6 comments

• 

  Tony

  1 year ago

  All of these were rough, though none of them compare to any single pre-Tedford loss to the 'furd. The loses to 'SC were consequential, but we left the 2004 matchup with more respect then we entered with, and we were just outplayed down the stretch in 2006. The pain of losing to the Cats was only fully realized after the events of the next two weeks. And the Holiday Bowl debacle was almost fiting after the Rose Bowl snub. So I pick Tennessee as the worst because the blowout took so much wind out of what we had accomplished over the preceeding years, and then the taint hung with us all last year.
  reply
• 

  Madeline

  1 year ago

  To me, the Arizona game was the most embarassing loss. The others were crushing but they were all against good teams. Arizona was not good last year. I just remember sitting in my house watching the ZonaZoo rush the field. I turned off the tv and sat in the dead silence holding my head in my hands. I knew right then that we would have to wait at least another year before knowing if we would go to the Bowl that Shall Not Be Named.
  reply
• 

  katster

  1 year ago

  Simply?
  
  1998 Big Game. We came in the game 5-5 and a win would send us to a bowl game. We'd just been to the Aloha Bowl in 1996, but a bowl game is a bowl game. And Stanford was a hideous 2-8 team. Now, it's Big Game, throw out the records, but from the looks of it, Cal had the better team.
  
  It was my twentieth birthday. An Axe for a birthday present was something I greatly desired.
  
  Final score:
  California 3
  Stanford 10
  
  Ouch.
  
  *Nothing* compares to that. Nothing. As much as I was sickened by last year's TN/AZ debacles, to say nothing of 2004's double whammy, none of them has that godawful feeling that the 1998 Big Game gives me.
  
  And I'll leave it at that.
  
  -kat
  reply
• 

  katster

  1 year ago

  Ahh...and then I see that I fail at reading comprehension. ;)
  
  Of the Tedford era? Yeah, I'll have to go with TN last year for the reasons already stated. But it's still a "meh" compared to that 1998 game.
  
  -kat
  reply
• 

  Avinash

  1 year ago

  I guess I never got the Cal-Stanford rivalry (well, I get it in the practical sense, but the teams have been at polar opposites of the Pac-10 ever since I got here that the games have been anti-climactic). So I can't really understand
  
  Now if Stanford were good, I'd be into it more. But I always think of USC as the main rival right now.
  reply
• 

  katster

  1 year ago

  Well, yeah, these days when we're hanging out at the top of the conference, USC is the team to beat. (Of course, in the Holmoe years, USC wasn't a very good team either, so we beat them more often than not.)
  
  Also, keep in mind that back in the Holmoe years, neither team was really that good (fluke Rose Bowl for Stanford in 1999 included), but the damned Furdies kept putting the hurt on us. You go your entire undergrad career without the Axe, and the whole thing takes on more meaning.
  
  My return to Berkeley (for grad school) happened to be the first year of the Tedford era. I remember staring at the scoreboard as the last few seconds ticked off and realizing that I was finally, after six years of loving (and suffering with) Golden Bear football, watching my Bears win a Big Game. It was...surreal, is the only word I can put to it. I couldn't quite get it in my head that we'd finally won. If you ask me to list the euphoric moments of my Cal Bear fandom, that would be up there pretty high.
  
  I can totally understand with the way Stanford sucks right now why Big Game doesn't mean that much. And you know? I think I'd rather have it that way for a while. It feels good to win.
  
  -kat
  reply