<p>Actually... we've only been the "Trojans" since the 20's (I believe)... And no, its not embarrasing... What's wrong with condoms? You guys should really start to use them in Texas... that way, your sister wont get pregnant!</p>
<p>1912...which would precede the Trojan condoms from the 20s.</p>
<p>lol on Cubsrule's post^^^</p>
<p>Good call Proto... it is 1912</p>
<p>Hahaha bro you guys dont even have beaches . . . . that totally sucks</p>
<p>Texas has beaches (around Galveston), but it's dirty.</p>
<p>This is really random, but I looked up Galveston on Google Maps and noticed that there's a Pasadena in Texas too. It's just a bit smaller in population to Pasadena, CA (where the Rose Bowl will be played), with 141,000 to 146,000. Not only that, but the mayor of Pasadena, TX is John Manlove. O.o</p>
<p>Yeah, there is a Pasadena here, I noticed that,too, when I first moved here, but CA Pasadena is so much more better than TX Pasadena. We also have a town called, Paris.</p>
<p>We have a town called Atlanta to, and I have to agree with you thesiren- Pasadena California is wayy better then Pasadena Texas even though I have never been, but it has to be!! Im so excited 2 more days untill the Rosebowl!!</p>
<p>As a Cal student, I feel Cal got cheated out of the Rose Bowl by Texas last year. This is a matter of pride. Crush them, SC. Any intelligent Cal fan is rooting you on.</p>
<p>Very true andrewtdx. And to thesiren72102, my sister named her baby Paris after that Texas town, and she named her son after Austin, Texas. I guess she has this weird thing about naming her kids after towns in Teaxs.</p>
<p>Cheated out of the Rose Bowl... I beg to differ... Wasnt the Rose Bowl one of the BEST bowl games last year? Two traditional powers in Meeechigan and Texass?? Then it seems to me that the BCS did its job... (Creating a #1 vs #2 "championship game", and then 3 more "good" matchups...NOT just the top 8 teams playing against eachother) </p>
<p>Not to hate on Kal that much, but Kal-Meeechigan would have been a lot more boring than the Meeechigan-Texass game...</p>
<p>Ummm....ur Kal and Meechigan stuff is really lame.</p>
<p>Oh sorry... didnt realize I wasnt allowed to joke around about the names of other schools...</p>
<p>Well now u know.</p>
<p>cal michigan woulda been boring? how the h.e.l.l do u know? If u can predict, so can I. After 2 minutes, USC texas is gonna be boring and a blowout. FIGHT ON!!</p>
<p>^^^ Very true</p>
<p>Well... even if Cal-Michigan (note the improved spelling) was an entertaining game, it probably could not have lived up to the Rose Bowl that was actually played last year. That was a great game...</p>
<p>And this is all missing the point... the point is that a Michigan-Texas matchup is going to make more money than a Cal-Michigan game... and that is what the BCS is about... Its annoying to keep hearing people say that the Pac 10 gets screwed by the BCS when thats just not the case...</p>
<p>Dude, #1, The Rose Bowl is traditionally Big 10 vs Pac 10. Plain and simple, and Cal earned that place in the Rose Bowl. #2. I don't give a two-shilling **** about Texas. Mac Brown wormed his way into that bowl game, plain and simple. Cal was higher ranked than Texas and CLEARLY earned it and Texas won the Bowl bid cheaply through politics and the game cheaply by one point after Michigan spent much of the game running Texas up and down the field. </p>
<p>If Texas was such a goddamn powerhouse, how come Michigan almost beat them?! Cal and Michigan have had a long standing rivalry, and to say that the Rose Bowl would have made LESS money if Cal had played is just plain ignorant. People (especially Alumni) from both schools would have come from all over the country for that.</p>
<p>And the BCS shouldn't be about money from advertising or whatever else. It should be about MERIT and what the teams deserved. And let me REMIND you, that Cal's given USC a run for its money every game we've played them since 2002, including handing them their only loss in very recent memory in 2003. Cal is a very good team, USC is the better team, clearly -- but do NOT discount or INSULT Cal like that. Cal deserved to go to the Rose Bowl last year and got cheated. Don't give me this ******** about how "Oh, it had to be Texas because Texas is more interesting!" That's a lot of crap! I think if it was Cal-Michigan, we would have seen a very intense, entertaining game.</p>
<p>Now that I am done thoroughly chewing CubsRule out, to my friends rooting for my second favorite team: "FIGHT ON!"</p>
<p>"The Rose Bowl is traditionally Big 10 vs Pac 10. Plain and simple, and Cal earned that place in the Rose Bowl." </p>
<p>No, USC "earned" its way into the traditional Pac 10 - Big 10 Rose Bowl by winning the Pac 10. Cmon, that one was easy.</p>
<p>"Cal was higher ranked than Texas and CLEARLY earned it"</p>
<p>Earned it? Do you understand the BCS? Did you read my post? Earning it does NOT mean being the highest ranked "at-large" team. There is no "earning it."</p>
<p>"Brown wormed his way into that bowl game, plain and simple. "</p>
<p>You're right... and he's a dirtball. But I'm fine with that because we are gonna destroy him tomorrow.</p>
<p>"And the BCS shouldn't be about money from advertising or whatever else. It should be about MERIT and what the teams deserved."</p>
<p>Ok... I'm glad you feel that way. But you're wrong. It isnt about merit, its about money.</p>
<p>"and to say that the Rose Bowl would have made LESS money if Cal had played is just plain ignorant."</p>
<p>Actually, I'm right. I'm not saying the Rose Bowl would have been half-full (or half-empty, you choose...?) for a Cal-Michigan game, but the Texas-Michigan game made more money. Texas has a much larger interested alumni base (that travels VERY well, with a ton of $$$) than Cal. Not only that, but the TV audience generated by having Texas as opposed to Cal was much larger (again, larger alumni base interested in football... THE ENTIRE STATE OF TEXAS minus a few Aggies and Raiders). This generates more ad revenue and thus more money for ABC... and dont be naive, generating money is what its all about. That is why the BCS was created (and dont give me crap about creating a "unified national champion... cause it aint true).</p>
<p>"And let me REMIND you, that Cal's given USC a run for its money every game we've played them since 2002,"</p>
<p>Um... ok... Fresno gave us a run this year... Why arent they in a BCS game? And Arizona State... Notre Dame (Oh, they were in a BCS game... and got KILLED....Oh, well, damn...)</p>
<p>Im not hating on Cal... or the Pac 10... Im just saying that with the way the BCS is set up, Texas was better for the system and THUS "deserved" to go to the Rose Bowl last year. I dont care that Cal got jobbed by Mack Brown's whining... they shouldve been whining too. And besides, nobody has been screwed harder by the BCS than USC (See 2003). Have a nice day! </p>
<p>FIGHT ON! BEAT THE LONGHORNS!</p>