Page 1 of 5 12345 LastLast
Results 1 to 15 of 75

Thread: The Chancellor made the right call (IMHO)

  1. #1

    The Chancellor made the right call (IMHO)

    The numbers have leaked out (at least on the Insiders board), so I don't think I saying anything that is confidential.

    Rugby came to the table with major donations. No suprise there. Great tradition, great coach, great alums, etc. A program worthy of reinstatement as a varsity sport. Its all been said before, but these guys are the best.

    Then comes women's lacross. Didn't see this one coming. Their coach did a great job fundraising. You can make all the snarky posts you want about elite or women's sports, but this team's supporters stepped-up to the plate guys and the team is essentially paying its way.

    Baseball and women's gymnastics raised essentially the same amount, $1.2 million. I am shocked assuming the numbers provided are correct. Rugby will fund a portion of the gymnastics program and a small portion of the LAX programs, so yes, in this case Title IX has some bearing. But gymnastics is a heck of a lot cheaper to fund than baseball, and reinstatement rids the program of Title IX issues.

    Further, the baseball donations (unlike those for LAX and women's gymnastics) were not solid - they were conditioned, deferred, etc. I am disappointed this had to happen, but in the context of what is happening to UC and Cal, this is an understandable business decision. There are a lot more of these desisions coming. Faculty and academic porgams are being called upon to support themselves or face cuts. Its just not baseball. I can't fault the Chancellor on this call.

    Baseball had its chance again assuming the numbers are accurate, and can come back again if it raises the money to become self-sufficient. The current AD strongly supports this effort. If you want baseball to come back, there is an effort under way you can support.

    Let the flaming begin.
    Last edited by wifeisafurd; 02-11-2011 at 09:01 PM. Reason: concenrs expressed by other posters the numbers are not accurate

  2. #2

    Agree

    Baseball is a problem because, aside from the lack of fan devotion and facilities not good enough to host an NCAA regional (which makes sense in this market and is confounding as well as to why nothing was done in that area), the program has simply not been that successful to mandate its continuation. 2 local MLB programs suck away any fan interest in the sport to begin with, which has made Cal baseball's popular upkeep a chore.

  3. #3
    True Blue Golden Bear Cal_Fan2's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    East Bay, Ca...
    Posts
    15,949
    FWIW, I agree with that sentiment...I think some things were handled in a clumsy way at times but faulting the Chancellor and AD for making this tough decision I feel is wrong. I for one fault a lot more things including Sacramento which has some control, and then the recession which is a cycle in and of itself. From reading other sources, some feel that Sandy wasn't straight up with them regarding how much they needed. I can't fault someone for that feeling of being slighted but when push comes to shove, and Title IX rearing its head, I'm not sure what else could be done... I do hope that some how down the line we can reinstate baseball if the numbers add up....

  4. #4

    Clumsy handling

    Quote Originally Posted by Cal_Fan2 View Post
    FWIW, I agree with that sentiment...I think some things were handled in a clumsy way at times but faulting the Chancellor and AD for making this tough decision I feel is wrong. I for one fault a lot more things including Sacramento which has some control, and then the recession which is a cycle in and of itself. From reading other sources, some feel that Sandy wasn't straight up with them regarding how much they needed. I can't fault someone for that feeling of being slighted but when push comes to shove, and Title IX rearing its head, I'm not sure what else could be done... I do hope that some how down the line we can reinstate baseball if the numbers add up....
    Agree. Good comment.

  5. #5
    Given how football generates the most cash flow for the Athletic Dept, could these cuts have been avoided had the football team continued on it's upward trajectory of success by playing in BCS games and collecting their much larger payouts?

    Did the athletic department hitch it's wagon to the recent success of the football program in hopes it's continued success would help support the other at-risk programs?

    Did the SAHPC reallocate funds that would have gone to support the cut/at-risk programs?

    Or, were these cuts inevitable and the cash flow increase that would have come from football success, only kicked-the-can of team downsizing down the road further?

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by wifeisafurd View Post
    The numbers have leaked out (at least on the Insiders board), so I don't think I saying anything that is confidential.

    Rugby came to the table with major donations. No suprise there. Great tradition, great coach, great alums, etc. A program worthy of reinstatement as a varsity sport. Its all been said before, but these guys are the best.

    Then comes women's lacross. Didn't see this one coming. Their coach did a great job fundraising. You can make all the snarky posts you want about elite or women's sports, but this team's supporters stepped-up to the plate guys and the team is essentially paying its way.

    Baseball and women's gymnastics raised essentially the same amount, $1.2 million. I am shocked. Rugby will fund a portion of the gymnastics program and a small portion of the LAX programs, so yes, in this case Title IX has some bearing. But gymnastics is a heck of a lot cheaper to fund than baseball, and reinstatement rids the program of Title IX issues.

    Further, the baseball donations (unlike those for LAX and women's gymnastics) were not solid - they were conditioned, deferred, etc. I am disappointed this had to happen, but in the context of what is happening to UC and Cal, this is an understandable business decision. There are a lot more of these desisions coming. Faculty and academic porgams are being called upon to support themselves or face cuts. Its just not baseball. I can't fault the Chancellor on this call.

    Baseball had its chance, and can come back again if it raises the money to become self-sufficient. The current AD strongly supports this effort. If you want baseball to come back, there is an effort under way you can support.

    Let the flaming begin.
    A direct quote from somebody on the baseball committee-"That is an absolute lie! We were the ones that spearheaded the process. They made us pool our donations. Those numbers are not close."

    People are ****ed- as they should be. There's a lot of BS going on here behind the scenes!

  7. #7
    Quote Originally Posted by calbb View Post
    A direct quote from somebody on the baseball committee-"That is an absolute lie! We were the ones that spearheaded the process. They made us pool our donations. Those numbers are not close."

    People are ****ed- as they should be. There's a lot of BS going on here behind the scenes!
    This and +1

  8. #8

    Adminsitration lied?

    Quote Originally Posted by calbb View Post
    A direct quote from somebody on the baseball committee-"That is an absolute lie! We were the ones that spearheaded the process. They made us pool our donations. Those numbers are not close."

    People are ****ed- as they should be. There's a lot of BS going on here behind the scenes!
    the numbers are from them. They specifically allocated the proposed donations by sport. Can the baseball guys provide some evidence? Give the numbers to the media, they would love a dispute. I would love to see the baseball team come back, but its time for baseball supporters to do more than hide behind some general claim. And they really should not diminish the role of rugby or old blues like Dwight Barker in the reinstatement process. They don't get ownership of spearheading the process.

    However given some of the comments by posters who said they didn't get to choose between sports, I am adjusting my original comments.
    Last edited by wifeisafurd; 02-11-2011 at 08:59 PM.

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by Tree Cutter View Post
    ...could these cuts have been avoided had the football team continued on it's upward trajectory of success by playing in BCS games and collecting their much larger payouts?
    Theoretically yes. But in practice most teams actually don't make money by going to bowls. Even in the case of BCS bowls, most schools wind up with large travel costs as they send expanded band, cheer and other groups to the game. Where the FB programs make money from bowls is indirectly and in the long run. A program that consistently plays in BCS bowls gets bigger donations from alums, higher TV viewership and higher attendence.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tree Cutter View Post
    Did the athletic department hitch it's wagon to the recent success of the football program in hopes it's continued success would help support the other at-risk programs?
    Of course they did. Wouldn't you? Do you honestly think Cal Athletics would have gotten a better return on its dollars had it thrown multiple millions of dollars to improve seating at the lacrosse field? For now and in the future, the only realistic place Cal Athletics can greatly increase revenue is via football. Men's and women's basketball can each increase their revenues by 40% and it still would raise less than if football increased its revenues by 10%.

    Quote Originally Posted by Tree Cutter View Post
    Did the SAHPC reallocate funds that would have gone to support the cut/at-risk programs?
    People are going to claim "no", but the answer is clearly "yes". Moreover that's the way it SHOULD be. SAHPC was funded by UC (from the general account's borrowing) and Cal Athletics will repay UC using FB's annual profits. The alternative would have been to not build SAHPC and instead use FB's profits to keep money losing sports. But in the long run that would have sapped the FB program of its competitiveness and ultimately caused that very profit stream to shrivel up and die. If FB is the goose that lays the golden eggs in the Athletics Department (and it is), it is also the goose that needs to eat some of those golden eggs in order to continue to be fertile.

    We've had numerous threads on this board over the past year where I've said that the need to reinvest in the FB business in order to stay competitive (and SAHPC is just the start), will ultimately force other sports to pull their own weight. Now that is as clear as day.

  10. #10
    I'll agree with the post about the process. It certainly looked clumsy, to say the least! I think Coach Clark and others within the department had some valid comments about how poorly it was handled as well.

    When dealing with a decision this tough, it would be nice to nail the process! I'm very disappointed that the school continues to look a bit incompetent in handling this.

  11. #11
    I suspect a lot of readers on this board are like me - not knowledgeable enough to post an intelligent comment. Nevertheless, I feel sad about the cut sports and happy that the ones reinstated have been kept.

    Tough times make for hard decisions.

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Cal84 View Post
    Of course they did. Wouldn't you? Do you honestly think Cal Athletics would have gotten a better return on its dollars had it thrown multiple millions of dollars to improve seating at the lacrosse field? For now and in the future, the only realistic place Cal Athletics can greatly increase revenue is via football. Men's and women's basketball can each increase their revenues by 40% and it still would raise less than if football increased its revenues by 10%.


    People are going to claim "no", but the answer is clearly "yes". Moreover that's the way it SHOULD be. SAHPC was funded by UC (from the general account's borrowing) and Cal Athletics will repay UC using FB's annual profits. The alternative would have been to not build SAHPC and instead use FB's profits to keep money losing sports. But in the long run that would have sapped the FB program of its competitiveness and ultimately caused that very profit stream to shrivel up and die. If FB is the goose that lays the golden eggs in the Athletics Department (and it is), it is also the goose that needs to eat some of those golden eggs in order to continue to be fertile.

    We've had numerous threads on this board over the past year where I've said that the need to reinvest in the FB business in order to stay competitive (and SAHPC is just the start), will ultimately force other sports to pull their own weight. Now that is as clear as day.
    Excellent post!
    +1

  13. #13

    Again, How This Was Handled Stinks!

    Quote Originally Posted by wifeisafurd View Post
    the numbers are from them. They specifically allocated the proposed donations by sport. Can the baseball guys provide some evidence? Give the numbers to the media, they would love a dispute. I would love to see the baseball team come back, but its time for baseball supporters to do more than hide behind some general claim. And they really should not diminish the role of rugby or old blues like Dwight Barker in the reinstatement process. They don't get ownership of spearheading the process.

    However given some of the comments by posters who said they didn't get to choose between sports, I am adjusting my original comments.
    Once again, our Chancellor did a unprofessional job of handling this whole process. From the originial decision through the fund raising period until the final decision, this thing was grossly mishandled by people who are paid to be professionals. Considering the potential fallout of leaving baseball and men's gymnastics out in the cold without clear evidence that either sport was given a fair chance to succeed in the reinstatement process, is unforgiveable.

    Simply, the original decision should not have been made. Instead, the Chancellor should have met with interested parties and told them exactly what would be necessary to reinstate each sport. In addition, the Ttitle IX implications should have been made clear to all parties at that time. Is it really that difficult for the Chancellor, AD, coaches and boosters to work together, or at least with the same rules in hand?

    This whole affair has made Cal look incompetent at running our IA department. We laugh at pucla's recent FB woes, but there are plenty of media and fans laughing at Cal right now. What a circus!

    BTW, how much did men's gymnastics raise? Much less than women's gymnastics?

  14. #14
    Loyal Bear SanseiBear's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Honolulu, Hawaii
    Posts
    3,350
    Totally agree, GOCAL73! As one who responded to the call by SaveCalBaseball to raise funds for reinstatement of all five teams, I'm appalled that our great university is looking like it's led by a bunch of bumpkins. I will not donate any more funds to Cal, athletic and academic, until as you stated, the Chancellor, AD, coaches, and booster representatives work together with the same rules to resolve this issue, whatever the outcome may be, provided the process is fair.
    Last edited by SanseiBear; 02-12-2011 at 05:21 PM.

  15. #15
    True Blue Golden Bear okaydo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Bearilinga, CA
    Posts
    15,465
    Quote Originally Posted by GOCAL73 View Post
    Simply, the original decision should not have been made. Instead, the Chancellor should have met with interested parties and told them exactly what would be necessary to reinstate each sport.
    Wouldn't it be better for fundraising for the chancellor and AD to publically announce that these programs have a serious chance of being cut than to not announce that?

Posting Permissions

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