Page 2 of 8 FirstFirst 123456 ... LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 106

Thread: OT: Christ to be the next Chancellor

  1. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by wifeisafurd View Post
    what is the story with Hasting and Boalt (or whatever it's called), other than they are the same distance from each other and have some joint programs. Medical schools increase endowment a couple billion and pay for related departments like neuro-sciences. Unless, USCF want to contribute, get out of the way.
    I'm sure there're a handful of local billionaires who'd be interested in one upping Benioff with a med school of their own, tbh.

    Hell, a couple months ago a Cal alum gave UCSF 600 million...

  2. #17
    Well she's comfortable here and she likes Cal that's more than I can say about Dirks he always seemed out of place to me.

  3. #18
    Quote Originally Posted by OldBlue1999 View Post
    Hopefully she has the sense to see that there's a simple solution and the political clout to make it happen: Football and MBB subsidize the minimum NCAA and/or P12 mandatory sports. In the event of multiple possible options sports are prioritized from cheapest to most expensive. Any other female sport can remain by fully endowing itself. Any other male sport can remain by fully endowing itself AND a female sport with an equal or larger roster size. It's time to move on from this ridiculousness.
    How would they stay in Title IX compliance? I believe cutting any women's sport will put them out of compliance.

  4. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by LTbear View Post
    What's the story with UCSF/ weren't they once affiliated more closely with us? It'd be great for us to have a medical school, but I'm 98% sure it'll just never happen.
    And in the we don't want to hear about any tough decisions category, expect the rapid expansion of STEM departments to continue at the expense of liberal arts, which is ironic given Christ's background. Its just the economics of where research grants, funds and the donor money are going, and she will continue on that path.

  5. #20
    Quote Originally Posted by philbert View Post
    How would they stay in Title IX compliance? I believe cutting any women's sport will put them out of compliance.
    My solution assumes the minimum required sports would be compliant under the first prong of the participation requirement test. If not, simply include additional womens' sport(s) from the list until compliance is achieved.

  6. #21
    Cal is bloated with expensive administrators who do nothing to either teach, do research, or coach sports.

    Looks to me that this hire is simply this army of money wasters getting one of their own into the cat-bird seat.

  7. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by wifeisafurd View Post
    And in the we don't want to hear about any tough decisions category, expect the rapid expansion of STEM departments to continue at the expense of liberal arts, which is ironic given Christ's background. Its just the economics of where research grants, funds and the donor money are going, and she will continue on that path.
    They kind of have to. Some departments, like the one where I worked, haven't had more funding for instructors despite some class sizes increasing to 2,000 students.

  8. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by wifeisafurd View Post
    She may want to look at UCLA that has done both. The other thing that would just kick some butt is to expand Haas undergrad and raise tuition for same, and start a medical school.
    +1000 - Medical Schools and associated research dollars are huge.

  9. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by juarezbear View Post
    +1000 - Medical Schools and associated research dollars are huge.
    Yes, but what are the odds of us ever starting a med school? Especially with the funds needed on the front end.

  10. #25
    As long as UC is one system, any surplus generated by a place like UCSF will end up covering Cal's deficit. If Cal broke off to become an independent entity it would actually have to get serious about deficit reduction.

  11. #26
    Quote Originally Posted by LTbear View Post
    Yes, but what are the odds of us ever starting a med school? Especially with the funds needed on the front end.
    As long as there is one in SF (especially one of that caliber), I would say none.

  12. #27
    True Blue Golden Bear FiatSlug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    city named for a Bishop of Cloyne
    Posts
    8,858
    Quote Originally Posted by OldBlue1999 View Post
    Hopefully she has the sense to see that there's a simple solution and the political clout to make it happen: Football and MBB subsidize the minimum NCAA and/or P12 mandatory sports. In the event of multiple possible options sports are prioritized from cheapest to most expensive. Any other female sport can remain by fully endowing itself. Any other male sport can remain by fully endowing itself AND a female sport with an equal or larger roster size. It's time to move on from this ridiculousness.
    So much anger here. Cal doesn't maintain FBS membership without at least 7 women's sports. But it gets more complicated from there.

    If you choose to cut any sports, Cal must demonstrate proportional opportunities to both sexes within 5% of the undergraduate student body (which is 51% women). If you choose to offer proportional opportunities to women, then at least 46% of the total roster spots must be for women alone. Here's a recitation of roster spots for each sport sponsored by Cal for the '15-'16 fiscal year. Tell us where we're going to cut women's sports and maintain Title IX compliance:

    Men's sports
    Baseball - 35 roster spots
    Basketball - 17 roster spots
    All Track combined - 105 roster spots
    Football - 154 (!) roster spots.
    Golf - 15 roster spots
    Gymnastics - 21 roster spots
    Rowing - 73 roster spots
    Soccer - 29 roster spots
    Swimming and Diving - 34 roster spots
    Rugby - 64 roster spots
    Tennis - 11 roster spots
    Water Polo - 38 roster spots
    Total participants - 596
    Unduplicated count of participants - 530

    Women's sports
    Basketball - 27 roster spots
    Beach Volleyball - 18 roster spots
    All Track combined - 86 roster spots
    Field Hockey - 28 roster spots.
    Golf - 9 roster spots
    Gymnastics - 18 roster spots
    Lacrosse - 33 roster spots
    Rowing - 72 roster spots
    Soccer - 34 roster spots
    Softball - 27 roster spots
    Swimming and Diving - 24 roster spots
    Tennis - 11 roster spots
    Volleyball - 24 roster spots
    Water Polo - 34 roster spots
    Total participants - 445
    Unduplicated count of participants - 393

    Women's sports are already behind the 8 ball. Where are the cuts coming from?
    Last edited by FiatSlug; 03-13-2017 at 08:07 PM.

  13. #28
    Anger? Where do you get that? We have a massive deficit. My solution just makes the most fiscal sense. It's totally devoid of emotion.

  14. #29
    True Blue Golden Bear FiatSlug's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    city named for a Bishop of Cloyne
    Posts
    8,858
    Quote Originally Posted by OldBlue1999 View Post
    Anger? Where do you get that? We have a massive deficit. My solution just makes the most fiscal sense. It's totally devoid of emotion.
    I get the anger from your blanket statement that sports are prioritized from cheapest to most expensive. That's an invitation to a solution that serves no one. But it is the solution that is the most dismissive. And it sets up a cut-throat atmosphere to achieve survival.

    I think you do have a point, though: endow or die. That's Cal's destination and it's been building towards that spot on the landscape for decades now. So, take the following for what it's worth (which may not be very much, if anything).

    To begin with, Baseball is not guaranteed a spot among the survivors. They have to earn it. And if Baseball can be cut, there are a number of other men's sports that probably should be cut as well.

    Gymnastics - 21 spots
    Soccer - 29 spots
    All Track combined - 105 spots
    reduce football by 48 spots (from 154 to 106)
    demote rugby to club status (64 spots go off the books since rugby is no longer a sponsored sport)

    That eliminates 267 spots, leaving 329 spots for Men's sports and allows cuts on the Women's side of the ledger (about 116 spots).

    Beach Volleyball - 18 spots (also last sport added)
    Gymnastics - 18 spots
    Lacrosse - 33 spots

    That would leave 47 female spots that could be cut later.

    Oh, hey. Cut Baseball and reduce the Men's participation by 35 spots (now at 294 spots). Now you can also cut Women's Track & Field (86 spots; Women's participation is now at 290 spots). Voila! You now have substantial compliance on Prong 1, proportional representation.

    Let's see. You also can free up Evans Diamond and Edwards Field by putting Women's soccer at Dwight-Derby field on the Clark Kerr campus, thereby reducing facility costs.

    The number of sponsored sports drops from 30 to about 19 or 20 and the administration component of the Athletic Department can be significantly reduced as well. It might also mean that the Academic Support component as it is now is better able to serve the down-sized student-athlete contingent.

    The crappy part of this exercise is that it means that there will be a lot of student-athletes with dashed hopes and dreams. A lot of coaches looking for jobs. A lot of staff in facility maintenance looking for work. A lot of administrators hitting the bricks. There is a huge human component to this that cannot be ignored.

    But barring a sudden influx of capital, I don't see how this ship gets righted and put on course without cuts, and lots of them. There are no winners here, because there were no hard decisions made back in the 80s and 90s when the costs were far less. Looking back at history, I think that Cal thought they could literally spend their way out of their quandary.

    Ugh.
    Last edited by FiatSlug; 03-13-2017 at 09:29 PM.

  15. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by FiatSlug View Post
    So much anger here. Cal doesn't maintain FBS membership without at least 7 women's sports. But it gets more complicated from there.

    If you choose to cut any sports, Cal must demonstrate proportional opportunities to both sexes within 5% of the undergraduate student body (which is 51% women). If you choose to offer proportional opportunities to women, then at least 46% of the total roster spots must be for women alone. Here's a recitation of roster spots for each sport sponsored by Cal for the '15-'16 fiscal year. Tell us where we're going to cut women's sports and maintain Title IX compliance:

    Men's sports
    Baseball - 35 roster spots
    Basketball - 17 roster spots
    All Track combined - 105 roster spots
    Football - 154 (!) roster spots.
    Golf - 15 roster spots
    Gymnastics - 21 roster spots
    Rowing - 73 roster spots
    Soccer - 29 roster spots
    Swimming and Diving - 34 roster spots
    Rugby - 64 roster spots
    Tennis - 11 roster spots
    Water Polo - 38 roster spots
    Total participants - 596
    Unduplicated count of participants - 530

    Women's sports
    Basketball - 27 roster spots
    Beach Volleyball - 18 roster spots
    All Track combined - 86 roster spots
    Field Hockey - 28 roster spots.
    Golf - 9 roster spots
    Gymnastics - 18 roster spots
    Lacrosse - 33 roster spots
    Rowing - 72 roster spots
    Soccer - 34 roster spots
    Softball - 27 roster spots
    Swimming and Diving - 24 roster spots
    Tennis - 11 roster spots
    Volleyball - 24 roster spots
    Water Polo - 34 roster spots
    Total participants - 445
    Unduplicated count of participants - 393

    Women's sports are already behind the 8 ball. Where are the cuts coming from?
    That's an interesting post. I'm sure many on this site are aware of these numbers but I wasn't and did a little digging. In order to stay in the Pac-12, Cal must remain eligible for NCAA Division 1 FBS status as well as sponsor key men's and women's sports. The rules are as follows:

    For Division 1 FBS-- "Sponsor a minimum of 16 varsity intercollegiate sports, including football, based on the minimum sports sponsorship and scheduling requirements set forth in Bylaw 20. Sponsorship shall include a minimum six sports involving all male teams or mixed teams (males and females), and a minimum of eight varsity intercollegiate teams involving all female teams. Institutions may use up to two emerging sports to satisfy the required eight varsity intercollegiate sports involving all female teams." http://www.ncaa.org/sites/default/fi...2%208%2014.pdf

    For the Pac-12 specifically: "To comply with NCAA Division I Football Bowl Subdivision membership requirements regarding the sponsorship of a minimum number of varsity sports, provided further that each member must sponsor teams in the following core sports: Men: Football Basketball; Women: Volleyball Basketball" http://compliance.pac-12.org/wp-cont...andbook.v2.pdf

    So the absolute minimum needed:
    Men: Football, basketball, and 4 other sports
    Women: Basketball, volleyball, and 6 other sports
    plus 2 other miscellaneous sports.
    Add to that Title IX which means women's roster sports must equal student body percentage - 5% = 46% (my understanding is that Cal is operating on some sort of exception since the current percentage is less than 46%).

    The mandatory women's sports utilize 51 roster spots and the men's utilize 171 spots.



Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •