<p>
[quote]
Does anyone agree with me, that the freaking area is really in the middle of the state (if you divide it vertically into say thirds?) I don't get it. Really, there's a lot of california North of the Bay, and unless "central California" is a triangle with the tip at the coast, the Bay just seems very central . . .
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It's just what we call it. It's like calling Georgia part of "The South" while Arizona is exempt from that reference. Yeah, the South has a geographical meaning, but it also has a cultural meaning which is why the southern US isn't all referred to as "The South". NorCal may closer to Central Cali geographically, but the culture is different than the area between Los Angeles and the bay.</p>
<p>Blah, people seem to ignore the many, many similarities between LA and SF culture, if not So Cal and "Nor Cal" culture, often casting the other as "other."</p>
<p>And Georgia actually was very much (and is still) the South, geographically speaking, is it not?</p>
<p>So this turned from a UCLA v Cal to a NorCal v SoCal thread. Interesting.
I saw something up there about USC being UCLA's main academic rival. I just have to clear that up. The basis for the entire UCLA v USC debacle is rooted in pranks and the fact that the two sports teams are very closely matched, and thusly extremely competitive with each other. </p>
<p>I'm surprised that misconception was present, considering Cal's bout with Stanford exists along the same lines.</p>
<p>And yes, UCLA students browse the UCB boards, and vice versa...so what?
Should everyone that goes to a certain school confine themselves to that school's specific forum?</p>
<p>
[quote]
And Georgia actually was very much (and is still) the South, geographically speaking, is it not?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You missed my point about Arizona apparently. Yes, Georgia is part of "the South", but geographically, Arizona should be, too. But when we say "the South" in a cultural reference, we aren't referring to Arizona. I'm just showing the subjectivity of our geographical references that really refer more to culture than geography.</p>
<p>"I'm surprised that misconception was present, considering Cal's bout with Stanford exists along the same lines."</p>
<p>Our sports teams (esp football) are far superior than stanfurd. The Cal football team is ranked in the #2 spot this season. The last couple of years Cal has been second only to SC.....and the gap is shrinking...</p>
<p>Great, someone who's on rallycon.
Keep in mind that I was focusing on the ROOT of the rivalry...Your athetic rankings these days aren't pertinent to that.</p>
<p>Well then, you totally missed the point. Sports rankings and other fluid numbers and factors didn't establish the original USC-UCLA/CAL-Stanfurd rivalries, proximity did. Nothing more, nothing less. </p>
<p>Take your condescending ****/ pseudo-psychological BS back where it belongs.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Sorry, the UCLA v USC rivalry IS based on pranks and sports...hate to say it.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Alright. You could repeat yourself or offer some sort of evidence. </p>
<p>eudean, I get what you're saying, and I agree, the "South" isn't really all that is South in the US, and that we're talking about culture, but there's a big difference between the two situations- earlier in the history of the US, back when the East Coast was all that mattered or essentially was what European Americans cared about, that which was South of the Mason Dixon line, or thereabouts, really was the South. As the US expanded and changed, the reference expanded only so much. The cultures of San Franciscans and Angelinos is very similar in many cases. But hey, say they aren't, why North and not Central? There's a lot North of the Bay Area.</p>
<p>I think it's because no one really cares about the "actual northern California." Everyone talks about San Francisco/San Jose/Oakland/Bay Area. Since NorCal sounded better than CenCal I guess we just started calling that area NorCal.</p>
<p>Central California to Californians usually would depict the Central Valley, the swath of agricultural farmland that I-5 crosses from north of Sacramento to the San Gabriel mountains, even though that includes parts of northern California and southern California.</p>
<p>I disagree, strykur. I feel that the students I've been around from both schools overall act the same towards the rivalry- it varies by student (and many bears have apathy), but some Stanford students are into it.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Central California to Californians usually would depict the Central Valley, the swath of agricultural farmland that I-5 crosses from north of Sacramento to the San Gabriel mountains, even though that includes parts of northern California and southern California.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yup, dead on. There IS a "central" California, which is what most people view as agricultural. There's a distinct difference between that, Los Angeles, and San Francisco / Bay Area. It's in the "center" of those two, while NorCal is north of that and SoCal is south of that. That's always how I've viewed the terminology.</p>
<p>Between UCB and Stanford, UCB is better. I turned down Stanford's offer for CAL's world-class Physics program. Stanford is a fine school but Berkeley is better and I never considered and will never consider Stanford as CALS's rival school (maybe only in sports). I only consider MIT and Harvard as the rival schools. </p>
<p>If you're very smart and very rich with a very strong personality, UC Berkeley is the best fit for you.</p>