via users.drew.edu

In talking about the final game-winning series against ASU, especially the controversial call of the Vereen pass on second down, I've been surprised by how many people have noted how anxious they were watching this game, with comments like, "My heart can't take another one like this!" Why?

I know well the anxiety of powerlessly watching the Bears snatch defeat out of the jaws of victory, or vice versa, such as the final minutes of Oregon and OSU '07, or Washington and Arizona '06. But those games all carried significant implications if Cal lost. I don't want to suggest that I've given up on this season, but right now I'm just enjoying the ride, one game at a time. One loss is exactly that, one loss--the difference, perhaps, between 9-3 and 10-2 (yawn), not a lost ticket to Pasadena.

Am I alone in no longer feeling, at least for the remainder of this season, that the outcome of Cal football games are a "life or death"-type of experience? I'm thrilled Cal won in Tempe, but I can't honestly say I would have been crushed if the Bears had lost. Only the Big Game this year still carries that kind of emotional weight for me, as it does every year.

Not that more photos are really necessary, but seeing as how the Emerald Bowl was the first Cal game for both of my two sons, I feel obliged to add a few more shots.

None of the pictures below are particularly good. This owes to crappy upper-deck seats, a less-than-professional telephoto lens (and photographer!), and slow shutter speeds in the night light. But I nonetheless got one or two shots that may at least be of passing interest.

The day started with a long train ride up from the in-laws' house in San Jose and a pre-tailgate family "lunch" at the 21st Amendment. The beers were extra good this day, which helps to further explain why my photos are less than stellar.

The fantastic 21st Amendment, on 2nd street

Well lubricated, the family and I headed off for further eating and drinking and reuniting with friends at the CAA tailgate. Along the way, we stopped for this Hallmark moment:

CalPete and family at the Emerald Bowl.

Once the game began, I was just sober enough to get a couple of shots of each team lined up in their respective "I" formations. (Note Cal's 3-man defensive front, as opposed to Miami's 4-man D-line.)

Slow shutter speed meant my photo of Verran Tucker's big pass play was blurry, although it does sort of give the impression of Jahvid-like speed. At least you can make out Oski celebrating on the sidelines in the background.

This play, of course, set up Jahvid's first touchdown run. I didn't get a shot of the play in progress, but I did get the before and after--including a nice photo of Giorgio kicking the PAT. Bravo giovane numero quaranta!

If you squint real hard, you can see Nate "Lucy Van Pelt" Longshore thinking about pulling a fake.

After that score, I grew tired of watching the game through a camera lens, which also was giving me a premature hangover headache. So I put the Nikon away, except for another moment or two to catch the Cal band and final celebrations.

While it wasn't my finest day of photography, I screamed by voice hoarse, I made my beer-tuned taste buds very happy (and my liver rather unhappy), and my wife and I finally baptised our sons into the Blue and Gold. Growing up in SoCal, our boys have come to think of we Cal folk as something of an oppressed, disrespected, and more-than-a-little-eccentric minority. To take part in such a joyful celebration of the Golden Bears--as a member of the overwhelming majority--was very refreshing, both for them and for us. There's no place like home. Go Bears!!

I hesitate writing this, because I think we're all sick of our own retreaded arguments. But I just can't resist.

I've been on the fence all season on the Riley-vs.-Longshore debate, which more often than not means I'm arguing for Longshore since Riley seems to be the more popular choice among the fan base. Since neither guy has clearly distinguished himself to date, I suspect that Tedford and Co. will do what they have done the last 2-3 weeks: develop a game plan and then decide which guy seems to be best suited to execute it.

It's less ideal than having one guy as THE guy, but I suppose it seems a reasonable enough approach given the situation. What frustrates me are some of the flawed arguments I often see made on the Rilerians' behalf. Here, for example, is what ESPN's Ted Miller recently wrote:

Riley has three clear advantages over Longshore: 1. He doesn't turn the ball over (see just two interceptions in 128 passes); 2. He's more mobile and therefore can escape a pass rush and create a positive plays with his feet; 3. He's a sophomore (Longshore is a senior) and will be the quarterback two more seasons.

Argument #1 is a fair one, and quite possibly it is the argument that should seal the deal for Riley. I'll concede that. But arguments #2 and #3 are flawed. For #2, yes, Riley is more mobile, and thus he was the guy better suited to a game plan that featured a QB draw or two. But Longshore actually gets sacked less than Riley, and Riley has yet to translate his greater mobility into truly better play.

It's #3, though, that I take the most issue with. Cal is still in the thick of the Rose Bowl hunt, and the Bears truly control their own destiny now that Zona has lost again. This team is not yet playing for next year, so if given the choice between a still somewhat raw sophomore and a senior who already has one conference championship under his belt, the choice seems obvious: go with the senior.

Again, I don't think my reverse-argument #3 is definitive, either. Argument #1 might still very well trump it. Until the Bears lose another game, however, I have little patience for the Play-Riley-because-he'll-be-here-next-year line.