above having a badly Physically injured QB, carries little effect for a team like Cal, and that season's subsequent woes were all Psychological. There were a lot of big holes in that lineup, from QB, DL, LB, DB to new OC that you don't seem to acknowledge. Who needs a healthy QB? And that would be quite an extended emotional breakdown the beavs inflicted on our bears, lasting from '07 to at least '17. No deficiencies in talent and coaching whatsoever. All emotional for the last 11 yrs. Diabolical floating rodents.

Regarding SC, you really haven't been paying attention the last few years. Underdeveloped talent (mostly coaching & experience related) is not the same as talent that folds. Two different things. That hasn't been a team that folds.

"Effete" means exactly what I meant it to mean: "effete (-ft) adj. Depleted of vitality, force, or effectiveness; exhausted: the final, effete period of the baroque style." The stated analogies are as effete as the final period of the baroque style.

---

First, thank you for your concerns about my health.

Second, what? At what point did I say that everything that happened to Cal from 2007-2017 was based on the letdown loss from the OSU game? That's not even implied by what I wrote, much less stated. As a hint when I say "what happened in the back half of the season was an abomination" I mean "what happened in the BACK HALF OF THE SEASON was an abomination." Hopefully that was clearer.

But you seem to be arguing that Cal lost games in the back half of 2007 for the same reason it lost games in 2009 and 2012 and 2013, etc. I think those are all different lost seasons for dramatically different reasons and it's a fine argument to have I suppose if you want to talk about it, but that was never really the point I was making. Here I'm talking about 2007 alone and analogizing it to what could (hopefully) happen to Oregon in 2018.

The thesis is that teams can have psychological hangovers from bad losses. Cal 2007 is profferred as an illustration of that thesis. You seem to counter that by saying it's not true in the case of our 2007 team and "look at everyone we lost from the prior year." I guess you think if we had won the OSU game we still would have gone 2-5 for the remainder of the season (Ha!!!!) My response is that we had one of the most talented rosters we've ever had in 2007. Who we lost from 2006 doesn't change that fact. You say we had big holes in DL and DB (among others). I'll note that Syd'Quan was a DB and Tyson Alualu was on the D line. Did we have first round NFL talent at every position? Were we the '72 Dophins? Of course not. Never said we were. We have always had holes. But I will again point out that we lost to teams with vastly inferior talent in the back half of 2007. I don't think that is objectively debatable. The reason for that is that we unraveled after OSU because we lost the big prize and we had a hard time dealing with that.

And I would further debate the use of "effete" in this context to refer to an argument as opposed to an individual or system is incorrect but that seems somewhat . . . effete.