1) Guess our esteemed Pac-12 refs will have to move to Pullman or Corvallis. Such a shame. At least they got the targeting call right.
2) Historically, the players mostly bailed after a field rush. This time, they celebrated in the thick of it. One was carrying the Axe. Not sure if the players changed or if Wilcox relaxed a rule but it was great to see them genuinely bonding with fans. Hope the ACC doesn't crack down (or fans don't do something reckless) because, as Lu pointed out, it's become enough of a tradition that you see kids make it down there safely. And this, paradoxically, has probably made it safer and less rowdy to do so than in my era.
3) Nando to Trond is so fun to watch. I thought Hunter would be The Guy this year but we have two unexpected heroes (even if we knew thought they had potential).
4) We had a few plays where it looks like someone missed a block (or maybe Nando missed a blitzer). Our OL play has improved enough that failure isn't the norm.
5) GO BEARS! LET'S STUN OUR FUTURE BENEFACTORS THIS WEEK!
I've only rushed the field a few times in the Big Game, but each time players were there, whether it was at the Farm or at the Memorial Stadium. I high fived the players every time.
There are usually a few but this time they seemed way more engaged with the fans. Like actually taking part in the fan celebration, carrying the Axe, etc. Normally they're either gone or hanging out with their families on the periphery, which is reasonable. I don't have any expectations that they share their moment with us, but it's super cool that they did.
Rushed the field last year. Got photos with Correia and Antzoulatos. Lots of fun. Players were pretty happy. Glad Ott and Mendoza are grooving on the fan thing
2009 was a fantastic celebration! There's photos of me somewhere doing "Furd angels" at midfield. I'm sure someone who was a better writer could compose a story about it being the last hurrah of my young adulthood.
That was the first win in a long time. I wasn't living in California then but would have been down on that field so fast. I went to 5 Big Games before that and was 0-5.
We sauntered on down maybe 5 min into the rush. I think I was on the West side after getting extra tickets from my friend's parents. Watched the goal posts come down. His dad was on the fundraising committee so he was like, well there goes 30K (or whatever the amount is for goalposts).
As an alum and with NIL & the current lack of transfer restrictions, I'm relying on WFC more & more to help familiarize myself with our players. Indeed, now that we're in the ACC, WFC is the essential source for information about not only Cal, but who we'll be playing week to week.
Even with your interpretation/definition assist, I’m not clear what the refs were thinking on the punt call. Interference applies to when the dude tries to catch it the FIRST time. Once it bounces off his chest the ball is live and he’s live. No one MADE that guy return punts; presumably he AUDITIONED to sit there looking up in the sky while big guys sprint at him full speed. I cannot tell you who the refs thought interfered with the initial catch cuz there was no one near him.
After reading Nick's interpretation, it sounds similar to the tag up rule in MLB. Once the player touches the ball, the runner can tag up regardless of if the player catches the ball cleanly or not.
The TV announcers asked the refers at HT, and reported that the rule allows for the receiving team to recover the ball after it hits the ground, not before. So the rule was still in force after the bounce on the helmet since it had not hit the ground.
Shocked as I was, I think they got this one right, because of that "(Exception: Rule 6-5-1-b)" in the quoted 6-4-1-c.
> b. If a Team B player makes a valid fair catch signal, the unimpeded opportunity to catch a free or scrimmage kick continues if this player muffs the kick and still has an opportunity to complete the catch. If that player (or another Team B player) subsequently catches the kick, the ball belongs to Team B where the player making the signal first touched it. This protection terminates when the kick touches the ground.
The box score has the penalty on Cam Sidney (#20), despite the PA announcement, and Sidney did grab the ball out of the air more-or-less above the waiting Furd player.
That was a Saturday night find for me, trying to understand how even Pac-12 officials could be that wrong. I definitely didn't know that exception when I was booing from section 238.
Still mystified, though, on how Hunter's "failed" try wasn't at least "stands" on review. "Confirmed"?!
If Sinclair sticks around for another year he needs to have his picture hung in the Cal locker room with a big “KOS” written on it. The O line and everyone else has to see 8 and react like a bull seeing red. I want him leaving next year’s game black and blue from head to toe. His ancestors and unborn children should be sore. You don’t mess with our QB, you don’t mess with Fernando.
The Trond 4th & 7 catch in the 4th quarter was an absolute game-changer. Momentum was shifting toward LSJU, and another failed Cal drive would've fed that momentum shift. Instead, we keep possession and dominate the rest of the game.
It's interesting that in the last few years we've looked more athletic and more physical than Stanford even though they've resoundingly outrecruited us (despite their recruiting being "down" from most of the Shaw years).
Unfortunately, due to the officials I didn't quite feel like "Cal controls Stanford throughout" until the clock ran down to 0:00!
My question that I haven't seen addressed is:
"Why didn't the officials review Hunter's reception on the 2-point conversion attempt?"
This was potentially a big deal at that point of the game just as was the review the previously overturned Stanford's 2-point conversion. Was it because they ruled he didn't score ? The only replay they showed in the stadium certainly made it appear he broke the plane of the goal line!
The TV announcers said that during the commercial break, the play was reviewed and the call was confirmed, but that was baffling to me because Hunter was clearly in, and it was a lot more clear to see than that play where Stanford TE Sam Roush allegedly got his foot in (where you could never see his foot and him having possession of the ball at the same time). Hunter clearly got the ball to the white line of the endzone before being downed, and hence it should have been a conversion.
The fact that I recognized these refs was a bad sign, but luckily Cal was so far ahead of Stanford that it didn't matter (the way the refs were difference-makers against Auburn and USC).
I watched during the time out, as I was certain they were going to review the play, but the officials never went near the review monitor that was set up down at the other end of the field on the Stanford sideline. On every other review they visited that review monitor before making a decision.
The only alternative was that a replay official made the call and called down to the on-field ref, which is a new rule change this year to speed up reviews in cases where the on-field call was obviously wrong (e.g. a pass hit the ground on replay, etc). However, the Hunter play was far from "obvious".
The other thing I noted during this time out was that a Cal coach (Wilcox?) was down on about the 20 yard line having a conference with three of the officials for at least the first two minutes of the time out. It appeared that the coach was pleading his case regarding the play ( pleading for a review ?), as I couldn't imagine what else he'd be talking about for so long, unless they were old family friends!
Great writing of the interpretation of the fair catch rule on punt receiving. The rest of your writing about the tradition of the big game is right on. I've been going to most Big Games since the early 50's and the Cal spirit is still there. Getting that 6th win is going to be really tough. UCLA's pass rush is really unconventional. Cal has to emphasize the run more this week and shore up its blocking of inside LB's.
ON 2006 CAL WAS AN ODDS UNDERDOG TO STANFORD. BUT, CAL BEAT STANFORD BECAUSE OF THE GREAT RUNNING OF VEREEN WHO, THAT DAY, OUT RAN MACAFFY (A SO CALLED HEISMAN CANDIDATE) THEREBY LEADING CAL TO TAKING THE GAME AWAY FROM .STANFORD. BUT STANFORD WON THE BIG GAME EVERY YEAR FOR THE NEXT TEN YEARS AFTER THAT'! GERBEAR
THERE IS NO QUESTION THAT VEREEN WAS THE OUTSTANDING CAL RUNNER IN THE IN THE BIG GAME OF 2006! CAL FAIED TO WIN THE NEXT 10 BIG GAMES I SUFERED THEN ALSO. BUT, I REMEMBER STNFURD HAD A HEISMAN RATED RUNNING BACK THAT YEAR WHO SIMPLY COULD NOT MATCH VEREEN. GERBEAR
So then it’s up with the blue and gold
Down with the red
California’s up for a victory
We’ll drop our battle axe on Stanford’s head
When we meet her
Our team will surely beat her
Down on the Stanford Farm
There’ll be no sound
When our Oski rips through the air!
Like our friend Mr Jonah
Stanford’s team will be found
In the tummy of the Golden Bear!
"Because these guys sure seem to feel a connection to us."
^^^^^THIS!
Love these guys!
Great job, Nick!
A few thoughts of my own:
1) Guess our esteemed Pac-12 refs will have to move to Pullman or Corvallis. Such a shame. At least they got the targeting call right.
2) Historically, the players mostly bailed after a field rush. This time, they celebrated in the thick of it. One was carrying the Axe. Not sure if the players changed or if Wilcox relaxed a rule but it was great to see them genuinely bonding with fans. Hope the ACC doesn't crack down (or fans don't do something reckless) because, as Lu pointed out, it's become enough of a tradition that you see kids make it down there safely. And this, paradoxically, has probably made it safer and less rowdy to do so than in my era.
3) Nando to Trond is so fun to watch. I thought Hunter would be The Guy this year but we have two unexpected heroes (even if we knew thought they had potential).
4) We had a few plays where it looks like someone missed a block (or maybe Nando missed a blitzer). Our OL play has improved enough that failure isn't the norm.
5) GO BEARS! LET'S STUN OUR FUTURE BENEFACTORS THIS WEEK!
Clemson has a tradition where they rush the field after every win, we'll fit in just fine.
The rush was pretty quick. Will we get penalized?
Wilcox in his presser said he told the players to stay on the field and enjoy it.
Good to know. Love it!
I've only rushed the field a few times in the Big Game, but each time players were there, whether it was at the Farm or at the Memorial Stadium. I high fived the players every time.
There are usually a few but this time they seemed way more engaged with the fans. Like actually taking part in the fan celebration, carrying the Axe, etc. Normally they're either gone or hanging out with their families on the periphery, which is reasonable. I don't have any expectations that they share their moment with us, but it's super cool that they did.
Rushed the field last year. Got photos with Correia and Antzoulatos. Lots of fun. Players were pretty happy. Glad Ott and Mendoza are grooving on the fan thing
I see.
I think 2009 was one of the best celebrations. Syd'quan riding on the shoulders of the fan was epic. I can't find the video of it.
https://www.californiagoldenblogs.com/2009/11/30/1180082/112th-big-game-photo-essay-iii
2009 was a fantastic celebration! There's photos of me somewhere doing "Furd angels" at midfield. I'm sure someone who was a better writer could compose a story about it being the last hurrah of my young adulthood.
I remember in 02 Boller riding on everyone's shoulders and Joe Igber just chilling in the stands.
That was the first win in a long time. I wasn't living in California then but would have been down on that field so fast. I went to 5 Big Games before that and was 0-5.
We sauntered on down maybe 5 min into the rush. I think I was on the West side after getting extra tickets from my friend's parents. Watched the goal posts come down. His dad was on the fundraising committee so he was like, well there goes 30K (or whatever the amount is for goalposts).
It would be SO DOPE if we can rush the field next week at the Rose Bowl...meet u at 50! Let's make Pasadena #BearTerritory #GoBears
As an alum and with NIL & the current lack of transfer restrictions, I'm relying on WFC more & more to help familiarize myself with our players. Indeed, now that we're in the ACC, WFC is the essential source for information about not only Cal, but who we'll be playing week to week.
Even with your interpretation/definition assist, I’m not clear what the refs were thinking on the punt call. Interference applies to when the dude tries to catch it the FIRST time. Once it bounces off his chest the ball is live and he’s live. No one MADE that guy return punts; presumably he AUDITIONED to sit there looking up in the sky while big guys sprint at him full speed. I cannot tell you who the refs thought interfered with the initial catch cuz there was no one near him.
and definitely #9 McMorris was not near him.
After reading Nick's interpretation, it sounds similar to the tag up rule in MLB. Once the player touches the ball, the runner can tag up regardless of if the player catches the ball cleanly or not.
The TV announcers asked the refers at HT, and reported that the rule allows for the receiving team to recover the ball after it hits the ground, not before. So the rule was still in force after the bounce on the helmet since it had not hit the ground.
But where is that rule written? Have you seen it?
Shocked as I was, I think they got this one right, because of that "(Exception: Rule 6-5-1-b)" in the quoted 6-4-1-c.
> b. If a Team B player makes a valid fair catch signal, the unimpeded opportunity to catch a free or scrimmage kick continues if this player muffs the kick and still has an opportunity to complete the catch. If that player (or another Team B player) subsequently catches the kick, the ball belongs to Team B where the player making the signal first touched it. This protection terminates when the kick touches the ground.
The box score has the penalty on Cam Sidney (#20), despite the PA announcement, and Sidney did grab the ball out of the air more-or-less above the waiting Furd player.
…something here about blind squirrels…
Ok, so I admit I didn't research it myself and just relied on the quoted rule in the article.
Thanks for the 6-5-1-b exception which i thought about but didn't look up myself.
That was a Saturday night find for me, trying to understand how even Pac-12 officials could be that wrong. I definitely didn't know that exception when I was booing from section 238.
Still mystified, though, on how Hunter's "failed" try wasn't at least "stands" on review. "Confirmed"?!
finally a win that felt like a win
If Sinclair sticks around for another year he needs to have his picture hung in the Cal locker room with a big “KOS” written on it. The O line and everyone else has to see 8 and react like a bull seeing red. I want him leaving next year’s game black and blue from head to toe. His ancestors and unborn children should be sore. You don’t mess with our QB, you don’t mess with Fernando.
The Trond 4th & 7 catch in the 4th quarter was an absolute game-changer. Momentum was shifting toward LSJU, and another failed Cal drive would've fed that momentum shift. Instead, we keep possession and dominate the rest of the game.
Thanks Nick!
Good work on the fair catch interference rule. Clearly it was a Cal recovery, but the Bears prevailed in spite of PAC 12 referees.
It's interesting that in the last few years we've looked more athletic and more physical than Stanford even though they've resoundingly outrecruited us (despite their recruiting being "down" from most of the Shaw years).
Unfortunately, due to the officials I didn't quite feel like "Cal controls Stanford throughout" until the clock ran down to 0:00!
My question that I haven't seen addressed is:
"Why didn't the officials review Hunter's reception on the 2-point conversion attempt?"
This was potentially a big deal at that point of the game just as was the review the previously overturned Stanford's 2-point conversion. Was it because they ruled he didn't score ? The only replay they showed in the stadium certainly made it appear he broke the plane of the goal line!
The TV announcers said that during the commercial break, the play was reviewed and the call was confirmed, but that was baffling to me because Hunter was clearly in, and it was a lot more clear to see than that play where Stanford TE Sam Roush allegedly got his foot in (where you could never see his foot and him having possession of the ball at the same time). Hunter clearly got the ball to the white line of the endzone before being downed, and hence it should have been a conversion.
The fact that I recognized these refs was a bad sign, but luckily Cal was so far ahead of Stanford that it didn't matter (the way the refs were difference-makers against Auburn and USC).
I watched during the time out, as I was certain they were going to review the play, but the officials never went near the review monitor that was set up down at the other end of the field on the Stanford sideline. On every other review they visited that review monitor before making a decision.
The only alternative was that a replay official made the call and called down to the on-field ref, which is a new rule change this year to speed up reviews in cases where the on-field call was obviously wrong (e.g. a pass hit the ground on replay, etc). However, the Hunter play was far from "obvious".
The other thing I noted during this time out was that a Cal coach (Wilcox?) was down on about the 20 yard line having a conference with three of the officials for at least the first two minutes of the time out. It appeared that the coach was pleading his case regarding the play ( pleading for a review ?), as I couldn't imagine what else he'd be talking about for so long, unless they were old family friends!
Great writing of the interpretation of the fair catch rule on punt receiving. The rest of your writing about the tradition of the big game is right on. I've been going to most Big Games since the early 50's and the Cal spirit is still there. Getting that 6th win is going to be really tough. UCLA's pass rush is really unconventional. Cal has to emphasize the run more this week and shore up its blocking of inside LB's.
This upcoming game might be one of the bigger, “Is the program going in the right direction?”, games in recent memory.
YAH,BUT I HAVE A GREAT PHOTO OF VEREEN CARRYING IN THE FOOTBALL WHILE BEING TCKLED IN THE 2006 BIG GAME GAME!!
PLEASE CHECK THIS OUT ,PLUS .....THAT 2006 WAS THE LAST CAL VICTORY OVER STAFORD FOR THE NEXT 10 YEARS, ARE WE HAVING FUN?? GERBEAR!!
You're confusing 2006 with 2009. https://www.espn.com/college-football/game/_/gameId/293250024
ON 2006 CAL WAS AN ODDS UNDERDOG TO STANFORD. BUT, CAL BEAT STANFORD BECAUSE OF THE GREAT RUNNING OF VEREEN WHO, THAT DAY, OUT RAN MACAFFY (A SO CALLED HEISMAN CANDIDATE) THEREBY LEADING CAL TO TAKING THE GAME AWAY FROM .STANFORD. BUT STANFORD WON THE BIG GAME EVERY YEAR FOR THE NEXT TEN YEARS AFTER THAT'! GERBEAR
We had Marshawn Lynch in 2006.
If you are talking about Vereen in 2009, then McCaffrey joined Stanford 5 years later in 2014.
THERE IS NO QUESTION THAT VEREEN WAS THE OUTSTANDING CAL RUNNER IN THE IN THE BIG GAME OF 2006! CAL FAIED TO WIN THE NEXT 10 BIG GAMES I SUFERED THEN ALSO. BUT, I REMEMBER STNFURD HAD A HEISMAN RATED RUNNING BACK THAT YEAR WHO SIMPLY COULD NOT MATCH VEREEN. GERBEAR
Vereen joined Cal in 2007. He did not play in the 2006 Big Game.
You are thinking of 2009 Big Game, that game featured Vereen and Gerhart.
As someone who literally worked with the team in 2009, I can confirm this was 100% 2009 and that Shane was a senior in high school in 2006