wifeisafurd said:

---

01Bear said:

---

HateRed said:

---

I like CA a lot. It's just too expensive. I'm sorry you think it's a cesspool. It's not, as a matter of fact from Austin to The Piney Woods is beautiful and forested. Houston is built in a forest. If you dislike Texas for its politics, I do too. It's lethal here, but every state has it.

---

I went the other way around. I lived in Texas as a little kid, before moving to California, where I grew up. I have some fond memories of Texas, but am glad I left. I visited Texas for work a couple times in the early 2000s; I was glad for the trips back to Texas but even more glad to be flying back to California.

For one, humidity is not my friend. For another, the natural beauty of California dwarfs that found in Texas*. Also, California has all four seasons within driving distance.

Finally, the food scene in California is the best. I can have pastrami breakfast burritos in the morning, goulash for lunch, and doro wat for dinner followed by a nightcap of California wines. Don't get me wrong, Texas BBQ is the best and Texmex is also fantastic, but the melting pot of cuisines and cultures in California is nonpareil.

Sure, there's plenty California doesn't get quite right. The cost of living is also ridiculous! But overall, California is about as close to paradise as I've found.

*Is there anything to rival Yosemite? That's one of the most beautiful spots on God's green earth, IMHO.

---

Well I agree on the CA vs Texas comparison, especially the weather.

But CA doesn't have the best food scene in the world. Start with Italy. San Sebastin, France, etc.

And Yosemite is awesome, but it isn't the Grand Canyon, the Alps, the Great Ocean road, Patagonia, New Zealand Alps (think the Lord of the Ring Trilogy) and I could go on.

Nothing wrong with being a boomer for where you live, but let's not get crazy.

---

If you're limiting good food to just European cuisine, you're absolutely missing out. Italian and French food are definitely good, but they aren't nearly the best IMHO. One of the drawbacks with eating in Italy or France is the dearth of variety. While there's excellent French food in France and also excellent Italian food in Italy, it's hard to find excellent Italian food in France or excellent French food in Italy, let alone at reasonable prices.

California, OTOH, has excellent cuisines from all around the world, and all at reasonable prices. Heck, we even have pizza trucks that make traditional Neapolitan pizzas! If just for the culinary options alone, I would much rather live in California than anywhere else in the world.

Also, I've been to the Grand Canyon and it's little more than a giant hole in the ground. Seriously, though, I've visited the Grand Canyon many times, but Yosemite is on a whole other level. It has a different personality for each of the four seasons. The same can't really be said about the Grand Canyon. As for the Alps, i've never been but I really don't see the appeal as a non-skiier/hiker. If there are other reasons to visit, please feel free to enlighten me (I mean this entirely seriously). As for Patagonia, I'd love to visit there some day. That looks like a gorgeous spot of Earth, as well.

That said, none of these spots are in Texas. IIRC, we were comparing the relative pros and cons of Texas with those of California.

BearlySane88 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

California High School Football

---

He didn't say there weren't good teams in California. If you're arguing the level of support for HS FB is the same in California as the states mentioned then you're highly confused.

---

I simply posted photos of one of the greatest high school teams in history 151 - 0.

I'm not arguing anything.
You are.

DiabloWags said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

California High School Football

---

He didn't say there weren't good teams in California. If you're arguing the level of support for HS FB is the same in California as the states mentioned then you're highly confused.

---

I simply posted photos of one of the greatest high school teams in history.

---

Not one of, the greatest team in HS football history

BearlySane88 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

California High School Football

---

He didn't say there weren't good teams in California. If you're arguing the level of support for HS FB is the same in California as the states mentioned then you're highly confused.

---

I simply posted photos of one of the greatest high school teams in history.

---

Not one of, the greatest team in HS football history

---

I make a distinction between Private and Public high schools and the benefits that DLS has enjoyed over the years of their streak in which they recruited. No one that I know would be blind to that fact. Public high schools did not have that luxury.

I know this personally.

DiabloWags said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

California High School Football

---

He didn't say there weren't good teams in California. If you're arguing the level of support for HS FB is the same in California as the states mentioned then you're highly confused.

---

I simply posted photos of one of the greatest high school teams in history.

---

Not one of, the greatest team in HS football history

---

I make a distinction between Private and Public high schools and the benefits that DLS has enjoyed over the years of their streak in which they recruited. No one that I know would be blind to that fact. Public high schools did not have that luxury.

I know this personally.

---

The greatest high school football program of all time. Hands down. No qualifiers needed.

They aren't the only private school. If it was so easily replicated then it would have been.

BearlySane88 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

California High School Football

---

He didn't say there weren't good teams in California. If you're arguing the level of support for HS FB is the same in California as the states mentioned then you're highly confused.

---

I simply posted photos of one of the greatest high school teams in history.

---

Not one of, the greatest team in HS football history

---

I make a distinction between Private and Public high schools and the benefits that DLS has enjoyed over the years of their streak in which they recruited. No one that I know would be blind to that fact. Public high schools did not have that luxury.

I know this personally.

---

The greatest high school football program of all time. Hands down. No qualifiers needed.

They aren't the only private school. If it was so easily replicated then it would have been.

---

DLS recruited in the Bay Area.
That's a MASSIVE advantage.

I'm not interested in playing "tit for tat" with you.
This will be my last post on the topic.

DiabloWags said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

California High School Football

---

He didn't say there weren't good teams in California. If you're arguing the level of support for HS FB is the same in California as the states mentioned then you're highly confused.

---

I simply posted photos of one of the greatest high school teams in history.

---

Not one of, the greatest team in HS football history

---

I make a distinction between Private and Public high schools and the benefits that DLS has enjoyed over the years of their streak in which they recruited. No one that I know would be blind to that fact. Public high schools did not have that luxury.

I know this personally.

---

The greatest high school football program of all time. Hands down. No qualifiers needed.

They aren't the only private school. If it was so easily replicated then it would have been.

---

DLS recruited in the Bay Area.
That's a MASSIVE advantage.

I'm not interested in playing "tit for tat" with you.
This will be my last post on the topic.

---

Every other private school could have done the same thing.
They don't have to recruit much, their reputation draws the players in.

BearlySane88 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

California High School Football

---

He didn't say there weren't good teams in California. If you're arguing the level of support for HS FB is the same in California as the states mentioned then you're highly confused.

---

I simply posted photos of one of the greatest high school teams in history.

---

Not one of, the greatest team in HS football history

---

I make a distinction between Private and Public high schools and the benefits that DLS has enjoyed over the years of their streak in which they recruited. No one that I know would be blind to that fact. Public high schools did not have that luxury.

I know this personally.

---

The greatest high school football program of all time. Hands down. No qualifiers needed.

They aren't the only private school. If it was so easily replicated then it would have been.

---

DLS recruited in the Bay Area.
That's a MASSIVE advantage.

I'm not interested in playing "tit for tat" with you.
This will be my last post on the topic.

---

Every other private school could have done the same thing.
They don't have to recruit much, their reputation draws the players in.

---

I was there day 0 and played for the coach Lad took over from my coach who was a hard ass to some. It's a more nuanced progression from a crap team that was us to what it's become. Originally the improvement came from coach Lad and his ability to attract kids that already were going there (Danville, Alamo, Dublin the Nut, Lamorinda, Concord and a few Pitt kids. The Pitt kids were not Black.
He puts together some wins and voila. Now I did not witness recruiting myself but……could it have happened of course. I do know this, they or someone was doing a heck of a job selling the program to kids that saw their college football chances better at DLS. Remember DLS had a huge advantage in that we can "recruit" form any area. So if you had a promising kid in football are you sending him/her to Encinal? John Swett?
Once he got the ball rolling it's not clear how much recruiting needs to happen but the competition has improved immensely from the 150 record. Would be interesting to hear from some of the Pitt kids or maybe McClymonds kids if they were approached by DLS staff etc .

cal83dls79 said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

California High School Football

---

He didn't say there weren't good teams in California. If you're arguing the level of support for HS FB is the same in California as the states mentioned then you're highly confused.

---

I simply posted photos of one of the greatest high school teams in history.

---

Not one of, the greatest team in HS football history

---

I make a distinction between Private and Public high schools and the benefits that DLS has enjoyed over the years of their streak in which they recruited. No one that I know would be blind to that fact. Public high schools did not have that luxury.

I know this personally.

---

The greatest high school football program of all time. Hands down. No qualifiers needed.

They aren't the only private school. If it was so easily replicated then it would have been.

---

DLS recruited in the Bay Area.
That's a MASSIVE advantage.

I'm not interested in playing "tit for tat" with you.
This will be my last post on the topic.

---

Every other private school could have done the same thing.
They don't have to recruit much, their reputation draws the players in.

---

I was there day 0 and played for the coach Lad took over from my coach who was a was a hard ass to some. It's a more nuanced progression from a crap team that was us to what it's become. Originally the improvement came from coach Lad and his ability to attract kids that already were going there (Danville, Alamo, Dublin the Nut, Lamorinda, Concord and a few Pitt kids. The Pitt kids were not Black.
He puts together some wins and voila. Now I did not witness recruiting myself but……could it have happened of course. I do know this, they or someone was doing a heck of a job selling the program to kids that saw their college football chances better at DLS. Remember DLS had a huge advantage in that we can "recruit" form any area. So if you had a promising kid in football are you sending him/her to Encinal? John Swett?
Once he got the ball rolling it's not clear how much recruiting needs to happen but the competition has improved immensely from the 150 record. Would be interesting to hear from some of the Pitt kids or maybe McClymonds kids if they were approached by DLS staff etc .

---

as a follow up lad was/is a big track guy. Talked to him at Brutus Hamilton meet (held at Edward's for HS kids)one day. He was definitely scouting the sprints and hurdles.

I once was talking to the current DLS Varsity Baseball Coach (Jeans) at a local sports bar some 20 years ago and he gave me the "they did it too" narrative when it came to public schools "recruiting".

I'm not sure how much actual "recruiting" by coaches happened because that would have been illegal, but a kid who was going to school in Richmond could transfer to Miramonte in Orinda because they wanted to take the LATIN CLASS that was not offered at their school. This is how the Carey Brothers all wound up going to Miramonte and helped them win an NCS Football Title.

Even my alma mater at Las Lomas had a kid commuting from Benicia who was the starting southpaw QB, because his school did not offer any Auto Shop classes.

He could have made a right turn right after the Benicia Bridge and attended Alhambra High in Martinez where they had a pretty good auto shop. Nope. He needed to keep going down 680 until he got to Walnut Creek.

The transfers were notified via FAX to all schools in the District.
The AD's never challenged them.

They just turned their heads and walked away.

But it's not like this was running rampant.

cal83dls79 said:

---

as a follow up lad was/is a big track guy. Talked to him at Brutus Hamilton meet (held at Edward's for HS kids)one day. He was definitely scouting the sprints and hurdles.

---

Assistant Football Coach Terrell Ward at DLS is a huge Track & Field guy.
He's also in charge of their T&F program. Took over from John Harvey who passed away in April 2025.

Coach Ward's son TJ won Superbowl 50 with the Denver Broncos as their safety.
His older son Terron was a running back for the Atlanta Falcons.

Coach Ward is Awesome!




Coach Terrell Ward Appointed as the Director of Track and Field for Carondelet and De La Salle - De La Salle High School

cal83dls79 said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

BearlySane88 said:

---

DiabloWags said:

---

California High School Football

---

He didn't say there weren't good teams in California. If you're arguing the level of support for HS FB is the same in California as the states mentioned then you're highly confused.

---

I simply posted photos of one of the greatest high school teams in history.

---

Not one of, the greatest team in HS football history

---

I make a distinction between Private and Public high schools and the benefits that DLS has enjoyed over the years of their streak in which they recruited. No one that I know would be blind to that fact. Public high schools did not have that luxury.

I know this personally.

---

The greatest high school football program of all time. Hands down. No qualifiers needed.

They aren't the only private school. If it was so easily replicated then it would have been.

---

DLS recruited in the Bay Area.
That's a MASSIVE advantage.

I'm not interested in playing "tit for tat" with you.
This will be my last post on the topic.

---

Every other private school could have done the same thing.
They don't have to recruit much, their reputation draws the players in.

---

I was there day 0 and played for the coach Lad took over from my coach who was a hard ass to some. It's a more nuanced progression from a crap team that was us to what it's become. Originally the improvement came from coach Lad and his ability to attract kids that already were going there (Danville, Alamo, Dublin the Nut, Lamorinda, Concord and a few Pitt kids. The Pitt kids were not Black.
He puts together some wins and voila. Now I did not witness recruiting myself but……could it have happened of course. I do know this, they or someone was doing a heck of a job selling the program to kids that saw their college football chances better at DLS. Remember DLS had a huge advantage in that we can "recruit" form any area. So if you had a promising kid in football are you sending him/her to Encinal? John Swett?
Once he got the ball rolling it's not clear how much recruiting needs to happen but the competition has improved immensely from the 150 record. Would be interesting to hear from some of the Pitt kids or maybe McClymonds kids if they were approached by DLS staff etc .

---

Well said and agreed.

DJ Williams was the best high school football player I ever saw. Was the 1999 USA Defensive player of the year, but went both ways. Was 6'2" and 220 as a freshman.

Also pretty fast on the track.
Dude reminded me of Herschel Walker.

He was a locomotive.

Big C said:

---

Still, I think it would be fun to shut down the AC in Florida, Texas and Arizona for a few years, just to see what would happen.

---

Perhaps all of those new data centers that they're building will suck up all the juice on their grid.

Popcorn ready!

DiabloWags said:

---

I once was talking to the current DLS Varsity Baseball Coach (Jeans) at a local sports bar some 20 years ago and he gave me the "they did it too" narrative when it came to public schools "recruiting".

I'm not sure how much actual "recruiting" by coaches happened because that would have been illegal, but a kid who was going to school in Richmond could transfer to Miramonte in Orinda because they wanted to take the LATIN CLASS that was not offered at their school. This is how the Carey Brothers all wound up going to Miramonte and helped them win an NCS Football Title.

Even my alma mater at Las Lomas had a kid commuting from Benicia who was the starting southpaw QB, because his school did not offer any Auto Shop classes.

He could have made a right turn right after the Benicia Bridge and attended Alhambra High in Martinez where they had a pretty good auto shop. Nope. He needed to keep going down 680 until he got to Walnut Creek.

The transfers were notified via FAX to all schools in the District.
The AD's never challenged them.

They just turned their heads and walked away.

But it's not like this was running rampant.

---

This is just one anecdote but it gave me the impression that parents were involved in DLS recruiting. LF jr was a very good basketball player (one year of D-1 before deciding it took too much asway from academics). He was also a good baseball player. So following his freshman year at Berkeley High, I'm at a summer league baseball game at DLS and two dads sitting in front of me start discussing LF jr when he. comes up to bat. Speculating that he'd start on the varsity basketball team and pitch for the baseball team. Never approached by DLS but I found it interesting that they knew anything about him. He was recruited by St Mary's in Berkeley after their coach saw him dunk in an 8th grade game. Also, Berkeley High had two Richmond kids on the basketball team. I think they just used a relative's Berkeley address. This was all 25+ years ago

Big C said:

---

TomBear said:

---

Big C- While I appreciate your support for Cal, peripherally, this thinking is exactly why people leave this state and go to places like Texas, Tennessee, Idaho, and Florida, and why people in the rest of the country dislike Californians so much. I go to Texas every two years, and Tennessee on the alternate years. Only because of geography/topography I have taken Texas off my list of possible retirement destinations. But Tennessee is high on my list.

The problem is, too many Californians are leaving the state because of policies here, then go to other states and bring those same stupid policies that drove them out with them.

California is a beautiful state. But I've been out with some beautiful women that turned out to be ugly once I saw the nuanced part of them. California's nuanced sides have made a visually beautiful state into (as Steeley Span used to sing) "the ugliest witch in the north country".

As for high school football (what this thread was originally intended to be about), it is great to see how local communities in other states (even Oregon) support their local teams. Football is as important to local high schools as football is to a university. Maybe more so because the younger you can teach a young man about sacrifice, discipline, consequences based on performance, and doing something greater than self, the better.

---

I was partially kidding. Grew up in the East Bay, but I got no problem with other areas and the folks who reside in them. My dad grew up in West Virginia of all places and I always enjoy seeing my relatives there. I will let them bring up politics, if they want... and if they do, I listen more than I talk. We get along great!

Both California and Texas have their challenges, for sure. I got nothing wrong with Texas but I can't see moving there unless maybe both my kids did. And even then...

Still, I think it would be fun to shut down the AC in Florida, Texas and Arizona for a few years, just to see what would happen.

---

We'd just read up on how the indians did it and do that. You'd be surprised how you can get used to 95 temps with humidity. But, you can't beat a wildfire, except get the hell out and lose everything.

Anarchistbear said:

---

Texas and California are both great and both are examples of how the decentralized system in the US can create different economic powerhouses with different approaches but the major approach has been the same- business rules.

Both have relied on immigration to sustain this, both domestic and international with Texas now eclipsing CA because of costs.

Both have diverse cultures- Texas more African American and Latino; California more Asian and Latino.

Both have great places of beauty and recreation but California gets the clear edge from ocean to desert .

Texas wins music. Football isn't close. You can eat well in both.

---

I agree with most of your points, but beg to differ as to music. It really depends on what kind of music one likes. When it comes to classical, California wins hands down. Back in the 80s and 90s, California also won re rap and hip hop (I'm not sure now as I no longer regularly follow/listen to rap/hip hop). For country, Texas definitely has an edge, but California isn't that far behind with Stagecoach, Bakersfield, and the rural areas up and down the state.

As for other music, at least my generation had something called the Orange County music scene that gave us bands like the Offspring, No Doubt, and Save Ferris. I'm hard pressed to think of anything similar from Texas. Of course, personally, I would also want to remind you that California also gave the world Carlos Santana and the Beach Boys. Also, since this is a Cal board, I'm going to pull the trump card and remind you that Counting Crows was formed in Berkeley (with fellow Cal alum Adam Duritz as lead vocals).

Ultimately, I think the music point goes to California, not Texas. Especially for a Cal fan board!

TomBear said:

---

But I've been out with some beautiful women that turned out to be ugly once I saw the nuanced part of them. California's nuanced sides have made a visually beautiful state into (as Steeley Span used to sing) "the ugliest witch in the north country".

---

Wait, did you just attack California Girls? Well, here is my retort:

01Bear said:

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

Texas and California are both great and both are examples of how the decentralized system in the US can create different economic powerhouses with different approaches but the major approach has been the same- business rules.

Both have relied on immigration to sustain this, both domestic and international with Texas now eclipsing CA because of costs.

Both have diverse cultures- Texas more African American and Latino; California more Asian and Latino.

Both have great places of beauty and recreation but California gets the clear edge from ocean to desert .

Texas wins music. Football isn't close. You can eat well in both.

---

I agree with most of your points, but beg to differ as to music. It really depends on what kind of music one likes. When it comes to classical, California wins hands down. Back in the 80s and 90s, California also won re rap and hip hop (I'm not sure now as I no longer regularly follow/listen to rap/hip hop). For country, Texas definitely has an edge, but California isn't that far behind with Stagecoach, Bakersfield, and the rural areas up and down the state.

As for other music, at least my generation had something called the Orange County music scene that gave us bands like the Offspring, No Doubt, and Save Ferris. I'm hard pressed to think of anything similar from Texas. Of course, personally, I would also want to remind you that California also gave the world Carlos Santana and the Beach Boys. Also, since this is a Cal board, I'm going to pull the trump card and remind you that Counting Crows was formed in Berkeley (with fellow Cal alum Adam Duritz as lead vocals).

Ultimately, I think the music point goes to California, not Texas. Especially for a Cal fan board!

---

Now you have really done it. On a Cal board discussing music and no reference to the Dead? Blasphemy!

01Bear said:

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

Texas and California are both great and both are examples of how the decentralized system in the US can create different economic powerhouses with different approaches but the major approach has been the same- business rules.

Both have relied on immigration to sustain this, both domestic and international with Texas now eclipsing CA because of costs.

Both have diverse cultures- Texas more African American and Latino; California more Asian and Latino.

Both have great places of beauty and recreation but California gets the clear edge from ocean to desert .

Texas wins music. Football isn't close. You can eat well in both.

---

I agree with most of your points, but beg to differ as to music. It really depends on what kind of music one likes. When it comes to classical, California wins hands down. Back in the 80s and 90s, California also won re rap and hip hop (I'm not sure now as I no longer regularly follow/listen to rap/hip hop). For country, Texas definitely has an edge, but California isn't that far behind with Stagecoach, Bakersfield, and the rural areas up and down the state.

As for other music, at least my generation had something called the Orange County music scene that gave us bands like the Offspring, No Doubt, and Save Ferris. I'm hard pressed to think of anything similar from Texas. Of course, personally, I would also want to remind you that California also gave the world Carlos Santana and the Beach Boys. Also, since this is a Cal board, I'm going to pull the trump card and remind you that Counting Crows was formed in Berkeley (with fellow Cal alum Adam Duritz as lead vocals).

Ultimately, I think the music point goes to California, not Texas. Especially for a Cal fan board!

---

Blues; Leadbelly, Stevie Ray Vaughan. Johnny Winter, Lightning Hopkins, T bone Walker,

Willie, Waylon, Kris, Buddy Holly, Beyonc, Lyle Lovett, Janis Joplin, George Straiit, Roy Orbison

California is mouse music

01Bear said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

01Bear said:

---

HateRed said:

---

I like CA a lot. It's just too expensive. I'm sorry you think it's a cesspool. It's not, as a matter of fact from Austin to The Piney Woods is beautiful and forested. Houston is built in a forest. If you dislike Texas for its politics, I do too. It's lethal here, but every state has it.

---

I went the other way around. I lived in Texas as a little kid, before moving to California, where I grew up. I have some fond memories of Texas, but am glad I left. I visited Texas for work a couple times in the early 2000s; I was glad for the trips back to Texas but even more glad to be flying back to California.

For one, humidity is not my friend. For another, the natural beauty of California dwarfs that found in Texas*. Also, California has all four seasons within driving distance.

Finally, the food scene in California is the best. I can have pastrami breakfast burritos in the morning, goulash for lunch, and doro wat for dinner followed by a nightcap of California wines. Don't get me wrong, Texas BBQ is the best and Texmex is also fantastic, but the melting pot of cuisines and cultures in California is nonpareil.

Sure, there's plenty California doesn't get quite right. The cost of living is also ridiculous! But overall, California is about as close to paradise as I've found.

*Is there anything to rival Yosemite? That's one of the most beautiful spots on God's green earth, IMHO.

---

Well I agree on the CA vs Texas comparison, especially the weather.

But CA doesn't have the best food scene in the world. Start with Italy. San Sebastin, France, etc.

And Yosemite is awesome, but it isn't the Grand Canyon, the Alps, the Great Ocean road, Patagonia, New Zealand Alps (think the Lord of the Ring Trilogy) and I could go on.

Nothing wrong with being a boomer for where you live, but let's not get crazy.

---

If you're limiting good food to just European cuisine, you're absolutely missing out. Italian and French food are definitely good, but they aren't nearly the best IMHO. One of the drawbacks with eating in Italy or France is the dearth of variety. While there's excellent French food in France and also excellent Italian food in Italy, it's hard to find excellent Italian food in France or excellent French food in Italy, let alone at reasonable prices.

California, OTOH, has excellent cuisines from all around the world, and all at reasonable prices. Heck, we even have pizza trucks that make traditional Neapolitan pizzas! If just for the culinary options alone, I would much rather live in California than anywhere else in the world.

Also, I've been to the Grand Canyon and it's little more than a giant hole in the ground. Seriously, though, I've visited the Grand Canyon many times, but Yosemite is on a whole other level. It has a different personality for each of the four seasons. The same can't really be said about the Grand Canyon. As for the Alps, i've never been but I really don't see the appeal as a non-skiier/hiker. If there are other reasons to visit, please feel free to enlighten me (I mean this entirely seriously). As for Patagonia, I'd love to visit there some day. That looks like a gorgeous spot of Earth, as well.

That said, none of these spots are in Texas. IIRC, we were comparing the relative pros and cons of Texas with those of California.

---

Agreed about Yosemite being better than the Grand Canyon but Yellowstone is better than both.

But you are missing out on the Alps. In the Alps you can take aerial cable cars or underground trams up to mountain towns that have no private cars. Then a short walk into a valley where a small family owned restaurant will serve you and dozens of other travelers great wine, cheese, and food with a majestic view. In America the spot would probably have a McDonalds.

Anarchistbear said:

---

01Bear said:

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

Texas and California are both great and both are examples of how the decentralized system in the US can create different economic powerhouses with different approaches but the major approach has been the same- business rules.

Both have relied on immigration to sustain this, both domestic and international with Texas now eclipsing CA because of costs.

Both have diverse cultures- Texas more African American and Latino; California more Asian and Latino.

Both have great places of beauty and recreation but California gets the clear edge from ocean to desert .

Texas wins music. Football isn't close. You can eat well in both.

---

I agree with most of your points, but beg to differ as to music. It really depends on what kind of music one likes. When it comes to classical, California wins hands down. Back in the 80s and 90s, California also won re rap and hip hop (I'm not sure now as I no longer regularly follow/listen to rap/hip hop). For country, Texas definitely has an edge, but California isn't that far behind with Stagecoach, Bakersfield, and the rural areas up and down the state.

As for other music, at least my generation had something called the Orange County music scene that gave us bands like the Offspring, No Doubt, and Save Ferris. I'm hard pressed to think of anything similar from Texas. Of course, personally, I would also want to remind you that California also gave the world Carlos Santana and the Beach Boys. Also, since this is a Cal board, I'm going to pull the trump card and remind you that Counting Crows was formed in Berkeley (with fellow Cal alum Adam Duritz as lead vocals).

Ultimately, I think the music point goes to California, not Texas. Especially for a Cal fan board!

---

Blues; Leadbelly, Stevie Ray Vaughan. Johnny Winter, Lightning Hopkins, T bone Walker,

Willie, Waylon, Kris, Buddy Holly, Beyonc, Lyle Lovett, Janis Joplin, George Straiit, Roy Orbison

California is mouse music

---

Short list. California wins.

To WIAF: I wasn't attacking "California Girls" per se. Just the ones who aren't as beautiful in the heart as they are on the outside.

Big C: Got it, and noted. No harm no foul

Anarchistbear: "Mouse music".......the line of the week!

As for music, I'll take Tennessee over any state. Even on Broadway in Nashville, you'll get a little diversity.

And 01Bear, you are right on classical music being better in California. I would suggest the same holds true for Jazz. Both genres are, in my opinion, overall under-represented, especially early music and west coast jazz.

As for H.S. football, I seem to recall being informed that DLS games are now streamed? Can anyone confirm that for me, and if so, what is the procedure to view them? I know a few Miramonte and Campo games were streamed by some independent service, but I can't recall who it was.

Years ago, when I had a 12 foot satellite dish, I would get H.S. Games from Texas and Chicago. This was before my treks to Texas (going back to the '80s?). Up to then I had only heard about how crazy H.S. football was in Texas. But watching it on TV made the rumors confirmed. Even rural Texas games were up on the birds.

TomBear said:

---

To WIAF: I wasn't attacking "California Girls" per se. Just the ones who aren't as beautiful in the heart as they are on the outside.

Big C: Got it, and noted. No harm no foul

Anarchistbear: "Mouse music".......the line of the week!

As for music, I'll take Tennessee over any state. Even on Broadway in Nashville, you'll get a little diversity.

And 01Bear, you are right on classical music being better in California. I would suggest the same holds true for Jazz. Both genres are, in my opinion, overall under-represented, especially early music and west coast jazz.

As for H.S. football, I seem to recall being informed that DLS games are now streamed? Can anyone confirm that for me, and if so, what is the procedure to view them? I know a few Miramonte and Campo games were streamed by some independent service, but I can't recall who it was.

Years ago, when I had a 12 foot satellite dish, I would get H.S. Games from Texas and Chicago. This was before my treks to Texas (going back to the '80s?). Up to then I had only heard about how crazy H.S. football was in Texas. But watching it on TV made the rumors confirmed. Even rural Texas games were up on the birds.

---

Tom, I was kidding you both on the music and the girls.

WIAF, sometimes I just don't "get it". Again, no harm, no foul

A former classmate sold her $2,8 million South Bay 3bdr house that must have cost around $150,000 to build in 1980 for a mansion in a coastal S Carolina golf community with I would guess half the proceeds left over...

TX has bad weather but readily accessible weekend skiing in CO and beach destinations in the Caribbean and Mexico.

The food variety in places like Houston is excellent today, but yeah nobody walks and it's complete suburbia, which can work out OK overall for families who will enjoy having room to spread on their big lots.

wifeisafurd said:

---

01Bear said:

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

Texas and California are both great and both are examples of how the decentralized system in the US can create different economic powerhouses with different approaches but the major approach has been the same- business rules.

Both have relied on immigration to sustain this, both domestic and international with Texas now eclipsing CA because of costs.

Both have diverse cultures- Texas more African American and Latino; California more Asian and Latino.

Both have great places of beauty and recreation but California gets the clear edge from ocean to desert .

Texas wins music. Football isn't close. You can eat well in both.

---

I agree with most of your points, but beg to differ as to music. It really depends on what kind of music one likes. When it comes to classical, California wins hands down. Back in the 80s and 90s, California also won re rap and hip hop (I'm not sure now as I no longer regularly follow/listen to rap/hip hop). For country, Texas definitely has an edge, but California isn't that far behind with Stagecoach, Bakersfield, and the rural areas up and down the state.

As for other music, at least my generation had something called the Orange County music scene that gave us bands like the Offspring, No Doubt, and Save Ferris. I'm hard pressed to think of anything similar from Texas. Of course, personally, I would also want to remind you that California also gave the world Carlos Santana and the Beach Boys. Also, since this is a Cal board, I'm going to pull the trump card and remind you that Counting Crows was formed in Berkeley (with fellow Cal alum Adam Duritz as lead vocals).

Ultimately, I think the music point goes to California, not Texas. Especially for a Cal fan board!

---

Now you have really done it. On a Cal board discussing music and no reference to the Dead? Blasphemy!

---

Mea culpa!

Seriously, though, I did consider adding in the Dead but I wasn't sure if they were from California. I kind of assumed a couple of them were, but I wasn't positive. Thanks for letting me know that they're a Californian band, though!

So does the Dead being a Californian group swing your vote on music to California?

dajo9 said:

---

01Bear said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

01Bear said:

---

HateRed said:

---

I like CA a lot. It's just too expensive. I'm sorry you think it's a cesspool. It's not, as a matter of fact from Austin to The Piney Woods is beautiful and forested. Houston is built in a forest. If you dislike Texas for its politics, I do too. It's lethal here, but every state has it.

---

I went the other way around. I lived in Texas as a little kid, before moving to California, where I grew up. I have some fond memories of Texas, but am glad I left. I visited Texas for work a couple times in the early 2000s; I was glad for the trips back to Texas but even more glad to be flying back to California.

For one, humidity is not my friend. For another, the natural beauty of California dwarfs that found in Texas*. Also, California has all four seasons within driving distance.

Finally, the food scene in California is the best. I can have pastrami breakfast burritos in the morning, goulash for lunch, and doro wat for dinner followed by a nightcap of California wines. Don't get me wrong, Texas BBQ is the best and Texmex is also fantastic, but the melting pot of cuisines and cultures in California is nonpareil.

Sure, there's plenty California doesn't get quite right. The cost of living is also ridiculous! But overall, California is about as close to paradise as I've found.

*Is there anything to rival Yosemite? That's one of the most beautiful spots on God's green earth, IMHO.

---

Well I agree on the CA vs Texas comparison, especially the weather.

But CA doesn't have the best food scene in the world. Start with Italy. San Sebastin, France, etc.

And Yosemite is awesome, but it isn't the Grand Canyon, the Alps, the Great Ocean road, Patagonia, New Zealand Alps (think the Lord of the Ring Trilogy) and I could go on.

Nothing wrong with being a boomer for where you live, but let's not get crazy.

---

If you're limiting good food to just European cuisine, you're absolutely missing out. Italian and French food are definitely good, but they aren't nearly the best IMHO. One of the drawbacks with eating in Italy or France is the dearth of variety. While there's excellent French food in France and also excellent Italian food in Italy, it's hard to find excellent Italian food in France or excellent French food in Italy, let alone at reasonable prices.

California, OTOH, has excellent cuisines from all around the world, and all at reasonable prices. Heck, we even have pizza trucks that make traditional Neapolitan pizzas! If just for the culinary options alone, I would much rather live in California than anywhere else in the world.

Also, I've been to the Grand Canyon and it's little more than a giant hole in the ground. Seriously, though, I've visited the Grand Canyon many times, but Yosemite is on a whole other level. It has a different personality for each of the four seasons. The same can't really be said about the Grand Canyon. As for the Alps, i've never been but I really don't see the appeal as a non-skiier/hiker. If there are other reasons to visit, please feel free to enlighten me (I mean this entirely seriously). As for Patagonia, I'd love to visit there some day. That looks like a gorgeous spot of Earth, as well.

That said, none of these spots are in Texas. IIRC, we were comparing the relative pros and cons of Texas with those of California.

---

Agreed about Yosemite being better than the Grand Canyon but Yellowstone is better than both.

But you are missing out on the Alps. In the Alps you can take aerial cable cars or underground trams up to mountain towns that have no private cars. Then a short walk into a valley where a small family owned restaurant will serve you and dozens of other travelers great wine, cheese, and food with a majestic view. In America the spot would probably have a McDonalds.

---

I may just have to visit the Alps at some point? Any one in particular you'd recommend?

Also, I've visited Yellowstone. While it was gorgeous in some places, a lot of it was just about the hot springs. While I liked them well enough, it also meant I really couldn't wander around Yellowstone as I could Yosemite. Also, the sulphur smell I could do without.

For me, Yosemite wins hands down. Zion National Park is another gorgeous spot, and one I'd like to explore more sometime. But Yosemite stole my heart.

01Bear said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

01Bear said:

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

Texas and California are both great and both are examples of how the decentralized system in the US can create different economic powerhouses with different approaches but the major approach has been the same- business rules.

Both have relied on immigration to sustain this, both domestic and international with Texas now eclipsing CA because of costs.

Both have diverse cultures- Texas more African American and Latino; California more Asian and Latino.

Both have great places of beauty and recreation but California gets the clear edge from ocean to desert .

Texas wins music. Football isn't close. You can eat well in both.

---

I agree with most of your points, but beg to differ as to music. It really depends on what kind of music one likes. When it comes to classical, California wins hands down. Back in the 80s and 90s, California also won re rap and hip hop (I'm not sure now as I no longer regularly follow/listen to rap/hip hop). For country, Texas definitely has an edge, but California isn't that far behind with Stagecoach, Bakersfield, and the rural areas up and down the state.

As for other music, at least my generation had something called the Orange County music scene that gave us bands like the Offspring, No Doubt, and Save Ferris. I'm hard pressed to think of anything similar from Texas. Of course, personally, I would also want to remind you that California also gave the world Carlos Santana and the Beach Boys. Also, since this is a Cal board, I'm going to pull the trump card and remind you that Counting Crows was formed in Berkeley (with fellow Cal alum Adam Duritz as lead vocals).

Ultimately, I think the music point goes to California, not Texas. Especially for a Cal fan board!

---

Now you have really done it. On a Cal board discussing music and no reference to the Dead? Blasphemy!

---

Mea culpa!

Seriously, though, I did consider adding in the Dead but I wasn't sure if they were from California. I kind of assumed a couple of them were, but I wasn't positive. Thanks for letting me know that they're a Californian band, though!

So does the Dead being a Californian group swing your vote on music to California?

---

Okay, a political answer here: for me yes, I like classic rock and there are just so many classic rock acts that developed in CA that it has the edge: the Eagles, the Dead, CC&R, The Doors, Beach Boys, Go-Gos. Jefferson Airplane/Starship and I could just go on and on. But I understand that people into other musical genres may lean to Texas. Depends on what you listen to.

01Bear said:

---

dajo9 said:

---

01Bear said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

01Bear said:

---

HateRed said:

---

I like CA a lot. It's just too expensive. I'm sorry you think it's a cesspool. It's not, as a matter of fact from Austin to The Piney Woods is beautiful and forested. Houston is built in a forest. If you dislike Texas for its politics, I do too. It's lethal here, but every state has it.

---

I went the other way around. I lived in Texas as a little kid, before moving to California, where I grew up. I have some fond memories of Texas, but am glad I left. I visited Texas for work a couple times in the early 2000s; I was glad for the trips back to Texas but even more glad to be flying back to California.

For one, humidity is not my friend. For another, the natural beauty of California dwarfs that found in Texas*. Also, California has all four seasons within driving distance.

Finally, the food scene in California is the best. I can have pastrami breakfast burritos in the morning, goulash for lunch, and doro wat for dinner followed by a nightcap of California wines. Don't get me wrong, Texas BBQ is the best and Texmex is also fantastic, but the melting pot of cuisines and cultures in California is nonpareil.

Sure, there's plenty California doesn't get quite right. The cost of living is also ridiculous! But overall, California is about as close to paradise as I've found.

*Is there anything to rival Yosemite? That's one of the most beautiful spots on God's green earth, IMHO.

---

Well I agree on the CA vs Texas comparison, especially the weather.

But CA doesn't have the best food scene in the world. Start with Italy. San Sebastin, France, etc.

And Yosemite is awesome, but it isn't the Grand Canyon, the Alps, the Great Ocean road, Patagonia, New Zealand Alps (think the Lord of the Ring Trilogy) and I could go on.

Nothing wrong with being a boomer for where you live, but let's not get crazy.

---

If you're limiting good food to just European cuisine, you're absolutely missing out. Italian and French food are definitely good, but they aren't nearly the best IMHO. One of the drawbacks with eating in Italy or France is the dearth of variety. While there's excellent French food in France and also excellent Italian food in Italy, it's hard to find excellent Italian food in France or excellent French food in Italy, let alone at reasonable prices.

California, OTOH, has excellent cuisines from all around the world, and all at reasonable prices. Heck, we even have pizza trucks that make traditional Neapolitan pizzas! If just for the culinary options alone, I would much rather live in California than anywhere else in the world.

Also, I've been to the Grand Canyon and it's little more than a giant hole in the ground. Seriously, though, I've visited the Grand Canyon many times, but Yosemite is on a whole other level. It has a different personality for each of the four seasons. The same can't really be said about the Grand Canyon. As for the Alps, i've never been but I really don't see the appeal as a non-skiier/hiker. If there are other reasons to visit, please feel free to enlighten me (I mean this entirely seriously). As for Patagonia, I'd love to visit there some day. That looks like a gorgeous spot of Earth, as well.

That said, none of these spots are in Texas. IIRC, we were comparing the relative pros and cons of Texas with those of California.

---

Agreed about Yosemite being better than the Grand Canyon but Yellowstone is better than both.

But you are missing out on the Alps. In the Alps you can take aerial cable cars or underground trams up to mountain towns that have no private cars. Then a short walk into a valley where a small family owned restaurant will serve you and dozens of other travelers great wine, cheese, and food with a majestic view. In America the spot would probably have a McDonalds.

---

I may just have to visit the Alps at some point? Any one in particular you'd recommend?

Also, I've visited Yellowstone. While it was gorgeous in some places, a lot of it was just about the hot springs. While I liked them well enough, it also meant I really couldn't wander around Yellowstone as I could Yosemite. Also, the sulphur smell I could do without.

For me, Yosemite wins hands down. Zion National Park is another gorgeous spot, and one I'd like to explore more sometime. But Yosemite stole my heart.

---

The Alps cover a huge area. The French Alps, the Swiss Alps, the German/Austrian Alps and the Italian alps tend to be different due to cultural leanings (and the Swiss Alps themselves have several different cultural leanings). And the Alps even get to Slovenia, which is a beautiful country. My favorite place is the Bernese Oberland, which is insanely dramatic and accessible due to gondolas and railways. But what area you will like best depends on budget, travel style, if you want to participate in sports or outdoor adventure, enjoy luxury, you are a foodie (go to France or Italy) etc.

wifeisafurd said:

---

01Bear said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

01Bear said:

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

Texas and California are both great and both are examples of how the decentralized system in the US can create different economic powerhouses with different approaches but the major approach has been the same- business rules.

Both have relied on immigration to sustain this, both domestic and international with Texas now eclipsing CA because of costs.

Both have diverse cultures- Texas more African American and Latino; California more Asian and Latino.

Both have great places of beauty and recreation but California gets the clear edge from ocean to desert .

Texas wins music. Football isn't close. You can eat well in both.

---

I agree with most of your points, but beg to differ as to music. It really depends on what kind of music one likes. When it comes to classical, California wins hands down. Back in the 80s and 90s, California also won re rap and hip hop (I'm not sure now as I no longer regularly follow/listen to rap/hip hop). For country, Texas definitely has an edge, but California isn't that far behind with Stagecoach, Bakersfield, and the rural areas up and down the state.

As for other music, at least my generation had something called the Orange County music scene that gave us bands like the Offspring, No Doubt, and Save Ferris. I'm hard pressed to think of anything similar from Texas. Of course, personally, I would also want to remind you that California also gave the world Carlos Santana and the Beach Boys. Also, since this is a Cal board, I'm going to pull the trump card and remind you that Counting Crows was formed in Berkeley (with fellow Cal alum Adam Duritz as lead vocals).

Ultimately, I think the music point goes to California, not Texas. Especially for a Cal fan board!

---

Now you have really done it. On a Cal board discussing music and no reference to the Dead? Blasphemy!

---

Mea culpa!

Seriously, though, I did consider adding in the Dead but I wasn't sure if they were from California. I kind of assumed a couple of them were, but I wasn't positive. Thanks for letting me know that they're a Californian band, though!

So does the Dead being a Californian group swing your vote on music to California?

---

Okay, a political answer here: for me yes, I like classic rock and there are just so many classic rock acts that developed in CA that it has the edge: the Eagles, the Dead, CC&R, The Doors, Beach Boys, Go-Gos. Jefferson Airplane/Starship and I could just go on and on. But I understand that people into other musical genres may lean to Texas. Depends on what you listen to.

---

If you like country then Texas may win. But if you like classic rock or hip hop or new wave or heavy metal or glam rock or punk or pop or grunge then CA wins.