okaydo said:

---

---

Sebastabear said:

---

71Bear said:

---

okaydo said:

---

---

...yielding a grand total of one post-season win (a low level bowl game).

---

I really think you'd save time if you just changed your sig line to "I hate you all".

---

71Bear said:

---

okaydo said:

---

---

...yielding a grand total of one post-season win (a low level bowl game).

---

SBGold said:

---

71Bear said:

---

okaydo said:

---

---

...yielding a grand total of one post-season win (a low level bowl game).

---

Didn't Brown and Goff win playoff games (and series) in that time? Those are bigger than a bowl win.

---

SBGold said:

---

71Bear said:

---

okaydo said:

---

---

...yielding a grand total of one post-season win (a low level bowl game).

---

Didn't Brown and Goff win playoff games (and series) in that time? Those are bigger than a bowl win.

---

KenBurnski said:

---

Nobody:
71Bear: I DISAGREE

---

NYCGOBEARS said:

---

Fiat Lux. Cal sucks!

---

hanky1 said:

---

NYCGOBEARS said:

---

Fiat Lux. Cal sucks!

---

That's what I've been saying.

---

BearGoggles said:

---

71Bear said:

---

KenBurnski said:

---

Nobody:
71Bear: I DISAGREE

---

No problem. Quite frankly, what has made this site the place it is has become is the variety of opinions expressed by the posters. While it is not what it once was (RIP, Grey), it is still the "go-to" place for conversation about Cal athletics. The day it becomes a lock-step "Cal is perfect, dissenters not wanted" is the day I'll step away. Fortunately, with voices like Yogi and Blue, we are still a ways from that day.

---

Your original response (minimizing the fact that Cal is unique in having 3 high draft picks) was not a differing opinion. It was just a negative nelly response to something that, unequivocally, Cal fans can and should take pride in and want to publicize. Why the immediate negative reaction/comment?

I love the fact that dissenters have a place here. But oftentimes, people confuse dissent and debate for being curmudgeonly and knee jerk negative. When something good happens (high draft picks), why do you feel the need to immediately respond with a totally unrelated negative point?

---

KenBurnski said:

---

Nobody:
71Bear: I DISAGREE

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

71Bear said:

---

KenBurnski said:

---

Nobody:
71Bear: I DISAGREE

---

No problem. Quite frankly, what has made this site the place it is has become is the variety of opinions expressed by the posters. While it is not what it once was (RIP, Grey), it is still the "go-to" place for conversation about Cal athletics. The day it becomes a lock-step "Cal is perfect, dissenters not wanted" is the day I'll step away. Fortunately, with voices like Yogi and Blue, we are still a ways from that day.

---

Your original response (minimizing the fact that Cal is unique in having 3 high draft picks) was not a differing opinion. It was just a negative nelly response to something that, unequivocally, Cal fans can and should take pride in and want to publicize. Why the immediate negative reaction/comment?

I love the fact that dissenters have a place here. But oftentimes, people confuse dissent and debate for being curmudgeonly and knee jerk negative. When something good happens (high draft picks), why do you feel the need to immediately respond with a totally unrelated negative point?

---

You hit the mark BG...I would dearly love the ability to dissent, but it comes to how you do it.
I can agree with 71Bear at times in context, but the way he expresses comes off not too well.
The old expression "It is not necessarily what you say, but how you say it."

---

71Bear said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

71Bear said:

---

KenBurnski said:

---

Nobody:
71Bear: I DISAGREE

---

No problem. Quite frankly, what has made this site the place it is has become is the variety of opinions expressed by the posters. While it is not what it once was (RIP, Grey), it is still the "go-to" place for conversation about Cal athletics. The day it becomes a lock-step "Cal is perfect, dissenters not wanted" is the day I'll step away. Fortunately, with voices like Yogi and Blue, we are still a ways from that day.

---

Your original response (minimizing the fact that Cal is unique in having 3 high draft picks) was not a differing opinion. It was just a negative nelly response to something that, unequivocally, Cal fans can and should take pride in and want to publicize. Why the immediate negative reaction/comment?

I love the fact that dissenters have a place here. But oftentimes, people confuse dissent and debate for being curmudgeonly and knee jerk negative. When something good happens (high draft picks), why do you feel the need to immediately respond with a totally unrelated negative point?

---

You hit the mark BG...I would dearly love the ability to dissent, but it comes to how you do it.
I can agree with 71Bear at times in context, but the way he expresses comes off not too well.
The old expression "It is not necessarily what you say, but how you say it."

---

OTOH, some of us subscribe to the direct approach - don't mince words, say what you have to say and move on. The notion of treading lightly to avoid conflict is a load of crap. What was it that Jack Nicholson said to Tom Cruise?

---

71Bear said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

71Bear said:

---

KenBurnski said:

---

Nobody:
71Bear: I DISAGREE

---

No problem. Quite frankly, what has made this site the place it is has become is the variety of opinions expressed by the posters. While it is not what it once was (RIP, Grey), it is still the "go-to" place for conversation about Cal athletics. The day it becomes a lock-step "Cal is perfect, dissenters not wanted" is the day I'll step away. Fortunately, with voices like Yogi and Blue, we are still a ways from that day.

---

Your original response (minimizing the fact that Cal is unique in having 3 high draft picks) was not a differing opinion. It was just a negative nelly response to something that, unequivocally, Cal fans can and should take pride in and want to publicize. Why the immediate negative reaction/comment?

I love the fact that dissenters have a place here. But oftentimes, people confuse dissent and debate for being curmudgeonly and knee jerk negative. When something good happens (high draft picks), why do you feel the need to immediately respond with a totally unrelated negative point?

---

You hit the mark BG...I would dearly love the ability to dissent, but it comes to how you do it.
I can agree with 71Bear at times in context, but the way he expresses comes off not too well.
The old expression "It is not necessarily what you say, but how you say it."

---

OTOH, some of us subscribe to the direct approach - don't mince words, say what you have to say and move on. The notion of treading lightly to avoid conflict is a load of crap. What was it that Jack Nicholson said to Tom Cruise?

---

GMP said:

---

71Bear said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

71Bear said:

---

KenBurnski said:

---

Nobody:
71Bear: I DISAGREE

---

No problem. Quite frankly, what has made this site the place it is has become is the variety of opinions expressed by the posters. While it is not what it once was (RIP, Grey), it is still the "go-to" place for conversation about Cal athletics. The day it becomes a lock-step "Cal is perfect, dissenters not wanted" is the day I'll step away. Fortunately, with voices like Yogi and Blue, we are still a ways from that day.

---

Your original response (minimizing the fact that Cal is unique in having 3 high draft picks) was not a differing opinion. It was just a negative nelly response to something that, unequivocally, Cal fans can and should take pride in and want to publicize. Why the immediate negative reaction/comment?

I love the fact that dissenters have a place here. But oftentimes, people confuse dissent and debate for being curmudgeonly and knee jerk negative. When something good happens (high draft picks), why do you feel the need to immediately respond with a totally unrelated negative point?

---

You hit the mark BG...I would dearly love the ability to dissent, but it comes to how you do it.
I can agree with 71Bear at times in context, but the way he expresses comes off not too well.
The old expression "It is not necessarily what you say, but how you say it."

---

OTOH, some of us subscribe to the direct approach - don't mince words, say what you have to say and move on. The notion of treading lightly to avoid conflict is a load of crap. What was it that Jack Nicholson said to Tom Cruise?

---

You know his character set in motion a murder, covered it up, and was arrested right after that, right?

---

71Bear said:

---

GMP said:

---

71Bear said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

71Bear said:

---

KenBurnski said:

---

Nobody:
71Bear: I DISAGREE

---

No problem. Quite frankly, what has made this site the place it is has become is the variety of opinions expressed by the posters. While it is not what it once was (RIP, Grey), it is still the "go-to" place for conversation about Cal athletics. The day it becomes a lock-step "Cal is perfect, dissenters not wanted" is the day I'll step away. Fortunately, with voices like Yogi and Blue, we are still a ways from that day.

---

Your original response (minimizing the fact that Cal is unique in having 3 high draft picks) was not a differing opinion. It was just a negative nelly response to something that, unequivocally, Cal fans can and should take pride in and want to publicize. Why the immediate negative reaction/comment?

I love the fact that dissenters have a place here. But oftentimes, people confuse dissent and debate for being curmudgeonly and knee jerk negative. When something good happens (high draft picks), why do you feel the need to immediately respond with a totally unrelated negative point?

---

You hit the mark BG...I would dearly love the ability to dissent, but it comes to how you do it.
I can agree with 71Bear at times in context, but the way he expresses comes off not too well.
The old expression "It is not necessarily what you say, but how you say it."

---

OTOH, some of us subscribe to the direct approach - don't mince words, say what you have to say and move on. The notion of treading lightly to avoid conflict is a load of crap. What was it that Jack Nicholson said to Tom Cruise?

---

You know his character set in motion a murder, covered it up, and was arrested right after that, right?

---

Yes, I saw the movie....

---

okaydo said:

---

Hey everybody on this board. I've heard good things about this book and author.

This is my BearInsider pick for Book of the Month.

https://www.amazon.com/Young-Money-Proven-Actions-Design/dp/1523092165

---

Cal8285 said:

---

71Bear said:

---

GMP said:

---

71Bear said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

71Bear said:

---

KenBurnski said:

---

Nobody:
71Bear: I DISAGREE

---

No problem. Quite frankly, what has made this site the place it is has become is the variety of opinions expressed by the posters. While it is not what it once was (RIP, Grey), it is still the "go-to" place for conversation about Cal athletics. The day it becomes a lock-step "Cal is perfect, dissenters not wanted" is the day I'll step away. Fortunately, with voices like Yogi and Blue, we are still a ways from that day.

---

Your original response (minimizing the fact that Cal is unique in having 3 high draft picks) was not a differing opinion. It was just a negative nelly response to something that, unequivocally, Cal fans can and should take pride in and want to publicize. Why the immediate negative reaction/comment?

I love the fact that dissenters have a place here. But oftentimes, people confuse dissent and debate for being curmudgeonly and knee jerk negative. When something good happens (high draft picks), why do you feel the need to immediately respond with a totally unrelated negative point?

---

You hit the mark BG...I would dearly love the ability to dissent, but it comes to how you do it.
I can agree with 71Bear at times in context, but the way he expresses comes off not too well.
The old expression "It is not necessarily what you say, but how you say it."

---

OTOH, some of us subscribe to the direct approach - don't mince words, say what you have to say and move on. The notion of treading lightly to avoid conflict is a load of crap. What was it that Jack Nicholson said to Tom Cruise?

---

You know his character set in motion a murder, covered it up, and was arrested right after that, right?

---

Yes, I saw the movie....

---

So are you suggesting that your direct approach is a load of simplistic crap that many people would say isn't true?

Since you saw the movie, you know that Jack Nicholson said to Tom Cruise that he can't handle the truth, and then said his "truth"-- "Santiago's death while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence while grotesque, and incomprehensible, to you, saves lives. You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that well, you need me on that wall!"

While difficult to be sure what a fictional character is thinking, I suspect most of the characters and much (not all) of the audience listening to Jessup, and screenwriter Aaron Sorkin, think that what he said is not the truth. Santiago's death probably didn't save lives, overall, Jessup's existence probably doesn't save lives. We don't want him on that wall, we don't need him on that wall. I suspect that Aaron Sorkin would tell you that people of honor will not agree that what Jessup said is "truth." Odd for you to cite Jessup in support of your position.

However, your "truth" is a very different "truth" from that of Jessup, because you responded to something that Cal accomplished with an undisputable truth, things that Cal has not accomplished. Unlike Jessup's statement, we can't really argue that what you said isn't true.

But it isn't like we can't handle the truth, or don't know the truth. Oh no, Cal fans know the truth all too well. And we frequently acknowledge that truth, sometimes depressingly and sometimes jokingly, Which is why we need to focus on the victories once in awhile, however meaningless they may be.

Of course, OF COURSE, everything positive that Cal has accomplished in my lifetime can be responded to with more significant things Cal has not accomplished. We ALL know that. But we're Cal fans anyway. Part of how we handle the truth is to focus on the small positives, even if in a rational world, they don't make up for the negatives. If we don't do that, we'll end up as old grumps, perhaps even old grumps who don't bother to go to games anymore because we no longer find that the positives we get out of going give us enough joy to make it worth going.

If you always want to throw cold water on what others wish to celebrate with respect to Cal athletics, the truth will pretty much always allow that. You have a choice to respond with over a thousand different truths, or respond with silence. Sometimes, in the response to a Cal fan trying desperately to find a win, desiring not to become an unhappy old grump, it is better to either respond with another positive truth or to just stay silent.

I'd rather be silent once in awhile than be a grump who needs to throw cold water immediately whenever anyone else wants to be happy about something Cal. "I'm not happy, so I'm going to do my damnedest to make sure everyone else sees the truths that make me unhappy, and then they all can be unhappy like me." Damn, I sure don't want to be that grump.

Even if I become a total grump in the future, I hope I don't feel the need to help create other grumps. There are times when it is appropriate to respond to something positive with a negative counterpoint, but a big part of wisdom is knowing when that moment is, and when it is the moment to stay silent. I do not always have that wisdom, but I try.

---

Cal8285 said:

---

71Bear said:

---

GMP said:

---

71Bear said:

---

OdontoBear66 said:

---

BearGoggles said:

---

71Bear said:

---

KenBurnski said:

---

Nobody:
71Bear: I DISAGREE

---

No problem. Quite frankly, what has made this site the place it is has become is the variety of opinions expressed by the posters. While it is not what it once was (RIP, Grey), it is still the "go-to" place for conversation about Cal athletics. The day it becomes a lock-step "Cal is perfect, dissenters not wanted" is the day I'll step away. Fortunately, with voices like Yogi and Blue, we are still a ways from that day.

---

Your original response (minimizing the fact that Cal is unique in having 3 high draft picks) was not a differing opinion. It was just a negative nelly response to something that, unequivocally, Cal fans can and should take pride in and want to publicize. Why the immediate negative reaction/comment?

I love the fact that dissenters have a place here. But oftentimes, people confuse dissent and debate for being curmudgeonly and knee jerk negative. When something good happens (high draft picks), why do you feel the need to immediately respond with a totally unrelated negative point?

---

You hit the mark BG...I would dearly love the ability to dissent, but it comes to how you do it.
I can agree with 71Bear at times in context, but the way he expresses comes off not too well.
The old expression "It is not necessarily what you say, but how you say it."

---

OTOH, some of us subscribe to the direct approach - don't mince words, say what you have to say and move on. The notion of treading lightly to avoid conflict is a load of crap. What was it that Jack Nicholson said to Tom Cruise?

---

You know his character set in motion a murder, covered it up, and was arrested right after that, right?

---

Yes, I saw the movie....

---

So are you suggesting that your direct approach is a load of simplistic crap that many people would say isn't true?

Since you saw the movie, you know that Jack Nicholson said to Tom Cruise that he can't handle the truth, and then said his "truth"-- "Santiago's death while tragic, probably saved lives; and my existence while grotesque, and incomprehensible, to you, saves lives. You don't want the truth because deep down in places you don't talk about at parties, you want me on that well, you need me on that wall!"

While difficult to be sure what a fictional character is thinking, I suspect most of the characters and much (not all) of the audience listening to Jessup, and screenwriter Aaron Sorkin, think that what he said is not the truth. Santiago's death probably didn't save lives, overall, Jessup's existence probably doesn't save lives. We don't want him on that wall, we don't need him on that wall. I suspect that Aaron Sorkin would tell you that people of honor will not agree that what Jessup said is "truth." Odd for you to cite Jessup in support of your position.

However, your "truth" is a very different "truth" from that of Jessup, because you responded to something that Cal accomplished with an undisputable truth, things that Cal has not accomplished. Unlike Jessup's statement, we can't really argue that what you said isn't true.

But it isn't like we can't handle the truth, or don't know the truth. Oh no, Cal fans know the truth all too well. And we frequently acknowledge that truth, sometimes depressingly and sometimes jokingly, Which is why we need to focus on the victories once in awhile, however meaningless they may be.

Of course, OF COURSE, everything positive that Cal has accomplished in my lifetime can be responded to with more significant things Cal has not accomplished. We ALL know that. But we're Cal fans anyway. Part of how we handle the truth is to focus on the small positives, even if in a rational world, they don't make up for the negatives. If we don't do that, we'll end up as old grumps, perhaps even old grumps who don't bother to go to games anymore because we no longer find that the positives we get out of going give us enough joy to make it worth going.

If you always want to throw cold water on what others wish to celebrate with respect to Cal athletics, the truth will pretty much always allow that. You have a choice to respond with over a thousand different truths, or respond with silence. Sometimes, in the response to a Cal fan trying desperately to find a win, desiring not to become an unhappy old grump, it is better to either respond with another positive truth or to just stay silent.

I'd rather be silent once in awhile than be a grump who needs to throw cold water immediately whenever anyone else wants to be happy about something Cal. "I'm not happy, so I'm going to do my damnedest to make sure everyone else sees the truths that make me unhappy, and then they all can be unhappy like me." Damn, I sure don't want to be that grump.

Even if I become a total grump in the future, I hope I don't feel the need to help create other grumps. There are times when it is appropriate to respond to something positive with a negative counterpoint, but a big part of wisdom is knowing when that moment is, and when it is the moment to stay silent. I do not always have that wisdom, but I try.

---

Big C said:

---

okaydo said:

---

Hey everybody on this board. I've heard good things about this book and author.

This is my BearInsider pick for Book of the Month.

https://www.amazon.com/Young-Money-Proven-Actions-Design/dp/1523092165

---

A promising college football career derailed by injury, this Cal grad made the most of his education from the #1 public university in the world!

---

AunBear89 said:

---

And he lost that game at $c - HATE that guy!

---