Texas gets the Rose Bowl!!

[IceColdBrewski]

I stand by my previous assessments.

Look, Cal got beat by Tech and beaten pretty soundly at that. But you can't look at that in a vacuum and say, well Texas > Tech > Cal. It doesn't work that way.

Human beings play football and they bring their emotions to play in any given game. I figured (and was glad to see, frankly) that Tech would beat Cal. That was true largely because, once Cal got dissed by the BCS, it had absolutely nothing to play for and a tremendous disappointment to overcome. It was damn near impossible for them to get back to the emotional pitch that they had reached during the regular season. Tech, meanwhile, had everything to play for an was overjoyed to be playing in the highest profile game it has seen in a decade. Cal was emotionally vulnerable and Tech was able to exploit that. It's not unlike the affliction that has gotten to UT in a few of its recent bowl games (Holiday 2003, for example).

I still maintain that had Cal played in the Rose Bowl, you would have seen a much different team, playing a much different game. You can try to downplay the role that emotion plays in the game of football, or you can argue that teams should not be so devastated by unfortunate turns of events since they're just being asked to play football, but if you do make such arguments, you must not have played much football and particularly not at very high levels.

Finally someone who sees things for the way they really are. We see this scenario play out every year. A team that feels slighted because they weren't selected for a BCS game goes out and plays like because they know they deserve better.

[samikeyp]

ok again...I agreed with FWD. What is it with you and the blanket statments?

[FromWayDowntown]

How about their school? Their fans? Themselves? I would think that the overwhelming desire to prove to the world that they did deserve to be in the Rose Bowl.

Sure, those things are there, but they are the humdrum motivations of any football team, good or bad. It's awfully hard to reach the great emotional levels that are necessary to compete at a high level if there is nothing beyond those things to play for.

Even if Cal had blown out Tech, it would have made no difference to their argument that they should have been in the Rose Bowl. Even if it would have made a difference (and I don't think anyone who thought it came out right would have rethought their positions) I don't think that was ever really the point of Cal's argument.

For Cal, once the Orange Bowl became unattainable, it was about the Rose Bowl, as an ins ution, not the Rose Bowl as a big bowl game. Pac-10 schools measure success by Rose Bowl appearances, even to this day. For Cal to reach that particular game, it would have been the highlight of a quarter century or more of football. Having been deprived of that opportunity -- really through no fault of their own -- that bunch suffered a disappointment greater than merely not being a BCS team: they were denied the opportunity to stamp their season with the ultimate success for a school like Cal.

Sure, they could have handled the situation better, but until you've walked a mile in their shoes it's hard to say that you would have handled it any better than those guys did. You have to remember that the Cal Bears (like every other collegiate team) are nothing other than a bunch of 18-23 year olds. Like all kids, they suffer from the emotional nosedives of disappointment.

[samikeyp]

You are absolutely correct which is why I said...

I am not disagreeing with you, just providing things that I thought could have been used for motivation. You are correct though. The impact of emotion in a football game can never be discounted

also, not once did I say I would have handled it better than those kids.

[FromWayDowntown]

You asked the question about other motivations, and I tried to explain why I still think you saw a very flat Cal team that had no interest in playing in the Holiday Bowl and why I don't think you can take Cal's loss as any sort of proof that they didn't belong in the Rose Bowl.

Mikey, I'm not on you. I read your statement and appreciate and respect your viewpoint (and thank you for respecting mine). I wasn't trying to suggest that you were saying you would have handled it better -- those statements are more for others who might come along later to this discussion.



On another front, though, does anyone still have any questions about whether Utah belonged in the BCS? Those guys will have been robbed if they don't end up #3 in the polls.

[samikeyp]

Fair enough FWD. Thank you for respecting mine as well.

As far as Utah at #3...is that assuming Auburn is 2 if they win? If Auburn wins....then I would put OU/USC winner 1, Auburn 2 and Utah 3.

[2centsworth]

I don't think so. Tech gets rolling on "O" Cal is gonna have a of a time. This is my upset special, take Tech plus the 12.

It's not easy being a genious.

[samikeyp]

good call. I was wayyyyyyyyy off. But, I didn't mind.