What is identity of Cal Football and can this identity be truly competitive in the changing landscape of modern College Football?

I think most of us would agree that the goal identity of Cal Football and Cal Athletics in general is nurture true student athletes that experience success at the highest level as students and athletes.

It seems too dissonant to think that just because the trend in College football is more rapidly hurtling towards professionalism, that Cal Football will all of a sudden transform itself into a football factory ready to duke it out with the "Big Boys" who have decades of preparation, infrastructure, donors, and fan bases willing to cooperate in masquerading a semi-professional team as a group of student athletes.

Most of us in our own professional career can relate to this type of choice. Most industries, be it medicine, insurance, real estate, financial investment, engineering all began with a service-oriented broader mission. Many professionals get into those industries (some with significant investment in education and training) with the idea that they will make a difference serving others in the context of this broader mission only to find that the mechanics of the industry have totally shifted to profit over mission.

Most make the compromise and participate in the profit machine in the name of supporting their families and building their own personal prosperity. Some leave out of disgust. A few stay in the system and they figure out how to still serve the mission despite a structure that makes it difficult. Many of these people find, perhaps surprisingly, that they do not have to sacrifice personal well being to remain mission focused.

I think Cal Football can be have this type of identity. We can be who we want to be and still succeed at the highest level. All of our decisions should flow from the clarity of this identity and goal. Feels good to have the world shaking around you with changes and everyone shouting that your very existence is in jeopardy and you are standing in the security of knowing who you are and believing that you can accomplish what you set out to accomplish.

Go Bears!

Cal can join the Big 10
UC Berkeley can join the Ivy Leagues
Cal State can go Independent

I've posted this in other threads but I see it like the Warriors. The Warriors became resurgent after decades of languishing in the NBA by an injection of vision, planning, marketing, coaching, and (yes) money and talent. They're now the top team and have the biggest fanbase.

I'd like Cal to do the same. We had a bright spot under Tedford but the program came off the rails as his tenure ended. I think it will take some creativity from us:

- We need academic programs and majors that can uniquely exist at Cal for athletes. We need to offer athelete-oriented majors like sports marketing, sports business, video production, sports communications, etc. And tailor the learning paths for athletes. Students aren't dumb and know their chances in the NFL (and other pro leagues) are slim.

Cal should offer unique academic programs for our atheletes that will allow them to be successful in their post athletic careers. This can allow us to compete for recruiting when NIL money may be lower compared to other schools. Just like how we compete against the Ivy's academically.

- We need better marketing and vision for the program to sell the region, history, rivalries, alumni etc to fans, viewers, investors, media, etc. We are one of the oldest programs with an amazing location, rivalries, media market, good sports culture in the area, etc. and we don't lean into any of that meaningfully in the national media landscape.

- We need to fix the friction between athletics and academia on campus and institutionally. There is no reason we can't be excellent in both areas. Cal leadership should understand that a successful sports program creates momentum, pride, donors, strong alumni network, etc. and can have benefits to one's "whole self" and success in life outside of academia and research. I consider myself a successful person but struggled academically at Cal. I benefitted immensely from the network, community, and vision that was developed for me during my time there and in the Bay Area.

TLDR is we can find ways to be successful even without massive resources. It certainly needs some creativity, vision, and luck though. I'm disappointed it's an uphill battle for us.

evanluck said:

---

What is identity of Cal Football and can this identity be truly competitive in the changing landscape of modern College Football?

I think most of us would agree that the goal identity of Cal Football and Cal Athletics in general is nurture true student athletes that experience success at the highest level as students and athletes.

It seems too dissonant to think that just because the trend in College football is more rapidly hurtling towards professionalism, that Cal Football will all of a sudden transform itself into a football factory ready to duke it out with the "Big Boys" who have decades of preparation, infrastructure, donors, and fan bases willing to cooperate in masquerading a semi-professional team as a group of student athletes.

Most of us in our own professional career can relate to this type of choice. Most industries, be it medicine, insurance, real estate, financial investment, engineering all began with a service-oriented broader mission. Many professionals get into those industries (some with significant investment in education and training) with the idea that they will make a difference serving others in the context of this broader mission only to find that the mechanics of the industry have totally shifted to profit over mission.

Most make the compromise and participate in the profit machine in the name of supporting their families and building their own personal prosperity. Some leave out of disgust. A few stay in the system and they figure out how to still serve the mission despite a structure that makes it difficult. Many of these people find, perhaps surprisingly, that they do not have to sacrifice personal well being to remain mission focused.

I think Cal Football can be have this type of identity. We can be who we want to be and still succeed at the highest level. All of our decisions should flow from the clarity of this identity and goal. Feels good to have the world shaking around you with changes and everyone shouting that your very existence is in jeopardy and you are standing in the security of knowing who you are and believing that you can accomplish what you set out to accomplish.

Go Bears!

---

I would put it a different way. The industry has changed. You could make a strong argument that in an era where football was largely played at 1 p.m. on a Saturday and TV revenues were largely an afterthought (if generated at all) there was value in fielding competive teams. Alumni parties provided an opportunity, nearly unique, for donor engagement and that mattered over the course of decades as Cal built up endowments and cultivated donations.

But in an era where TV wags the dog, the industry is fundamentally transformed. Alumni events can not be easily planned as the TV schedule often isn't finalized until 14 days away. The time is at the convenience of TV - not what works for engaging prospective donors. The game day experience is eroded as TV commercial time outs slow the game to a crawl. In-stadium revenue needs to be maximized. Etc. etc. etc.

I just can't make a BUSINESS argument for Cal being in this industry. I can make an emotional one. I can try to tie straws together to suggest that somehow the good will of seeing Cal on an ESPN broadcast at 10 a.m. on a Saturday translates into greater unrestricted donations but honestly I don't know if that is true and I would absolutely want the data on it. I get why every Chancellor makes happy sounds because why would you poke the bear and speak truth on this matter until you absolutely had to. But personally I think that this moment is a perfect one to step back and really ask whether the patient is worth saving and then ask why.

Its not that easy. If UCLA's athletic program, particularly its football program, competes in a different classification from Cal, I could see UCLA becoming perceived as the new flagship university in the UC system. We would be lumped in with the UC-Davis and UC Irvine schools.

Sure Cal would have way more Nobel prizes than those schools, but perception is reality, and if only one UC is competing in athletics at the highest level, that UC will be perceived as the big dog in the system.

socaltownie said:

---

I would put it a different way. The industry has changed. You could make a strong argument that in an era where football was largely played at 1 p.m. on a Saturday and TV revenues were largely an afterthought (if generated at all) there was value in fielding competive teams. Alumni parties provided an opportunity, nearly unique, for donor engagement and that mattered over the course of decades as Cal built up endowments and cultivated donations.

But in an era where TV wags the dog, the industry is fundamentally transformed. Alumni events can not be easily planned as the TV schedule often isn't finalized until 14 days away. The time is at the convenience of TV - not what works for engaging prospective donors. The game day experience is eroded as TV commercial time outs slow the game to a crawl. In-stadium revenue needs to be maximized. Etc. etc. etc.

I just can't make a BUSINESS argument for Cal being in this industry. I can make an emotional one. I can try to tie straws together to suggest that somehow the good will of seeing Cal on an ESPN broadcast at 10 a.m. on a Saturday translates into greater unrestricted donations but honestly I don't know if that is true and I would absolutely want the data on it. I get why every Chancellor makes happy sounds because why would you poke the bear and speak truth on this matter until you absolutely had to. But personally I think that this moment is a perfect one to step back and really ask whether the patient is worth saving and then ask why.

---

These changes are harder to take because you have experienced something better that is no longer available. With new fans the experience is still meaningful even with all the changes. The TV contract money is transformative and I believe necessary for the long term significance of the program. If the stated goal is to have true student athletes that compete at the highest level on the field and in the classroom, then we should pursue maximizing the revenue from the main source funding modern college athletics.

The game day experience will improve with better results and more fans showing up. Winning a few more games a year will solve lots of issues. TV revenue is important to staying competitive.

I can see the argument you are making and it is sound with the supporting beliefs that you've presented. I just think that the belief system is a bit short sighted and out of date. The revenue impact of live experiences of everything be it music, theater or sports is giving way from a revenue standpoint to the massive reach of video content.

The student body of Cal is increasingly international. I think we can go into the new paradigm and succeed and I think it is the best move for the long term goals of Cal Athletics and the university.

Vegas Bear said:

---

Its not that easy. If UCLA's athletic program, particularly its football program, competes in a different classification from Cal, I could see UCLA becoming perceived as the new flagship university in the UC system. We would be lumped in with the UC-Davis and UC Irvine schools.

Sure Cal would have way more Nobel prizes than those schools, but perception is reality, and if only one UC is competing in athletics at the highest level, that UC will be perceived as the big dog in the system.

---

Sorry but that's nutty. We're basically co-equals at this point. Cal has a MUCH higher profile outside the US and we're about even domestically. Our biggest deficit is a really the lack of a med school and all the research money that comes along with that.

socaltownie said:

---

evanluck said:

---

What is identity of Cal Football and can this identity be truly competitive in the changing landscape of modern College Football?

I think most of us would agree that the goal identity of Cal Football and Cal Athletics in general is nurture true student athletes that experience success at the highest level as students and athletes.

It seems too dissonant to think that just because the trend in College football is more rapidly hurtling towards professionalism, that Cal Football will all of a sudden transform itself into a football factory ready to duke it out with the "Big Boys" who have decades of preparation, infrastructure, donors, and fan bases willing to cooperate in masquerading a semi-professional team as a group of student athletes.

Most of us in our own professional career can relate to this type of choice. Most industries, be it medicine, insurance, real estate, financial investment, engineering all began with a service-oriented broader mission. Many professionals get into those industries (some with significant investment in education and training) with the idea that they will make a difference serving others in the context of this broader mission only to find that the mechanics of the industry have totally shifted to profit over mission.

Most make the compromise and participate in the profit machine in the name of supporting their families and building their own personal prosperity. Some leave out of disgust. A few stay in the system and they figure out how to still serve the mission despite a structure that makes it difficult. Many of these people find, perhaps surprisingly, that they do not have to sacrifice personal well being to remain mission focused.

I think Cal Football can be have this type of identity. We can be who we want to be and still succeed at the highest level. All of our decisions should flow from the clarity of this identity and goal. Feels good to have the world shaking around you with changes and everyone shouting that your very existence is in jeopardy and you are standing in the security of knowing who you are and believing that you can accomplish what you set out to accomplish.

Go Bears!

---

I would put it a different way. The industry has changed. You could make a strong argument that in an era where football was largely played at 1 p.m. on a Saturday and TV revenues were largely an afterthought (if generated at all) there was value in fielding competive teams. Alumni parties provided an opportunity, nearly unique, for donor engagement and that mattered over the course of decades as Cal built up endowments and cultivated donations.

But in an era where TV wags the dog, the industry is fundamentally transformed. Alumni events can not be easily planned as the TV schedule often isn't finalized until 14 days away. The time is at the convenience of TV - not what works for engaging prospective donors. The game day experience is eroded as TV commercial time outs slow the game to a crawl. In-stadium revenue needs to be maximized. Etc. etc. etc.

I just can't make a BUSINESS argument for Cal being in this industry. I can make an emotional one. I can try to tie straws together to suggest that somehow the good will of seeing Cal on an ESPN broadcast at 10 a.m. on a Saturday translates into greater unrestricted donations but honestly I don't know if that is true and I would absolutely want the data on it. I get why every Chancellor makes happy sounds because why would you poke the bear and speak truth on this matter until you absolutely had to. But personally I think that this moment is a perfect one to step back and really ask whether the patient is worth saving and then ask why.

---

We could probably lock in TV contracts with standardized 3:00 or 3:30 pm kickoffs. That would allow for planing alumni luncheons and tailgates. Or post game cocktails, dinners and parties. People could plan their Saturdays, plan their travel, etc.

Sorry, not feeling this thread.

The only thing acceptable is for Cal football to contend and improve every year. We've had both in the past. That's what I want again.

eabandit said:

---

- We need to fix the friction between athletics and academia on campus and institutionally. There is no reason we can't be excellent in both areas. Cal leadership should understand that a successful sports program creates momentum, pride, donors, strong alumni network, etc. and can have benefits to one's "whole self" and success in life outside of academia and research. I consider myself a successful person but struggled academically at Cal. I benefitted immensely from the network, community, and vision that was developed for me during my time there and in the Bay Area.

TLDR is we can find ways to be successful even without massive resources. It certainly needs some creativity, vision, and luck though. I'm disappointed it's an uphill battle for us.

---

Agreed.
Fundamentally, this is where it has to start.

I think the idea of the student athlete promoted at an elite level by an elite institution has been our identity, is our identity and should always be our identity especially if other institutions and the NCAA itself have sold out on that in the interest if monetizing college sports.

There will always be a place for it, even if it is only in my heart.

I think the balancing of physical fitness with intellectual advancement is a fundamental ambition of humanity itself and we need places where the realization of that can inspire us to those ends.

This is probably the real reason why I fell in love with Cal football, even if I did not realize it until now.

Thanks so much for your post. It really was very healing to read it.

DiabloWags said:

---

eabandit said:

---

- We need to fix the friction between athletics and academia on campus and institutionally. There is no reason we can't be excellent in both areas. Cal leadership should understand that a successful sports program creates momentum, pride, donors, strong alumni network, etc. and can have benefits to one's "whole self" and success in life outside of academia and research. I consider myself a successful person but struggled academically at Cal. I benefitted immensely from the network, community, and vision that was developed for me during my time there and in the Bay Area.

TLDR is we can find ways to be successful even without massive resources. It certainly needs some creativity, vision, and luck though. I'm disappointed it's an uphill battle for us.

---

Agreed.
Fundamentally, this is where it has to start.

---

+1

So are you saying that winning is the only important thing to you and that what Cal needs to do is do it the same way the other power house programs are planning to do it (e.g. $10 million NIL contracts to star players) and all the other things that go with the chasing the trend towards making college football a semi-professional sport?

The point of my original post was that winning at the highest level and that the most effective way for Cal to do it is to clarify it's identity as a program and make decisions that are consistent with this identity and winning at the highest level.

We have no disagreement about contending and improving.

XXXBEAR said:

---

Sorry, not feeling this thread.

The only thing acceptable is for Cal football to contend and improve every year. We've had both in the past. That's what I want again.

---

socaltownie said:

---

evanluck said:

---

What is identity of Cal Football and can this identity be truly competitive in the changing landscape of modern College Football?

I think most of us would agree that the goal identity of Cal Football and Cal Athletics in general is nurture true student athletes that experience success at the highest level as students and athletes.

It seems too dissonant to think that just because the trend in College football is more rapidly hurtling towards professionalism, that Cal Football will all of a sudden transform itself into a football factory ready to duke it out with the "Big Boys" who have decades of preparation, infrastructure, donors, and fan bases willing to cooperate in masquerading a semi-professional team as a group of student athletes.

Most of us in our own professional career can relate to this type of choice. Most industries, be it medicine, insurance, real estate, financial investment, engineering all began with a service-oriented broader mission. Many professionals get into those industries (some with significant investment in education and training) with the idea that they will make a difference serving others in the context of this broader mission only to find that the mechanics of the industry have totally shifted to profit over mission.

Most make the compromise and participate in the profit machine in the name of supporting their families and building their own personal prosperity. Some leave out of disgust. A few stay in the system and they figure out how to still serve the mission despite a structure that makes it difficult. Many of these people find, perhaps surprisingly, that they do not have to sacrifice personal well being to remain mission focused.

I think Cal Football can be have this type of identity. We can be who we want to be and still succeed at the highest level. All of our decisions should flow from the clarity of this identity and goal. Feels good to have the world shaking around you with changes and everyone shouting that your very existence is in jeopardy and you are standing in the security of knowing who you are and believing that you can accomplish what you set out to accomplish.

Go Bears!

---

I would put it a different way. The industry has changed. You could make a strong argument that in an era where football was largely played at 1 p.m. on a Saturday and TV revenues were largely an afterthought (if generated at all) there was value in fielding competive teams. Alumni parties provided an opportunity, nearly unique, for donor engagement and that mattered over the course of decades as Cal built up endowments and cultivated donations.

But in an era where TV wags the dog, the industry is fundamentally transformed. Alumni events can not be easily planned as the TV schedule often isn't finalized until 14 days away. The time is at the convenience of TV - not what works for engaging prospective donors. The game day experience is eroded as TV commercial time outs slow the game to a crawl. In-stadium revenue needs to be maximized. Etc. etc. etc.

I just can't make a BUSINESS argument for Cal being in this industry. I can make an emotional one. I can try to tie straws together to suggest that somehow the good will of seeing Cal on an ESPN broadcast at 10 a.m. on a Saturday translates into greater unrestricted donations but honestly I don't know if that is true and I would absolutely want the data on it. I get why every Chancellor makes happy sounds because why would you poke the bear and speak truth on this matter until you absolutely had to. But personally I think that this moment is a perfect one to step back and really ask whether the patient is worth saving and then ask why.

---

This post falls squarely in the "I wish I'd said that" category. The revenue sports of college athletics have been semi-professional for decades and, in the last 25 years or so, have ramped up toward full on professional status. For the last several years I've questioned how any so called "institution of higher learning", particularly one that is public, can justify being in the sports entertainment business.

You can have a very successful career in sports and entertainment. There is no reason why we shouldn't accept that and create academic programs that support growth and learning in this field.

I really feel like it's a missed opportunity to cultivate an elite sports-adjacent academia environment and actually do it better than every other NCAA school. We're certainly top 5 in so many fields it's frustrating we can't do something elite and special here too.

socaltownie said:

---

evanluck said:

---

What is identity of Cal Football and can this identity be truly competitive in the changing landscape of modern College Football?

I think most of us would agree that the goal identity of Cal Football and Cal Athletics in general is nurture true student athletes that experience success at the highest level as students and athletes.

It seems too dissonant to think that just because the trend in College football is more rapidly hurtling towards professionalism, that Cal Football will all of a sudden transform itself into a football factory ready to duke it out with the "Big Boys" who have decades of preparation, infrastructure, donors, and fan bases willing to cooperate in masquerading a semi-professional team as a group of student athletes.

Most of us in our own professional career can relate to this type of choice. Most industries, be it medicine, insurance, real estate, financial investment, engineering all began with a service-oriented broader mission. Many professionals get into those industries (some with significant investment in education and training) with the idea that they will make a difference serving others in the context of this broader mission only to find that the mechanics of the industry have totally shifted to profit over mission.

Most make the compromise and participate in the profit machine in the name of supporting their families and building their own personal prosperity. Some leave out of disgust. A few stay in the system and they figure out how to still serve the mission despite a structure that makes it difficult. Many of these people find, perhaps surprisingly, that they do not have to sacrifice personal well being to remain mission focused.

I think Cal Football can be have this type of identity. We can be who we want to be and still succeed at the highest level. All of our decisions should flow from the clarity of this identity and goal. Feels good to have the world shaking around you with changes and everyone shouting that your very existence is in jeopardy and you are standing in the security of knowing who you are and believing that you can accomplish what you set out to accomplish.

Go Bears!

---

I would put it a different way. The industry has changed. You could make a strong argument that in an era where football was largely played at 1 p.m. on a Saturday and TV revenues were largely an afterthought (if generated at all) there was value in fielding competive teams. Alumni parties provided an opportunity, nearly unique, for donor engagement and that mattered over the course of decades as Cal built up endowments and cultivated donations.

But in an era where TV wags the dog, the industry is fundamentally transformed. Alumni events can not be easily planned as the TV schedule often isn't finalized until 14 days away. The time is at the convenience of TV - not what works for engaging prospective donors. The game day experience is eroded as TV commercial time outs slow the game to a crawl. In-stadium revenue needs to be maximized. Etc. etc. etc.

I just can't make a BUSINESS argument for Cal being in this industry. I can make an emotional one. I can try to tie straws together to suggest that somehow the good will of seeing Cal on an ESPN broadcast at 10 a.m. on a Saturday translates into greater unrestricted donations but honestly I don't know if that is true and I would absolutely want the data on it. I get why every Chancellor makes happy sounds because why would you poke the bear and speak truth on this matter until you absolutely had to. But personally I think that this moment is a perfect one to step back and really ask whether the patient is worth saving and then ask why.

---

The business argument for Cal to field a football team is it makes a ton of money. If football wasn't forced to give all its profits to every other sports on campus (save men's basketball), football could invest in itself and in all likelihood be very successful.

GMP said:

---

socaltownie said:

---

evanluck said:

---

What is identity of Cal Football and can this identity be truly competitive in the changing landscape of modern College Football?

I think most of us would agree that the goal identity of Cal Football and Cal Athletics in general is nurture true student athletes that experience success at the highest level as students and athletes.

It seems too dissonant to think that just because the trend in College football is more rapidly hurtling towards professionalism, that Cal Football will all of a sudden transform itself into a football factory ready to duke it out with the "Big Boys" who have decades of preparation, infrastructure, donors, and fan bases willing to cooperate in masquerading a semi-professional team as a group of student athletes.

Most of us in our own professional career can relate to this type of choice. Most industries, be it medicine, insurance, real estate, financial investment, engineering all began with a service-oriented broader mission. Many professionals get into those industries (some with significant investment in education and training) with the idea that they will make a difference serving others in the context of this broader mission only to find that the mechanics of the industry have totally shifted to profit over mission.

Most make the compromise and participate in the profit machine in the name of supporting their families and building their own personal prosperity. Some leave out of disgust. A few stay in the system and they figure out how to still serve the mission despite a structure that makes it difficult. Many of these people find, perhaps surprisingly, that they do not have to sacrifice personal well being to remain mission focused.

I think Cal Football can be have this type of identity. We can be who we want to be and still succeed at the highest level. All of our decisions should flow from the clarity of this identity and goal. Feels good to have the world shaking around you with changes and everyone shouting that your very existence is in jeopardy and you are standing in the security of knowing who you are and believing that you can accomplish what you set out to accomplish.

Go Bears!

---

I would put it a different way. The industry has changed. You could make a strong argument that in an era where football was largely played at 1 p.m. on a Saturday and TV revenues were largely an afterthought (if generated at all) there was value in fielding competive teams. Alumni parties provided an opportunity, nearly unique, for donor engagement and that mattered over the course of decades as Cal built up endowments and cultivated donations.

But in an era where TV wags the dog, the industry is fundamentally transformed. Alumni events can not be easily planned as the TV schedule often isn't finalized until 14 days away. The time is at the convenience of TV - not what works for engaging prospective donors. The game day experience is eroded as TV commercial time outs slow the game to a crawl. In-stadium revenue needs to be maximized. Etc. etc. etc.

I just can't make a BUSINESS argument for Cal being in this industry. I can make an emotional one. I can try to tie straws together to suggest that somehow the good will of seeing Cal on an ESPN broadcast at 10 a.m. on a Saturday translates into greater unrestricted donations but honestly I don't know if that is true and I would absolutely want the data on it. I get why every Chancellor makes happy sounds because why would you poke the bear and speak truth on this matter until you absolutely had to. But personally I think that this moment is a perfect one to step back and really ask whether the patient is worth saving and then ask why.

---

The business argument for Cal to field a football team is it makes a ton of money. If football wasn't forced to give all its profits to every other sports on campus (save men's basketball), football could invest in itself and in all likelihood be very successful.

---

Ah, the "I" word!

GMP said:

---

If football wasn't forced to give all its profits to every other sports on campus (save men's basketball), football could invest in itself and in all likelihood be very successful.

---

Not the slightest bit realistic.
So why even mention it?

59bear said:

---

GMP said:

---

socaltownie said:

---

evanluck said:

---

What is identity of Cal Football and can this identity be truly competitive in the changing landscape of modern College Football?

I think most of us would agree that the goal identity of Cal Football and Cal Athletics in general is nurture true student athletes that experience success at the highest level as students and athletes.

It seems too dissonant to think that just because the trend in College football is more rapidly hurtling towards professionalism, that Cal Football will all of a sudden transform itself into a football factory ready to duke it out with the "Big Boys" who have decades of preparation, infrastructure, donors, and fan bases willing to cooperate in masquerading a semi-professional team as a group of student athletes.

Most of us in our own professional career can relate to this type of choice. Most industries, be it medicine, insurance, real estate, financial investment, engineering all began with a service-oriented broader mission. Many professionals get into those industries (some with significant investment in education and training) with the idea that they will make a difference serving others in the context of this broader mission only to find that the mechanics of the industry have totally shifted to profit over mission.

Most make the compromise and participate in the profit machine in the name of supporting their families and building their own personal prosperity. Some leave out of disgust. A few stay in the system and they figure out how to still serve the mission despite a structure that makes it difficult. Many of these people find, perhaps surprisingly, that they do not have to sacrifice personal well being to remain mission focused.

I think Cal Football can be have this type of identity. We can be who we want to be and still succeed at the highest level. All of our decisions should flow from the clarity of this identity and goal. Feels good to have the world shaking around you with changes and everyone shouting that your very existence is in jeopardy and you are standing in the security of knowing who you are and believing that you can accomplish what you set out to accomplish.

Go Bears!

---

I would put it a different way. The industry has changed. You could make a strong argument that in an era where football was largely played at 1 p.m. on a Saturday and TV revenues were largely an afterthought (if generated at all) there was value in fielding competive teams. Alumni parties provided an opportunity, nearly unique, for donor engagement and that mattered over the course of decades as Cal built up endowments and cultivated donations.

But in an era where TV wags the dog, the industry is fundamentally transformed. Alumni events can not be easily planned as the TV schedule often isn't finalized until 14 days away. The time is at the convenience of TV - not what works for engaging prospective donors. The game day experience is eroded as TV commercial time outs slow the game to a crawl. In-stadium revenue needs to be maximized. Etc. etc. etc.

I just can't make a BUSINESS argument for Cal being in this industry. I can make an emotional one. I can try to tie straws together to suggest that somehow the good will of seeing Cal on an ESPN broadcast at 10 a.m. on a Saturday translates into greater unrestricted donations but honestly I don't know if that is true and I would absolutely want the data on it. I get why every Chancellor makes happy sounds because why would you poke the bear and speak truth on this matter until you absolutely had to. But personally I think that this moment is a perfect one to step back and really ask whether the patient is worth saving and then ask why.

---

The business argument for Cal to field a football team is it makes a ton of money. If football wasn't forced to give all its profits to every other sports on campus (save men's basketball), football could invest in itself and in all likelihood be very successful.

---

Ah, the "I" word!

---

plus many. That is the model. It is a function of the NCAA, Title IX, probably the US Olympic Committee and several hundred ADs and others who participated in non-revenue olympic sports and have a fond place in their hearts for wrestingly or field hockey.

I REALLY want there to be a business case for Cal to be in the football game since really some of my most cheished memories are at CMS with my father from the age of 5. However, I just can't. When you look at higher education as a business and think of where Cal sits in that eco-system there just isn't a strong business case for fielding a strong 8 win plus team.

One way to think about this is to realize that a student housing system for 20,000 students at 15K a pop brings in 300million - far in excess of most Athletic Department Top lines. From a pure business line standpoint who would you hire - the guru that knows football coaches or the top notch person that knows how to keep student housing profitable and growing. The answer is clear absent the fact that the VC of Housing is only known by readers of the Chronical of Higher Ed and the AD gets covered by ESPN.

There are other schools that can. Schools in the East and Midwest are deseperate for out of state students to fight off a real problem of demographics. Many also are looking at how USNews uses % accepted and number of applications in its rating system and the incentives to juice the books by getting universal applications from kids that saw the Mustangs on their blue field on TV. Many communities in the SEC use football essentially as a visitors promotion tool - bringing thousands to fairly rural communities several weekends a year to stay in hotels, drink, shop, etc. Many of those schools are also playing the US news ranking game - why schools like Bama give GENEROUS packages to academically successful Californian kids.

One thing this crisis should allow us to do - if we get past our fandom - is to ask these really hard questions. We might not like the answer and we might not say them outloud. But I haven't seen a solid argument for why a very selective research focused institution wtih a relatively strong development/fundraising history like Cal NEEDS football. It definately is a nice to have but given the increasing costs (and compromises) to succeed in football I just don't see the business case.

DiabloWags said:

---

GMP said:

---

If football wasn't forced to give all its profits to every other sports on campus (save men's basketball), football could invest in itself and in all likelihood be very successful.

---

Not the slightest bit realistic.
So why even mention it?

---

Yeah, I mean - isn't that a problem that every other university faces? Football is a big driver of revenue and operating expenses for other sports. Cal is no different than any other.

From

socaltownie said:

---

59bear said:

---

GMP said:

---

socaltownie said:

---

evanluck said:

---

What is identity of Cal Football and can this identity be truly competitive in the changing landscape of modern College Football?

I think most of us would agree that the goal identity of Cal Football and Cal Athletics in general is nurture true student athletes that experience success at the highest level as students and athletes.

It seems too dissonant to think that just because the trend in College football is more rapidly hurtling towards professionalism, that Cal Football will all of a sudden transform itself into a football factory ready to duke it out with the "Big Boys" who have decades of preparation, infrastructure, donors, and fan bases willing to cooperate in masquerading a semi-professional team as a group of student athletes.

Most of us in our own professional career can relate to this type of choice. Most industries, be it medicine, insurance, real estate, financial investment, engineering all began with a service-oriented broader mission. Many professionals get into those industries (some with significant investment in education and training) with the idea that they will make a difference serving others in the context of this broader mission only to find that the mechanics of the industry have totally shifted to profit over mission.

Most make the compromise and participate in the profit machine in the name of supporting their families and building their own personal prosperity. Some leave out of disgust. A few stay in the system and they figure out how to still serve the mission despite a structure that makes it difficult. Many of these people find, perhaps surprisingly, that they do not have to sacrifice personal well being to remain mission focused.

I think Cal Football can be have this type of identity. We can be who we want to be and still succeed at the highest level. All of our decisions should flow from the clarity of this identity and goal. Feels good to have the world shaking around you with changes and everyone shouting that your very existence is in jeopardy and you are standing in the security of knowing who you are and believing that you can accomplish what you set out to accomplish.

Go Bears!

---

I would put it a different way. The industry has changed. You could make a strong argument that in an era where football was largely played at 1 p.m. on a Saturday and TV revenues were largely an afterthought (if generated at all) there was value in fielding competive teams. Alumni parties provided an opportunity, nearly unique, for donor engagement and that mattered over the course of decades as Cal built up endowments and cultivated donations.

But in an era where TV wags the dog, the industry is fundamentally transformed. Alumni events can not be easily planned as the TV schedule often isn't finalized until 14 days away. The time is at the convenience of TV - not what works for engaging prospective donors. The game day experience is eroded as TV commercial time outs slow the game to a crawl. In-stadium revenue needs to be maximized. Etc. etc. etc.

I just can't make a BUSINESS argument for Cal being in this industry. I can make an emotional one. I can try to tie straws together to suggest that somehow the good will of seeing Cal on an ESPN broadcast at 10 a.m. on a Saturday translates into greater unrestricted donations but honestly I don't know if that is true and I would absolutely want the data on it. I get why every Chancellor makes happy sounds because why would you poke the bear and speak truth on this matter until you absolutely had to. But personally I think that this moment is a perfect one to step back and really ask whether the patient is worth saving and then ask why.

---

The business argument for Cal to field a football team is it makes a ton of money. If football wasn't forced to give all its profits to every other sports on campus (save men's basketball), football could invest in itself and in all likelihood be very successful.

---

Ah, the "I" word!

---

plus many. That is the model. It is a function of the NCAA, Title IX, probably the US Olympic Committee and several hundred ADs and others who participated in non-revenue olympic sports and have a fond place in their hearts for wrestingly or field hockey.

I REALLY want there to be a business case for Cal to be in the football game since really some of my most cheished memories are at CMS with my father from the age of 5. However, I just can't. When you look at higher education as a business and think of where Cal sits in that eco-system there just isn't a strong business case for fielding a strong 8 win plus team.

One way to think about this is to realize that a student housing system for 20,000 students at 15K a pop brings in 300million - far in excess of most Athletic Department Top lines. From a pure business line standpoint who would you hire - the guru that knows football coaches or the top notch person that knows how to keep student housing profitable and growing. The answer is clear absent the fact that the VC of Housing is only known by readers of the Chronical of Higher Ed and the AD gets covered by ESPN.

There are other schools that can. Schools in the East and Midwest are deseperate for out of state students to fight off a real problem of demographics. Many also are looking at how USNews uses % accepted and number of applications in its rating system and the incentives to juice the books by getting universal applications from kids that saw the Mustangs on their blue field on TV. Many communities in the SEC use football essentially as a visitors promotion tool - bringing thousands to fairly rural communities several weekends a year to stay in hotels, drink, shop, etc. Many of those schools are also playing the US news ranking game - why schools like Bama give GENEROUS packages to academically successful Californian kids.

One thing this crisis should allow us to do - if we get past our fandom - is to ask these really hard questions. We might not like the answer and we might not say them outloud. But I haven't seen a solid argument for why a very selective research focused institution wtih a relatively strong development/fundraising history like Cal NEEDS football. It definately is a nice to have but given the increasing costs (and compromises) to succeed in football I just don't see the business case.

---

Thanks for the well written, clear response. My response to you would be that we should get both a great student housing guru and a great AD. I honestly don't think Cal has a choice at the moment because there's no clear answer as to who assumes the CMS debt should we tank football. In essence, that decision was made 10 years ago when the decision to retrofit the stadium was made and the financial plan approved. I'm hoping against hope that the UW President and GK can negotiate a better deal with ESPN to raise the Pac 10 rates to a level where the Cal Admin can kick in some money and get us competitive again on the field. If so, the gate should increase along with merch sales, etc...basically, the momentum swings the other way and the entire boat stays afloat.

juarezbear said:

---

socaltownie said:

---

59bear said:

---

GMP said:

---

socaltownie said:

---

evanluck said:

---

What is identity of Cal Football and can this identity be truly competitive in the changing landscape of modern College Football?

I think most of us would agree that the goal identity of Cal Football and Cal Athletics in general is nurture true student athletes that experience success at the highest level as students and athletes.

It seems too dissonant to think that just because the trend in College football is more rapidly hurtling towards professionalism, that Cal Football will all of a sudden transform itself into a football factory ready to duke it out with the "Big Boys" who have decades of preparation, infrastructure, donors, and fan bases willing to cooperate in masquerading a semi-professional team as a group of student athletes.

Most of us in our own professional career can relate to this type of choice. Most industries, be it medicine, insurance, real estate, financial investment, engineering all began with a service-oriented broader mission. Many professionals get into those industries (some with significant investment in education and training) with the idea that they will make a difference serving others in the context of this broader mission only to find that the mechanics of the industry have totally shifted to profit over mission.

Most make the compromise and participate in the profit machine in the name of supporting their families and building their own personal prosperity. Some leave out of disgust. A few stay in the system and they figure out how to still serve the mission despite a structure that makes it difficult. Many of these people find, perhaps surprisingly, that they do not have to sacrifice personal well being to remain mission focused.

I think Cal Football can be have this type of identity. We can be who we want to be and still succeed at the highest level. All of our decisions should flow from the clarity of this identity and goal. Feels good to have the world shaking around you with changes and everyone shouting that your very existence is in jeopardy and you are standing in the security of knowing who you are and believing that you can accomplish what you set out to accomplish.

Go Bears!

---

I would put it a different way. The industry has changed. You could make a strong argument that in an era where football was largely played at 1 p.m. on a Saturday and TV revenues were largely an afterthought (if generated at all) there was value in fielding competive teams. Alumni parties provided an opportunity, nearly unique, for donor engagement and that mattered over the course of decades as Cal built up endowments and cultivated donations.

But in an era where TV wags the dog, the industry is fundamentally transformed. Alumni events can not be easily planned as the TV schedule often isn't finalized until 14 days away. The time is at the convenience of TV - not what works for engaging prospective donors. The game day experience is eroded as TV commercial time outs slow the game to a crawl. In-stadium revenue needs to be maximized. Etc. etc. etc.

I just can't make a BUSINESS argument for Cal being in this industry. I can make an emotional one. I can try to tie straws together to suggest that somehow the good will of seeing Cal on an ESPN broadcast at 10 a.m. on a Saturday translates into greater unrestricted donations but honestly I don't know if that is true and I would absolutely want the data on it. I get why every Chancellor makes happy sounds because why would you poke the bear and speak truth on this matter until you absolutely had to. But personally I think that this moment is a perfect one to step back and really ask whether the patient is worth saving and then ask why.

---

The business argument for Cal to field a football team is it makes a ton of money. If football wasn't forced to give all its profits to every other sports on campus (save men's basketball), football could invest in itself and in all likelihood be very successful.

---

Ah, the "I" word!

---

plus many. That is the model. It is a function of the NCAA, Title IX, probably the US Olympic Committee and several hundred ADs and others who participated in non-revenue olympic sports and have a fond place in their hearts for wrestingly or field hockey.

I REALLY want there to be a business case for Cal to be in the football game since really some of my most cheished memories are at CMS with my father from the age of 5. However, I just can't. When you look at higher education as a business and think of where Cal sits in that eco-system there just isn't a strong business case for fielding a strong 8 win plus team.

One way to think about this is to realize that a student housing system for 20,000 students at 15K a pop brings in 300million - far in excess of most Athletic Department Top lines. From a pure business line standpoint who would you hire - the guru that knows football coaches or the top notch person that knows how to keep student housing profitable and growing. The answer is clear absent the fact that the VC of Housing is only known by readers of the Chronical of Higher Ed and the AD gets covered by ESPN.

There are other schools that can. Schools in the East and Midwest are deseperate for out of state students to fight off a real problem of demographics. Many also are looking at how USNews uses % accepted and number of applications in its rating system and the incentives to juice the books by getting universal applications from kids that saw the Mustangs on their blue field on TV. Many communities in the SEC use football essentially as a visitors promotion tool - bringing thousands to fairly rural communities several weekends a year to stay in hotels, drink, shop, etc. Many of those schools are also playing the US news ranking game - why schools like Bama give GENEROUS packages to academically successful Californian kids.

One thing this crisis should allow us to do - if we get past our fandom - is to ask these really hard questions. We might not like the answer and we might not say them outloud. But I haven't seen a solid argument for why a very selective research focused institution wtih a relatively strong development/fundraising history like Cal NEEDS football. It definately is a nice to have but given the increasing costs (and compromises) to succeed in football I just don't see the business case.

---

Thanks for the well written, clear response. My response to you would be that we should get both a great student housing guru and a great AD. I honestly don't think Cal has a choice at the moment because there's no clear answer as to who assumes the CMS debt should we tank football. In essence, that decision was made 10 years ago when the decision to retrofit the stadium was made and the financial plan approved. I'm hoping against hope that the UW President and GK can negotiate a better deal with ESPN to raise the Pac 10 rates to a level where the Cal Admin can kick in some money and get us competitive again on the field. If so, the gate should increase along with merch sales, etc...basically, the momentum swings the other way and the entire boat stays afloat.

---

Except (and this gets tricky) Cal DOESN"T have the debt - the UC Regents do. That is who is on the hook for making bond payments.

THen the question is how OOP handles that. THe tricky part is that CMS is just one of NUMEROUS bond issuances by the system of a variety of different flavors.

1) Cal simply says "nope. We can't pay it given the $$ we are going to get from the denuded Pac10. You know who has money, OOP? UCLA. Ask them."
2) Since OOP has the debt but not the revenue Less Capital gets expended throughout the system. Cal MIGHT suffer some but the university is sorta past the era of massive infrastructure spends that are NOT 100% donor funded. WHo frankly gets screwed is campuses like Merced who need OOP $$ to grow and where there is strong pressure TO grow. Also Riverside, Davis and possibly a few others. There could be some demands from OOP for additional transfers from the university - likely resulting in some squeezing on the administrative staff side and Grant overhead.
2.5) Definately non revenue sports get wacked. No way the Chancellor is getting away with massive debt transfers to Oakland AND spending discretionary funds on field hockey. But the university as an institution of higher ed doesn't really suffer.
3) OOP again looks at that B1G windfall.

I get that the CMS debt is a great trump card to play but it it is not as clear cut as it seems since Cal is part of a SYSTEM where campuses have a ton of autonomy but also are financially very intertwinned.


PS. To really understand this would require far more knowledge than I have on how 1) any campus-OOP agreements on the CMS debt were worded. 2) Precedence for this kind of chicken between a campus and the OOP.

So, looking at the "who do we want to be" question, do we want to be the west coast version of Nebraska? Or are we more Ivy League?

For the sake of discussion, other than Stanford, who else would be in a west coast Ivy League? Does Cal Tech have a football team?

mirabelle said:

---

So, looking at the "who do we want to be" question, do we want to be the west coast version of Nebraska? Or are we more Ivy League?

For the sake of discussion, other than Stanford, who else would be in a west coast Ivy League? Does Cal Tech have a football team?

---

I don't think we need to look for a template for who we want to be. That is unnecessarily limits you. The choice of what league we should join is premature for most of us to consider, one because there is still so much movement that any choice other than one of panic is not clear.

Also most of us who are currently ruminating about what the Athletic department should do don't really believe that promoting a program with true student athletes who succeed at the highest level in the classroom and on the field is possible.

Those who make the decision need to clearly define the identity, and believe whole heartedly that Cal can be successful being who we have decided to be. Then the correct decision about what league to join will become clear.

If we get clear about this identity, I believe in the long run we will attract the talent needed to succeed. The experience of a pure form of college athletics has always had its appeal. The identity can be increasingly marketed as unique as the trend moves away from it.

mirabelle said:

---

So, looking at the "who do we want to be" question, do we want to be the west coast version of Nebraska? Or are we more Ivy League?

For the sake of discussion, other than Stanford, who else would be in a west coast Ivy League? Does Cal Tech have a football team?

---

Not yet. But, they are a hoops power!

A new rivalry?

59bear said:

---

socaltownie said:

---

evanluck said:

---

What is identity of Cal Football and can this identity be truly competitive in the changing landscape of modern College Football?

I think most of us would agree that the goal identity of Cal Football and Cal Athletics in general is nurture true student athletes that experience success at the highest level as students and athletes.

It seems too dissonant to think that just because the trend in College football is more rapidly hurtling towards professionalism, that Cal Football will all of a sudden transform itself into a football factory ready to duke it out with the "Big Boys" who have decades of preparation, infrastructure, donors, and fan bases willing to cooperate in masquerading a semi-professional team as a group of student athletes.

Most of us in our own professional career can relate to this type of choice. Most industries, be it medicine, insurance, real estate, financial investment, engineering all began with a service-oriented broader mission. Many professionals get into those industries (some with significant investment in education and training) with the idea that they will make a difference serving others in the context of this broader mission only to find that the mechanics of the industry have totally shifted to profit over mission.

Most make the compromise and participate in the profit machine in the name of supporting their families and building their own personal prosperity. Some leave out of disgust. A few stay in the system and they figure out how to still serve the mission despite a structure that makes it difficult. Many of these people find, perhaps surprisingly, that they do not have to sacrifice personal well being to remain mission focused.

I think Cal Football can be have this type of identity. We can be who we want to be and still succeed at the highest level. All of our decisions should flow from the clarity of this identity and goal. Feels good to have the world shaking around you with changes and everyone shouting that your very existence is in jeopardy and you are standing in the security of knowing who you are and believing that you can accomplish what you set out to accomplish.

Go Bears!

---

I would put it a different way. The industry has changed. You could make a strong argument that in an era where football was largely played at 1 p.m. on a Saturday and TV revenues were largely an afterthought (if generated at all) there was value in fielding competive teams. Alumni parties provided an opportunity, nearly unique, for donor engagement and that mattered over the course of decades as Cal built up endowments and cultivated donations.

But in an era where TV wags the dog, the industry is fundamentally transformed. Alumni events can not be easily planned as the TV schedule often isn't finalized until 14 days away. The time is at the convenience of TV - not what works for engaging prospective donors. The game day experience is eroded as TV commercial time outs slow the game to a crawl. In-stadium revenue needs to be maximized. Etc. etc. etc.

I just can't make a BUSINESS argument for Cal being in this industry. I can make an emotional one. I can try to tie straws together to suggest that somehow the good will of seeing Cal on an ESPN broadcast at 10 a.m. on a Saturday translates into greater unrestricted donations but honestly I don't know if that is true and I would absolutely want the data on it. I get why every Chancellor makes happy sounds because why would you poke the bear and speak truth on this matter until you absolutely had to. But personally I think that this moment is a perfect one to step back and really ask whether the patient is worth saving and then ask why.

---

This post falls squarely in the "I wish I'd said that" category. The revenue sports of college athletics have been semi-professional for decades and, in the last 25 years or so, have ramped up toward full on professional status. For the last several years I've questioned how any so called "institution of higher learning", particularly one that is public, can justify being in the sports entertainment business.

---

How is it any different than being in the medical business? UCSF is as commercial an entity that exists.

It's also not zero-sum -- one doesn't preclude success in the other. There's this lazy supposition that many have (not you, just the world at large) that every dollar spent on the Athletic Department could be better used on academics when in fact those dollars wouldn't exist at all without sports.

Grow the pie in all areas by being the best in them!

DiabloWags said:

---

GMP said:

---

If football wasn't forced to give all its profits to every other sports on campus (save men's basketball), football could invest in itself and in all likelihood be very successful.

---

Not the slightest bit realistic.
So why even mention it?

---

He is suggesting football either be disbanded or basically goes D2 or D3 (edit: and skimming his later posts, I believe he's suggesting disbanding). If you do so, all those other sports lose their funding.

So what's the business argument for football? It brings in a great deal of revenue that keeps all these other sports afloat. That's important. If he is arguing there is no place in college for varsity athletics, I disagree.

In that scenario, sports will have to raise their own funds. These men's sports have raised or likely can raise the money to support themselves: swimming, water polo, golf, rugby, basketball, crew. then the school would have to put up enough money to support the equivalent number of women athletes to meet Title IX.

Whatever sports are left would have to raise funds themselves or get cut.

Jeff82 said:

---

In that scenario, sports will have to raise their own funds. These men's sports have raised or likely can raise the money to support themselves: swimming, water polo, golf, rugby, basketball, crew. then the school would have to put up enough money to support the equivalent number of women athletes to meet Title IX.

Whatever sports are left would have to raise funds themselves or get cut.

---

Those sports would still have to pool their money and divide it up to be in compliance with Title IX. You can't just cut all the women's sports that don't raise enough funds.

So where are we then?

We would comply with Title IX solely on the numerical prong, where we provide women's sports positions equal to the percentage of women in the student body. If money is reduced, we would cut men's sports so that the percentages are correct.

Jeff82 said:

---

We would comply with Title IX solely on the numerical prong, where we provide women's sports positions equal to the percentage of women in the student body. If money is reduced, we would cut men's sports so that the percentages are correct.

---

Agreed.

Right now we are in the "striving" towards compliance category.
The University hands out surveys to undergrad females and as long as they agree that Cal continues to provide athletic and recreational facilities for women, the University does not have to be in a strict numbers compliance.

The moment we cut a woman's sport, we have to then comply strictly based on the percentage of women in the student body as you've indicated. - - - Rugby, Swimming, and Water Polo have shown strong legacy donors over the years.

Other sports like Track and Field have not.

Agree, wholeheartedly. StDium debt is the biggest issue.

GMP said:

---

socaltownie said:

---

evanluck said:

---

What is identity of Cal Football and can this identity be truly competitive in the changing landscape of modern College Football?

I think most of us would agree that the goal identity of Cal Football and Cal Athletics in general is nurture true student athletes that experience success at the highest level as students and athletes.

It seems too dissonant to think that just because the trend in College football is more rapidly hurtling towards professionalism, that Cal Football will all of a sudden transform itself into a football factory ready to duke it out with the "Big Boys" who have decades of preparation, infrastructure, donors, and fan bases willing to cooperate in masquerading a semi-professional team as a group of student athletes.

Most of us in our own professional career can relate to this type of choice. Most industries, be it medicine, insurance, real estate, financial investment, engineering all began with a service-oriented broader mission. Many professionals get into those industries (some with significant investment in education and training) with the idea that they will make a difference serving others in the context of this broader mission only to find that the mechanics of the industry have totally shifted to profit over mission.

Most make the compromise and participate in the profit machine in the name of supporting their families and building their own personal prosperity. Some leave out of disgust. A few stay in the system and they figure out how to still serve the mission despite a structure that makes it difficult. Many of these people find, perhaps surprisingly, that they do not have to sacrifice personal well being to remain mission focused.

I think Cal Football can be have this type of identity. We can be who we want to be and still succeed at the highest level. All of our decisions should flow from the clarity of this identity and goal. Feels good to have the world shaking around you with changes and everyone shouting that your very existence is in jeopardy and you are standing in the security of knowing who you are and believing that you can accomplish what you set out to accomplish.

Go Bears!

---

I would put it a different way. The industry has changed. You could make a strong argument that in an era where football was largely played at 1 p.m. on a Saturday and TV revenues were largely an afterthought (if generated at all) there was value in fielding competive teams. Alumni parties provided an opportunity, nearly unique, for donor engagement and that mattered over the course of decades as Cal built up endowments and cultivated donations.

But in an era where TV wags the dog, the industry is fundamentally transformed. Alumni events can not be easily planned as the TV schedule often isn't finalized until 14 days away. The time is at the convenience of TV - not what works for engaging prospective donors. The game day experience is eroded as TV commercial time outs slow the game to a crawl. In-stadium revenue needs to be maximized. Etc. etc. etc.

I just can't make a BUSINESS argument for Cal being in this industry. I can make an emotional one. I can try to tie straws together to suggest that somehow the good will of seeing Cal on an ESPN broadcast at 10 a.m. on a Saturday translates into greater unrestricted donations but honestly I don't know if that is true and I would absolutely want the data on it. I get why every Chancellor makes happy sounds because why would you poke the bear and speak truth on this matter until you absolutely had to. But personally I think that this moment is a perfect one to step back and really ask whether the patient is worth saving and then ask why.

---

The business argument for Cal to field a football team is it makes a ton of money. If football wasn't forced to give all its profits to every other sports on campus (save men's basketball), football could invest in itself and in all likelihood be very successful.

---

Men's basketball now loses money too.

aowatson said:

---

Agree, wholeheartedly. StDium debt is the biggest issue.

---

Here is an idea: spin off Cal football as a alumni/booster owned and run enterprise that would own the stadium (and the debt), negotiate the TV contracts and coaching salaries, market the team, pay the players for their NIL and fund their scholarships, and if there is money left over, make donations to the AD.

Every other sport would be part of the Cal Athletic Department with a men's and women's team in each sport, with equal scholarships, which should satisfy Title IX. Field hockey would get cut. Admin costs could be greatly reduced.