No problem with Cal or C being the logo on helmets, etc. I guess I don't have a problem with California being in there too. But Berkeley just seems weak on any sports stuff. There is no Ann Arbor stuff, no Seattle stuff, no Eugene stuff, etc. Keep the city out of sports. Plus, we are the flagship university in California. We don't have to qualify it like UCLA. Seems pretty straightforward. Unless new folks are brought in by Lyons we'll mess it up, though.

BearinOC said:

---

I think Cal is try to be like "Harvard", "Standfurd", "Columbia", hence, "Berkeley".
Try to cash in on the academic institution name recognition.

---

This is unequivocally it.

We need ridiculous amounts of private money to keep doing what we do, especially with the overhead cost of our bureaucracy.

Go read or listen to Scott Galloway. He has the #1 business podcast now and is a UCLA / Haas guy and successful entrepreneur who teaches at NYU and talks often about the "pedigree" mill of top educational brands.

95bears said:

---

BearinOC said:

---

I think Cal is try to be like "Harvard", "Standfurd", "Columbia", hence, "Berkeley".
Try to cash in on the academic institution name recognition.

---

This is unequivocally it.

We need ridiculous amounts of private money to keep doing what we do, especially with the overhead cost of our bureaucracy.

Go read or listen to Scott Galloway. He has the #1 business podcast now and is a UCLA / Haas guy and successful entrepreneur who teaches at NYU and talks often about the "pedigree" mill of top educational brands.

---

Problem with this is that we are also a school of protest and hippy movement which does not equate to sports excellence. Between Berkeley and Cal-Berkeley, I would have preferred the latter.

82gradDLSdad said:

---

No problem with Cal or C being the logo on helmets, etc. I guess I don't have a problem with California being in there too. But Berkeley just seems weak on any sports stuff. There is no Ann Arbor stuff, no Seattle stuff, no Eugene stuff, etc. Keep the city out of sports. Plus, we are the flagship university in California. We don't have to qualify it like UCLA. Seems pretty straightforward. Unless new folks are brought in by Lyons we'll mess it up, though.

---

Is there a formal flagship designation? If not, then UCLA can claim flagship of it wants. Someone mentioned to my previous response that they have the edge because of being academic equals but vastly superior on the athletics side that they benefit overwhelming from being in a highly attractive region and media market. Well that is just even more so a reason for them to be the flagship and for us to be the a nerdy offshoot.

Econ141 said:

---

82gradDLSdad said:

---

No problem with Cal or C being the logo on helmets, etc. I guess I don't have a problem with California being in there too. But Berkeley just seems weak on any sports stuff. There is no Ann Arbor stuff, no Seattle stuff, no Eugene stuff, etc. Keep the city out of sports. Plus, we are the flagship university in California. We don't have to qualify it like UCLA. Seems pretty straightforward. Unless new folks are brought in by Lyons we'll mess it up, though.

---

Is there a formal flagship designation? If not, then UCLA can claim flagship of it wants. Someone mentioned to my previous response that they have the edge because of being academic equals but vastly superior on the athletics side that they benefit overwhelming from being in a highly attractive region and media market. Well that is just even more so a reason for them to be the flagship and for us to be the a nerdy offshoot.

---

First of all, there isn't an official "flagship" campus. But wait, if there were, you would want fUCLA to have it?!? I want them to be the baby-blue song-stealing egg-sucking campus!

The UC system has no designated flagship.

But per custom, Berkeley was the first campus so gets to call itself "California" in a sporting context. It's the de facto flagship.

I've long thought that the sports side should lean into SOME Berkeley branding. Again, not to replace Cal or California as the athletic name but to add some small "Berkeley" lettering above the numbers on the uniforms or something. Like it or not, the Berkeley name has worldwide cache and it makes sense to connect the identities. Likewise, I think it would be beneficial to have some more connection to "Cal" or "Bears" on the academic side, without removing "UC Berkeley" as the official academic name.

This "B" logo doesn't seem to accomplish any of that. A pretty pointless change.

HearstMining said:

---

Anarchistbear said:

---

Bk too Burger King

---

Nope - Capital "B" and small "k". Bk. The people you want to get it will get it. The people who think a periodic table is something you buy at Crate and Barrel, well screw'em.

---

I still hear this song when I see the Bk logo.

Econ141 said:

---

82gradDLSdad said:

---

No problem with Cal or C being the logo on helmets, etc. I guess I don't have a problem with California being in there too. But Berkeley just seems weak on any sports stuff. There is no Ann Arbor stuff, no Seattle stuff, no Eugene stuff, etc. Keep the city out of sports. Plus, we are the flagship university in California. We don't have to qualify it like UCLA. Seems pretty straightforward. Unless new folks are brought in by Lyons we'll mess it up, though.

---

Is there a formal flagship designation? If not, then UCLA can claim flagship of it wants. Someone mentioned to my previous response that they have the edge because of being academic equals but vastly superior on the athletics side that they benefit overwhelming from being in a highly attractive region and media market. Well that is just even more so a reason for them to be the flagship and for us to be the a nerdy offshoot.

---

I didn't mean some official designation. I was just referring to the already accepted college names that either do or don't have additional qualifiers. No one knows UCLA as the university of California. They know us as that. Every state seems to have one of these (I guess not Louisiana...I'm winging it here). They never, to my knowledge, get referred to by their city.

For the Univsersity to basically abandon branding that places itself front, center and on TOP of California is the HEIGHT of stupidity as we enter the ACC and play on the East Coast. Right when we could have made a clear case for us BEING California for an East Coast crowd, we instead want to promote the COB??? I get that "Berkeley" has cache. But I'd argue California has far, far more for myriad reasons.

What a bunch of total idiots. We could have solidified our position as THE CALIFORNIA UNIVERSITY while UCLA would have had to explain itself. Our identity would be self-evident and we'd be able to promote and advance the famous Cal script.

Apparently not. Shame.

82gradDLSdad said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

82gradDLSdad said:

---

No problem with Cal or C being the logo on helmets, etc. I guess I don't have a problem with California being in there too. But Berkeley just seems weak on any sports stuff. There is no Ann Arbor stuff, no Seattle stuff, no Eugene stuff, etc. Keep the city out of sports. Plus, we are the flagship university in California. We don't have to qualify it like UCLA. Seems pretty straightforward. Unless new folks are brought in by Lyons we'll mess it up, though.

---

Is there a formal flagship designation? If not, then UCLA can claim flagship of it wants. Someone mentioned to my previous response that they have the edge because of being academic equals but vastly superior on the athletics side that they benefit overwhelming from being in a highly attractive region and media market. Well that is just even more so a reason for them to be the flagship and for us to be the a nerdy offshoot.

---

I didn't mean some official designation. I was just referring to the already accepted college names that either do or don't have additional qualifiers. No one knows UCLA as the university of California. They know us as that. Every state seems to have one of these (I guess not Louisiana...I'm winging it here). They never, to my knowledge, get referred to by their city.

---

UL Lafayette now calls themselves just "Louisiana" for athletics.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louisiana_Ragin%27_Cajuns

EDIT: I guess the only one that fully qualifies is New Jersey, since they decided to call their state university "Rutgers." Then you have New York and Pennsylvania, where private institutions came in and took the name first, so the public schools have other names. But there is still a "New York University" and a "University of Pennsylvania."

sycasey said:

---

82gradDLSdad said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

82gradDLSdad said:

---

No problem with Cal or C being the logo on helmets, etc. I guess I don't have a problem with California being in there too. But Berkeley just seems weak on any sports stuff. There is no Ann Arbor stuff, no Seattle stuff, no Eugene stuff, etc. Keep the city out of sports. Plus, we are the flagship university in California. We don't have to qualify it like UCLA. Seems pretty straightforward. Unless new folks are brought in by Lyons we'll mess it up, though.

---

Is there a formal flagship designation? If not, then UCLA can claim flagship of it wants. Someone mentioned to my previous response that they have the edge because of being academic equals but vastly superior on the athletics side that they benefit overwhelming from being in a highly attractive region and media market. Well that is just even more so a reason for them to be the flagship and for us to be the a nerdy offshoot.

---

I didn't mean some official designation. I was just referring to the already accepted college names that either do or don't have additional qualifiers. No one knows UCLA as the university of California. They know us as that. Every state seems to have one of these (I guess not Louisiana...I'm winging it here). They never, to my knowledge, get referred to by their city.

---

UL Lafayette now calls themselves just "Louisiana" for athletics.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Louisiana_Ragin%27_Cajuns

EDIT: I guess the only one that fully qualifies is New Jersey, since they decided to call their state university "Rutgers." Then you have New York and Pennsylvania, where private institutions came in and took the name first, so the public schools have other names. But there is still a "New York University" and a "University of Pennsylvania."

---

I'm really only familiar with college names I heard on TV watching football and basketball games growing up. More academically minded folks can probably come up with many examples that break my 'rules'.

TandemBear said:

---

For the Univsersity to basically abandon branding that places itself front, center and on TOP of California is the HEIGHT of stupidity as we enter the ACC and play on the East Coast. Right when we could have made a clear case for us BEING California for an East Coast crowd, we instead want to promote the COB??? I get that "Berkeley" has cache. But I'd argue California has far, far more for myriad reasons.

What a bunch of total idiots. We could have solidified our position as THE CALIFORNIA UNIVERSITY while UCLA would have had to explain itself. Our identity would be self-evident and we'd be able to promote and advance the famous Cal script.

Apparently not. Shame.

---

Agree. I'd think taking advantage of using "California" is only reinforced by the state retaining the 5th largest economy in the world.

Duh.

We should have owned the University of California decades ago. Today, whenever we try to use University of California or University of California, Berkeley etc…we blend in with the other UC's.

I don't like the idea of being branded Berkeley, but the world knows the university as such. Across the country, the academic prestige is associated with "Berkeley".

Think we have to live with a dual branding- one for academics and one (Cal) for sports. Those that are incapable of tying the two together really don't matter that much. I mean, an academic (only) person could care less about our sports programs. That's always been the case. A sports fan in Louisiana doesn't really care about the academic institution. Why try to force a connection?

UCLA is a powerful brand because LA is the California of dreams.

BearSD said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

captainbonzo said:

---

100% agree. What bothers me most about the B is that symbolically it feels like we've lost the Fight for California and have capitulated to the Bruins as the new flagship UC.

---

Yes this has already happened. Athletically they have always been better and now are part of the relevant 2 conferences and we are not. They also have lower admittance rate now and tied #1 public school from the primary rating service. So they have the edge.

They also have a B for bruins as the logo on their hats. So now we are copying them!!!

---

Edge? Ehhh.

Can't change the fact that southern California has a lot more people, can't change the weather or anything else prospective students like about Socal (all of which leads UCLA to a lower freshman acceptance rate, though UC Berkeley has a lower acceptance rate in comparable graduate departments). Athletically, can't change the fact that UCLA offered proximity to the football team the Big Ten really wanted, plus basketball history, plus the opportunity for Fox to lock ESPN out of the LA market.

UC Berkeley has to work with what they can control, including reputation and accomplishments in faculty research superior to UCLA -- Nobels, other elite academic awards, world rankings of research universities like this and this and this and even this.

---

I am visiting in Eastern Pennsylvania this summer and had an interesting Cal Related conversation.

This week my wife and I were visiting the Steel Stacks in Bethlehem PA. They are part of a new Museum of Industrial History commemorating the Steel Industry in Bethlehem. Joe, the tour guide was one of the last workers in the Bethlehem Steel Works. He has been interviewed extensively on TV and even in a movie about Bethlehem

Before the tour I was wearing my Cal visor. Joe came up to me and started talking and he asked tons of questions: "Did you go to Cal? When did you graduate? What brings you way out here? How do you think Cal will do in the ACC? We are certainly looking forward to see Cal play in the ACC? The teams out here will give Cal a run for its money.
We spent a lot of time talking about what has happened to college football.
Not once did he say the word "Berkeley".

GivemTheAxe said:

---

BearSD said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

captainbonzo said:

---

100% agree. What bothers me most about the B is that symbolically it feels like we've lost the Fight for California and have capitulated to the Bruins as the new flagship UC.

---

Yes this has already happened. Athletically they have always been better and now are part of the relevant 2 conferences and we are not. They also have lower admittance rate now and tied #1 public school from the primary rating service. So they have the edge.

They also have a B for bruins as the logo on their hats. So now we are copying them!!!

---

Edge? Ehhh.

Can't change the fact that southern California has a lot more people, can't change the weather or anything else prospective students like about Socal (all of which leads UCLA to a lower freshman acceptance rate, though UC Berkeley has a lower acceptance rate in comparable graduate departments). Athletically, can't change the fact that UCLA offered proximity to the football team the Big Ten really wanted, plus basketball history, plus the opportunity for Fox to lock ESPN out of the LA market.

UC Berkeley has to work with what they can control, including reputation and accomplishments in faculty research superior to UCLA -- Nobels, other elite academic awards, world rankings of research universities like this and this and this and even this.

---

I am visiting in Eastern Pennsylvania this summer and had an interesting Cal Related conversation.

This week my wife and I were visiting the Steel Stacks in Bethlehem PA. They are part of a new Museum of Industrial History commemorating the Steel Industry in Bethlehem. Joe, the tour guide was one of the last workers in the Bethlehem Steel Works. He has been interviewed extensively on TV and even in a movie about Bethlehem

Before the tour I was wearing my Cal visor. Joe came up to me and started talking and he asked tons of questions: "Did you go to Cal? When did you graduate? What brings you way out here? How do you think Cal will do in the ACC? We are certainly looking forward to see Cal play in the ACC? The teams out here will give Cal a run for its money.
We spent a lot of time talking about what has happened to college football.
Not once did he say the word "Berkeley".

---

Interesting, what team did he root for? Bethlehem isn't particularly close to any ACC school.

TandemBear said:

---

I get that "Berkeley" has cache. But I'd argue California has far, far more for myriad reasons.
.

---

But you would be incredibly and deeply incorrect. "Berkeley" is one of the top academic brands in the world, with decades of cache. "California" does not.

Berkeley is a luxury brand designed to attract foreign and out-of-state students:

https://medium.com/@profgalloway/super-drug-a5c7d98ab0c5

Bjorn91 said:

---

We should have owned the University of California decades ago. Today, whenever we try to use University of California or University of California, Berkeley etc…we blend in with the other UC's.

I don't like the idea of being branded Berkeley, but the world knows the university as such. Across the country, the academic prestige is associated with "Berkeley".

Think we have to live with a dual branding- one for academics and one (Cal) for sports. Those that are incapable of tying the two together really don't matter that much. I mean, an academic (only) person could care less about our sports programs. That's always been the case. A sports fan in Louisiana doesn't really care about the academic institution. Why try to force a connection?

---

Exactly. In many ways separate brands are better and allow for greater achievement in each field. It is why every superhero has a dual identity. Clark Kent is a good journalism brand, Superman is is the villain ass-kicking brand. It would be weird to have Superman as the by-line of an article on a new housing development and it would be weird to have Clark Kent trying to save the planet and intimidate bad guys.

Berkeley for academics and research, California or Cal as a nickname for athletics. As you pointed out, when we are trying to hire a top academic, they do not care how well the football team is doing. They care about academic prestige. And when California is playing North Carolina, what matters is the scoreboard.

And most of us have always been able to code switch depending on who we are talking with. If we see a fellow Cal alum we might say "When were you at Cal?" But when asked by a stranger my qualifications in economics I have no problem saying I have "a BA from Berkeley and an MA from Columbia."

MTbear22 said:

---

TandemBear said:

---

I get that "Berkeley" has cache. But I'd argue California has far, far more for myriad reasons.
.

---

But you would be incredibly and deeply incorrect. "Berkeley" is one of the top academic brands in the world, with decades of cache. "California" does not.

---

In the context of academics, sure, "Berkeley" has a huge amount of cache among many people, especially among academicians (well, also among those still wearing their Che Guevara tshirts).

But "California", in spite of governors from Texas and Florida taking pot-shots the last few years, has an unmatched cache world-wide, In fact, cache is too limiting a term - it's an aura. This, I'm sure, is what Tandembear refers to: things like natural beauty, weather, activities, economic vitality, technical achievement. Are all these things as true as they once were? Maybe not. But for 150 years, people have wanted to come to California!

Two examples (albeit, not recent)
My first job out of college was with a major defense contractor in Sunnyvale. Several of my co-workers from midwest engineering colleges who had offers from Ford, GM, etc. accepted their jobs at our companyafter just phone interviews because they wanted so much to come to California.

My wife, a Comp Sci grad from Ohio, had several offers in-hand when Hewlett Packard offered to fly her out. She's from a very close family - nobody had moved more than 150 miles from the family farm in generations. She accepted the interview just for the free trip to California but five months later, she was working in Palo Alto.

So, why narrow your market by using "Berkeley" to only aim your brand at academicians? You're the G*d D@mned University of California and your market is the world!

OK, maybe I got a little carried away there.

I'm seriously wondering why all of the progressive left in the East Bay is ignoring the very sordid and checkered past of our name sake.

https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/berkeley-city-university-renaming-18094613.php

calfanz said:

---

I'm seriously wondering why all of the progressive left in the East Bay is ignoring the very sordid and checkered past of our name sake.

https://www.sfgate.com/bayarea/article/berkeley-city-university-renaming-18094613.php

---

Didn't the city and university long ago rename themselves after cartoonist Berkeley Breathed, creator of Bloom County?

95bears said:

---

Big C said:

---

95bears said:

---

They really hit all their channels at once... here's LinkedIn:



Amazing to think they could coordinate anything overnight, like this rebrand on digital.

---

I am less anti-"Berkeley" than most folks here. I would love for people throughout the land to know that "Cal"/"California" and "Berkeley" are the same school. I love the "Welcome to Berkeley" and wouldn't mind even having a small-font "Berkeley" somewhere on our uniforms. (very small font).

But this "B"? What the heck?!? No! Hell no! We already have a letter... and it's "C"!

The "B" stands for bullsh*t.

---

Same here. I work in a professions where I think about branding and strategic positiong a lot, for startups who have zero identity or awareness. Cal isn't a well understood brand at all and has awareness with no substance behind it that the average person knows anything about. And off of I5 you can get a nice "Cali" hat, some folks out there think our brand is some state tourism campaign or something. On the other hand, Berkeley is so branded it brings tons mental images to people's minds, further cemented recently by Oppenheimer (Lots of commmies around Berkeley! And brilliant scientists!).

I don't really know what the answer is, but it feels like they are honing in on *something* because Berkeley works great in Academics and professionally for alums, but we all take pride as alums in being sons and daughters of California. Cal-Berkeley is bad and it looks like they're moving away from that recommendation. The"B" thing is so meh and adds confusion IMHO.

You do have to consider strategically the position you're giving up with these changes. The #2 always wants to beat the #1 and sometimes I think Cal is either ignorant or complacent about this. I just stumbled randomly across the UCLA decals below when grabbing the "Cali" logo. If we give up California (and adopt UCLA's "B"), we're ceding unequivocal flagship positioning to the southern branch.

Someone with knowledge on BI mentioned awhile ago Lyons is a proponent of "Berkeley", so hold on to your seat for this continued rebranding ride.

---

I see the two brands as an opportunity, especially heading to the ACC. I'd think a competent marketing department would cross market the two, but the Academic side is against it, hence the reason why we have this issue. Instead of changing because of peoples confusion, educate them about it. Winning in football and basket can only help with exposure. make people familiar with it.

sycasey said:

---

GivemTheAxe said:

---

BearSD said:

---

Econ141 said:

---

captainbonzo said:

---

100% agree. What bothers me most about the B is that symbolically it feels like we've lost the Fight for California and have capitulated to the Bruins as the new flagship UC.

---

Yes this has already happened. Athletically they have always been better and now are part of the relevant 2 conferences and we are not. They also have lower admittance rate now and tied #1 public school from the primary rating service. So they have the edge.

They also have a B for bruins as the logo on their hats. So now we are copying them!!!

---

Edge? Ehhh.

Can't change the fact that southern California has a lot more people, can't change the weather or anything else prospective students like about Socal (all of which leads UCLA to a lower freshman acceptance rate, though UC Berkeley has a lower acceptance rate in comparable graduate departments). Athletically, can't change the fact that UCLA offered proximity to the football team the Big Ten really wanted, plus basketball history, plus the opportunity for Fox to lock ESPN out of the LA market.

UC Berkeley has to work with what they can control, including reputation and accomplishments in faculty research superior to UCLA -- Nobels, other elite academic awards, world rankings of research universities like this and this and this and even this.

---

I am visiting in Eastern Pennsylvania this summer and had an interesting Cal Related conversation.

This week my wife and I were visiting the Steel Stacks in Bethlehem PA. They are part of a new Museum of Industrial History commemorating the Steel Industry in Bethlehem. Joe, the tour guide was one of the last workers in the Bethlehem Steel Works. He has been interviewed extensively on TV and even in a movie about Bethlehem

Before the tour I was wearing my Cal visor. Joe came up to me and started talking and he asked tons of questions: "Did you go to Cal? When did you graduate? What brings you way out here? How do you think Cal will do in the ACC? We are certainly looking forward to see Cal play in the ACC? The teams out here will give Cal a run for its money.
We spent a lot of time talking about what has happened to college football.
Not once did he say the word "Berkeley".

---

Interesting, what team did he root for? Bethlehem isn't particularly close to any ACC school.

---

He didn't say. But he certainly knew ACC football and college football in general.
There were about 10 people on the tour and he spent time trying to get to know his audience before the tour started. Besides my wife and me, there was a couple from England and their American friend. And a group of young men who turned out to be Amish and had bicycled to Bethlehem from Kutztown PA.

Updated brand website showcasing the brighter blue and a new University of California Berkeley logo along with an FAQ section: https://www.berkeley.edu/brand/

If Cal wins for a decade straight the public will figure out Cal = Berkeley et al. Until we do they have no reason to

Yep. Winning fixes all.

at the risk of appearing pedantic, i feel i ought to mention: the word to describe what our alma mater has is "cachet"

Catch**** in English

This **** sucks bro

Big C said:

---

at the risk of appearing pedantic, i feel i ought to mention: the word to describe what our alma mater has is "cachet"

---

Nice cache

captainbonzo said:

---

Good to see an official rejection of the "Cal Berkeley" rebrand idea at least.

---

You are the personification of glass half full!!!

I hate the logo, but I like your attitude.

Does anybody know if our unis are changing to this brighter blue?

oregoncalbear said:

---

Does anybody know if our unis are changing to this brighter blue?

---

Please God no

I don't know why it hasn't happened yet but students will eventually ask the university to remove all references to Berkeley from the school name since Bishop Geroge Berkeley was a slaveowner. When that happens, we go back to the University of California or Cal.