https://www.latimes.com/california/story/2022-07-20/newsom-demands-ucla-explain-pac-12-exit

The answer is it doesn't benefit all fuclans.

About time

Maybe the solution is

-- UCLA leaves the UC system at the same time it leaves the Pac, rebrands as "University of Los Angeles", and receives no public money at all from that point forward

-- Annual funding from the state that would otherwise have been given to the former UCLA as a member of the UC system goes to pay off all CMS and Simpson Center debt, and after that debt is retired, the annual funding is re-allocated among all campuses of the UC system.

Have we gone back to calling it the Pac-10 again already?

BearSD said:

---

Maybe the solution is

-- UCLA leaves the UC system at the same time it leaves the Pac, rebrands as "University of Los Angeles", and receives no public money at all from that point forward

---

U.L.A.

oohlah

BearSD said:

---

Maybe the solution is

-- UCLA leaves the UC system at the same time it leaves the Pac, rebrands as "University of Los Angeles", and receives no public money at all from that point forward

-- Annual funding from the state that would otherwise have been given to the former UCLA as a member of the UC system goes to pay off all CMS and Simpson Center debt, and after that debt is retired, the annual funding is re-allocated among all campuses of the UC system.

---

If you listen to newsom this is essentially what he's saying.

He specifically said he expects usc (as a private institution) to act this way, but ucla is a public institution and has a duty to all Californians. you can't take public funds and then not tell the state what the hell you are doing. Ucla basically wants the best of both worlds. They want public funds but want the autonomy of a private institution. **** them

It will take a Santa Clara grad to fight for California.

Them Jesuits(?) is tuff.

Bobodeluxe said:

---

Them Jesuits(?) is tuff.

---

This one has some aspirations coming up though.

Newsom is swinging his balls - I like it.

Newsome: "UCLA, I demand to know why you are you leaving the PAC-12 for the B1G?!!!"

UCLA: "Because our rival is leaving and because we have huge debts and we will get $80 million more than we currently do, which coukd be an $80 million a year savings for the state budget."

Newsome: "Oh."

calumnus said:

---

Newsome: "UCLA, I demand to know why you are you leaving the PAC-12 for the B1G?!!!"

UCLA: "Because our rival is leaving and because we have huge debts and we will get $80 million more than we currently do, which coukd be an $80 million a year savings for the state budget."

Newsome: "Oh."

---

Newsome knows the finances and what they were presented as. But hey, lets break this down point by point anyways:

1) USC leaving is fine, they aren't accountable to the state of California. UCLA is.

2) Those debts are owned by the Athletics Department, not the state of California. If the Athletic Department can't afford to keep their sports the state won't be paying for it. They will be forced to cut sports, then increase tuition to cover the prior debts.

3) The 80 million more per year goes to UCLA at the expense of a substantial sum of money to Cal. How much is to be determined at this point and could be anywhere from 0 dollars going to Cal if they get left out and choose to shut down football and probably something in the 25-30 million dollar range.

4) There is no way shape or form that the 80 million per year that UCLA would gain would go towards saving any portion of the state budget. It would go towards escalating the arms race in football to attempt to stay relevant, with any additional money going towards financing the non rev sports and paying all of the increased travel bills.

5) While none of that 80 million would go towards the state budget, any money Cal loses on WILL come OUT of the state budget as the Regents are on the hook for at least half a billion dollars in stadium debt.?

6) This doesn't cover his questions about how this is good for the student athletes who will now be traveling across the country regularly instead of staying in state.

calumnus said:

---

Newsome: "UCLA, I demand to know why you are you leaving the PAC-12 for the B1G?!!!"

UCLA: "Because our rival is leaving and because we have huge debts and we will get $80 million more than we currently do, which coukd be an $80 million a year savings for the state budget."

Newsome: "Oh."

---

Sadly.

If Newsom doesn't come down on UCLA with both feet, it will sink his presidential aspirations. Another weakling.

Rushinbear said:

---

If Newsom doesn't come down on UCLA with both feet, it will sink his presidential aspirations. Another weakling.

---

It would probably ding them anyway. You can't just talk the talk.

MrGPAC said:

---

2) … They will be forced to cut sports, then increase tuition to cover the prior debts.

---

What is this "tuition" you speak of? /s

calumnus said:

---

Newsome: "UCLA, I demand to know why you are you leaving the PAC-12 for the B1G?!!!"

UCLA: "Because our rival is leaving and because we have huge debts and we will get $80 million more than we currently do, which coukd be an $80 million a year savings for the state budget."

Newsome: "Oh."

---

It didn't occur to UCLA to cut their spending? $103 million? I thought they had an econ department. Business school? Nutrition department? Chancellor's budget office?

Rushinbear said:

---

calumnus said:

---

Newsome: "UCLA, I demand to know why you are you leaving the PAC-12 for the B1G?!!!"

UCLA: "Because our rival is leaving and because we have huge debts and we will get $80 million more than we currently do, which coukd be an $80 million a year savings for the state budget."

Newsome: "Oh."

---

It didn't occur to UCLA to cut their spending? $103 million? I thought they had an econ department. Business school? Nutrition department? Chancellor's budget office?

---

Yes, like perhaps their extravagant budget on food? Ridiculous

https://www.latimes.com/sports/ucla/story/2020-10-27/ucla-chip-kelly-food-costs-college-football

BearSD said:

---

Maybe the solution is

-- UCLA leaves the UC system at the same time it leaves the Pac, rebrands as "University of Los Angeles", and receives no public money at all from that point forward

-- Annual funding from the state that would otherwise have been given to the former UCLA as a member of the UC system goes to pay off all CMS and Simpson Center debt, and after that debt is retired, the annual funding is re-allocated among all campuses of the UC system.

---

If UCLA decided the Big Ten was more important than its affiliation with the UC system, then its admins need to be deported from the state. Last I checked, $450 million/yr > $100 million/yr. It would be the dumbest move in the history of dumb moves.

Rushinbear said:

---

If Newsom doesn't come down on UCLA with both feet, it will sink his presidential aspirations. Another weakling.

---

Oh come on, he will be criticized by the GOP if he stops UCLA and criticized if he doesn't. We all know how the game is played.

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

If Newsom doesn't come down on UCLA with both feet, it will sink his presidential aspirations. Another weakling.

---

Oh come on, he will be criticized by the GOP if he stops UCLA and criticized if he doesn't. We all know how the game is played.

---

So, let him stand above it. Others have.

Shouldn't take long to find out. Today is the last day of the regent's meeting. I'm betting slap on the wrist. They're all eunuchs.

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

If Newsom doesn't come down on UCLA with both feet, it will sink his presidential aspirations. Another weakling.

---

Oh come on, he will be criticized by the GOP if he stops UCLA and criticized if he doesn't. We all know how the game is played.

---

I don't think he wants to stop it, but he does want to put them through the ringer. I get why UCLA was secretive, but it's a bad look when the UC system isn't involved. (I read somewhere the UC president was given a head's up.) The way it's being framed on Twitter, though, is if Newsom is meddling in something he shouldn't. People generally don't know the full context of how the UCLA decision affects Cal.

Oh, for Pete's sake. Doesn't he have other problems like homelessness, crime, fentanyl, Southern border and Covid-19 lockdowns to keep him busy? Stay out of sports, sir. https://t.co/l6ZM2tSQ3G

— Lisa Horne (@LisaHorne) July 15, 2022

(Also, I read a Los Angeles Times opinion piece blaming him for this because he was a big proponent NIL.)

Rushinbear said:

---

If Newsom doesn't come down on UCLA with both feet, it will sink his presidential aspirations. Another weakling.

---

Per the Office of the President, teh Gov has little/no authority to come down on UCLA. The only thing he could do is to ask the Legislature to reduce UCLA's academic funding from teh state but that, of course, would never fly as it would hurt the non-athlete students.

okaydo said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

If Newsom doesn't come down on UCLA with both feet, it will sink his presidential aspirations. Another weakling.

---

Oh come on, he will be criticized by the GOP if he stops UCLA and criticized if he doesn't. We all know how the game is played.

---

I don't think he wants to stop it, but he does want to put them through the ringer. I get why UCLA was secretive, but it's a bad look when the UC system isn't involved. (I read somewhere the UC president was given a head's up.) The way it's being framed on Twitter, though, is if Newsom is meddling in something he shouldn't. People generally don't know the full context of how the UCLA decision affects Cal.

Oh, for Pete's sake. Doesn't he have other problems like homelessness, crime, fentanyl, Southern border and Covid-19 lockdowns to keep him busy? Stay out of sports, sir. https://t.co/l6ZM2tSQ3G

— Lisa Horne (@LisaHorne) July 15, 2022

(Also, I read a Los Angeles Times opinion piece blaming him for this because he was a big proponent NIL.)

---

Asking questions is fine, both as a Gov and a ex officio member of the Regents. He needs to get up to speed. But appearing to 'meddle' when he (apparently) has zero authority to do so, comes across as faux outrage.

berserkeley said:

---

BearSD said:

---

Maybe the solution is

-- UCLA leaves the UC system at the same time it leaves the Pac, rebrands as "University of Los Angeles", and receives no public money at all from that point forward

-- Annual funding from the state that would otherwise have been given to the former UCLA as a member of the UC system goes to pay off all CMS and Simpson Center debt, and after that debt is retired, the annual funding is re-allocated among all campuses of the UC system.

---

If UCLA decided the Big Ten was more important than its affiliation with the UC system, then its admins need to be deported from the state. Last I checked, $450 million/yr > $100 million/yr. It would be the dumbest move in the history of dumb moves.

---

What's the source of the ridiculous assertion that ucla wants to divorce itself from the UC system?

Ah, the governor can blue pencil out line items in the state budget if he wants which requires 2/3th from each house to restore. So he has a little more power than just asking.

Chabbear said:

---

Ah, the governor can blue pencil out line items in the state budget if he wants which requires 2/3th from each house to restore. So he has a little more power than just asking.

---

Great and very interesting point...but I'd argue that this would just be petty for the gov to do and a bit hypocritical - why should university research get penalized for what the athletic side does? He's just doing the reverse of what UCLA athletics did.

That said, I'm totally happy with him splitting 100mm -- 50mm for the state and 50mm for our beloved football team.

Big Dog said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

If Newsom doesn't come down on UCLA with both feet, it will sink his presidential aspirations. Another weakling.

---

Per the Office of the President, teh Gov has little/no authority to come down on UCLA. The only thing he could do is to ask the Legislature to reduce UCLA's academic funding from teh state but that, of course, would never fly as it would hurt the non-athlete students.

---

Right, has no authority, but he does have clout. Will he use it? No.

Best we can hope for is for the regents to wring some % of UCLA's tv money to go for memorial debt and Cal subsidy.

Pathetic bunch.

Cal_79 said:

---

berserkeley said:

---

BearSD said:

---

Maybe the solution is

-- UCLA leaves the UC system at the same time it leaves the Pac, rebrands as "University of Los Angeles", and receives no public money at all from that point forward

-- Annual funding from the state that would otherwise have been given to the former UCLA as a member of the UC system goes to pay off all CMS and Simpson Center debt, and after that debt is retired, the annual funding is re-allocated among all campuses of the UC system.

---

If UCLA decided the Big Ten was more important than its affiliation with the UC system, then its admins need to be deported from the state. Last I checked, $450 million/yr > $100 million/yr. It would be the dumbest move in the history of dumb moves.

---

What's the source of the ridiculous assertion that ucla wants to divorce itself from the UC system?

---

Nah. It was that UCLA should be kicked out of UC and left to be their own private. Venting.

Chabbear said:

---

Ah, the governor can blue pencil out line items in the state budget if he wants which requires 2/3th from each house to restore. So he has a little more power than just asking.

---

Yes, but teh line item to which you speak is the funding for the academic classes offered at UCLA. Is the Gov really gonna line out the state's portion of the campus education fee, aka, tuition? Or, whatever small amount the state pays for research? Effectively shutting down the campus? Seriously?

Rushinbear said:

---

Cal_79 said:

---

berserkeley said:

---

BearSD said:

---

Maybe the solution is

-- UCLA leaves the UC system at the same time it leaves the Pac, rebrands as "University of Los Angeles", and receives no public money at all from that point forward

-- Annual funding from the state that would otherwise have been given to the former UCLA as a member of the UC system goes to pay off all CMS and Simpson Center debt, and after that debt is retired, the annual funding is re-allocated among all campuses of the UC system.

---

If UCLA decided the Big Ten was more important than its affiliation with the UC system, then its admins need to be deported from the state. Last I checked, $450 million/yr > $100 million/yr. It would be the dumbest move in the history of dumb moves.

---

What's the source of the ridiculous assertion that ucla wants to divorce itself from the UC system?

---

Nah. It was that UCLA should be kicked out of UC and left to be their own private. Venting.

---

UCLA administrators would love that, assuming a deal could be worked out for the 400+ acre campus. Far more likely that the regents fire a bunch of administrators and install loyalists. It's not that different from the british royals who wanted to walk away (and maybe initially wanted to keep some of dat royal money). I don't want to have Okaydo blast this thread with royal talk but my main point is that just like in that situation, the idea of UCLA going private just isn't that simple.

it's been stated in the LA Times article that Newsom recently "fought to provide $500 million to UCLA for a new immunology center." I could see him saying we'll move the center somewhere else now. He has tools that don't affect the school's budget directly.

okaydo said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

If Newsom doesn't come down on UCLA with both feet, it will sink his presidential aspirations. Another weakling.

---

Oh come on, he will be criticized by the GOP if he stops UCLA and criticized if he doesn't. We all know how the game is played.

---

I don't think he wants to stop it, but he does want to put them through the ringer. I get why UCLA was secretive, but it's a bad look when the UC system isn't involved. (I read somewhere the UC president was given a head's up.) The way it's being framed on Twitter, though, is if Newsom is meddling in something he shouldn't. People generally don't know the full context of how the UCLA decision affects Cal.

Oh, for Pete's sake. Doesn't he have other problems like homelessness, crime, fentanyl, Southern border and Covid-19 lockdowns to keep him busy? Stay out of sports, sir. https://t.co/l6ZM2tSQ3G

— Lisa Horne (@LisaHorne) July 15, 2022

(Also, I read a Los Angeles Times opinion piece blaming him for this because he was a big proponent NIL.)

---

And the full impact of how it affects Cal is not yet known.
Should Cal have to share its TV revenues with Davis, UC Santa Cruz, etc?

UCLA has developed a better athletics brand than Cal and has done so in California's largest market. Part of their success is they embraced African American athletes like Jackie Robinson in the 1930s, half a century ahead of the SEC. They embraced athletics as part of their campus, Cal has only occasionally. More often than not we squandered our success. They used to share some of their value with us through the revenue pooling with all of the teams in the conference (Oregon State too, for example), now they won't.

Maybe all the UC TV revenues be pooled and shared among all the campuses' athletic departments?

I don't think Cal has any particular claim on UCLA's revenue.

calumnus said:

---

okaydo said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

If Newsom doesn't come down on UCLA with both feet, it will sink his presidential aspirations. Another weakling.

---

Oh come on, he will be criticized by the GOP if he stops UCLA and criticized if he doesn't. We all know how the game is played.

---

I don't think he wants to stop it, but he does want to put them through the ringer. I get why UCLA was secretive, but it's a bad look when the UC system isn't involved. (I read somewhere the UC president was given a head's up.) The way it's being framed on Twitter, though, is if Newsom is meddling in something he shouldn't. People generally don't know the full context of how the UCLA decision affects Cal.

Oh, for Pete's sake. Doesn't he have other problems like homelessness, crime, fentanyl, Southern border and Covid-19 lockdowns to keep him busy? Stay out of sports, sir. https://t.co/l6ZM2tSQ3G

— Lisa Horne (@LisaHorne) July 15, 2022

(Also, I read a Los Angeles Times opinion piece blaming him for this because he was a big proponent NIL.)

---

And the full impact of how it affects Cal is not yet known.
Should Cal have to share its TV revenues with Davis, UC Santa Cruz, etc?

UCLA has developed a better athletics brand than Cal and has done so in California's largest market. Part of their success is they embraced African American athletes like Jackie Robinson in the 1930s, half a century ahead of the SEC. They embraced athletics as part of their campus, Cal has only occasionally. More often than not we squandered our success. They used to share some of their value with us through the revenue pooling with all of the teams in the conference (Oregon State too, for example), now they won't.

Maybe all the UC TV revenues be pooled and shared among all the campuses' athletic departments?

I don't think Cal has any particular claim on UCLA's revenue.

---

Agreed - our admins and culture built the predicament we are in. Bringing UCLA down for a no-brainer decision on their part is just a poor look. Let's not try to go down this path...

Instead of bringing UCLA down, newsom should grow bigger cajones and figure out how to lean his political connections to get Cal included in the B1G so that everyone wins.

calumnus said:

---

okaydo said:

---

Unit2Sucks said:

---

Rushinbear said:

---

If Newsom doesn't come down on UCLA with both feet, it will sink his presidential aspirations. Another weakling.

---

Oh come on, he will be criticized by the GOP if he stops UCLA and criticized if he doesn't. We all know how the game is played.

---

I don't think he wants to stop it, but he does want to put them through the ringer. I get why UCLA was secretive, but it's a bad look when the UC system isn't involved. (I read somewhere the UC president was given a head's up.) The way it's being framed on Twitter, though, is if Newsom is meddling in something he shouldn't. People generally don't know the full context of how the UCLA decision affects Cal.

Oh, for Pete's sake. Doesn't he have other problems like homelessness, crime, fentanyl, Southern border and Covid-19 lockdowns to keep him busy? Stay out of sports, sir. https://t.co/l6ZM2tSQ3G

— Lisa Horne (@LisaHorne) July 15, 2022

(Also, I read a Los Angeles Times opinion piece blaming him for this because he was a big proponent NIL.)

---

And the full impact of how it affects Cal is not yet known.
Should Cal have to share its TV revenues with Davis, UC Santa Cruz, etc?

UCLA has developed a better athletics brand than Cal and has done so in California's largest market. Part of their success is they embraced African American athletes like Jackie Robinson in the 1930s, half a century ahead of the SEC. They embraced athletics as part of their campus, Cal has only occasionally. More often than not we squandered our success. They used to share some of their value with us through the revenue pooling with all of the teams in the conference (Oregon State too, for example), now they won't.

Maybe all the UC TV revenues be pooled and shared among all the campuses' athletic departments?

I don't think Cal has any particular claim on UCLA's revenue.

---

This is a can of worms you don't want opened. If UCLA has to share revenue with Cal, then Irvine, Davis and Santa Barbara etc. can all make a claim for a share of all TV and athletic revenue generated by Cal and UCLA, or a pooling of all TV/media revenue. Good luck with that!