I've been thinking about the portal, more so players leaving Cal. First thought was reason Mendoza left. Money? O-Line? Team record? Conference play? Wilsux and co? Money, although a huge motivator, doesn't seem like his style. His comment on the "football future" seems more so he wants to do what he can to get drafter in pros.

The above reason could be a combination of course. But I wonder about all the players. If one leaves, do you think the other players get a confirmed reason why from that specific player and if they do, why don't they do the same. I wish these kids see through the eyes of older people. Wilcox is not a good coach nor are his subordinates. He's a proven loser. Don't know who this credit goes too, but his DBs do get drafted. And that's about it.

All of them have their reasons to do what they do. Just curious. I wish people were more vocal. I also wish they were more vocal and truthful upon departure.

Not saying it's a classy or professional move but saying
"I'm transferring because I want to win and go pro. I am not going to be doing that here. Best of luck for those who stay."

Our QB left and a bunch of WR eft when their coach got termed. I expect a few of those end up at UCLA.

Regardless, there are as many reasons why people leave as why they stay.Some stay who the coaches would like to leave, and vice versa. It is a bit of a S**T show now in college football. Kids leave good teams because now that they are good, they have NIL dollars they did not have the year before (Indiana) and they are recruiting above them. Players leave bad teams because they want to go to a better team or a higher level because the money is better. Mostly, players leave because of the money and the opportunity to start, based on their thinking.

That's pretty good. This made me laugh with that quote. But I agree with you on your point of low priority. Just a thought I had is all.

GoCal80 said:

---

The big loser in all of this is the value placed on the free education that comes with an athletic scholarship. Before we entered the portal era, it was nice to believe that the value of an education at a top institution was a factor in why players chose to play for Cal. Whatever is motivating these folks to move around so much, it is clearly not pursuit of the best possible educational opportunity possible. This raises the question, why should these teams be affiliated with universities?

---

I fear the next "reform" will be the reversal of the requirement that the so-called "student-athletes" take classes and demonstrate progress toward graduation.

Fred Bear said:

---

GoCal80 said:

---

The big loser in all of this is the value placed on the free education that comes with an athletic scholarship. Before we entered the portal era, it was nice to believe that the value of an education at a top institution was a factor in why players chose to play for Cal. Whatever is motivating these folks to move around so much, it is clearly not pursuit of the best possible educational opportunity possible. This raises the question, why should these teams be affiliated with universities?

---

The unfortunate answer is that without the affiliation to the universities, nobody is going to foot the bill for these guys to play football. Rich alums clinging to the past of college football is what's keeping this enterprise afloat for the time being but at some point, the inherent hypocrisy of the whole thing will convince more and more colleges to drop out of the enterprise either because it's become too expensive or just too far from having anything to do with the university at all.

---

and then there's the question of all the other sports. haven't they all become minor leagues, the Olympic ones at least. it's just that fb and to some extent bb, have any hope of financially supporting the others.

take down all the college varsity sports and see what happens to enrollment, or number of applications, at least. we are in a temporary pickle right now. some new system must be created, but let's not throw out the baby, just yet.

GoCal80 said:

---

The big loser in all of this is the value placed on the free education that comes with an athletic scholarship. Before we entered the portal era, it was nice to believe that the value of an education at a top institution was a factor in why players chose to play for Cal. Whatever is motivating these folks to move around so much, it is clearly not pursuit of the best possible educational opportunity possible. This raises the question, why should these teams be affiliated with universities?

---

It's a free education for scholarship athletes, but I think it's worth pointing out that the demands of their sports in many cases restrict the majors they can pursue. No football or basketball coach is going to let you miss practice every Thursday afternoon for a Chem lab and unfortunately at Cal, no prof is going to allow you to make up the lab at a different time since they see no value in sports. So, right there you've eliminated dozens of majors. I presume coaches have some minimal interest in athletes graduating, probably because they get a bonus if the grad rate is above a certain percentage, but I'm sure they're quite happy if the kid picks the least rigorous course of study available.

Give great customer service in exchange maybe long term customers that share their experiences to potential clients

This part getting paid via education after only applies to a select few that is not the norm/ a given

golden sloth said:

---

I dont think the portal is particularly worse towards Cal. It's just kids trying to find playing time or getting paid. I dont blame them. But it does reduce my desire to watch college football when the players are 1 year rentals.

---

I just tell myself it's the price we have to pay to finally build a culture of winning that will eventually lead to us being the premier institution for 4 year players. It gets me through, even though it's probably nonsense.

I completely understand the concept of allowing these players to exercise their freedom as young adults. I just wish that, similiar to professional sports (i.e.NFL,MLB) there was a way that this freedom could be "modified." I know I'm dreaming, but if there was a system in which a players' transfer was restricted to only one or two over a 4 year career it would be easier to deal with as a fan. Or a "non transfer within a conference rule." Although this would probably open up a can of worms because now conference affiliations tend to change every year. Bottom line, if an athlete can play for four different teams in four successive years, it really makes it hard to be a fan.

SouthKBear said:

---

Not saying it's a classy or professional move but saying
"I'm transferring because I want to win and go pro. I am not going to be doing that here. Best of luck for those who stay."

---

They all want to go pro, at least the more elite group does. But even those that aren't getting playing time want to find (literally) greener pastures. Whereas before NIL and the TP, I would expect a certain amount of allegiance to Cal and the team, but now? Nope. It's over. Minor league baseball.

DoubtfulBear said:

---

SouthKBear said:

---

Which is why I was against NIL. They got paid through scholarships and education. College football was like being in an internship with a company or a "trainee" in some industries. If you were good enough, you're hired, or go pro in this case. If not, you're done. Id say make these kids all pay for college on there own a get rid of scholarships.

---

Getting paid through education is a myth. They have so many practices and workouts that there's no time for them to attend class or study for exams. On top of that, they can easily sustain life altering injuries at all time and may never find meaningful employment as a result. College kids absolutely deserve to get paid for what they put their time and bodies through just for our entertainment and $$$ to media networks and universities

---

Everytime someone complains about NIL they should be made to read what you wrote.

I'm glad players have NIL, but I don't think NIL has improved the healthcare issue for players.

Those who sustain devastating injuries often need the support of boosters to find employment after their playing career is over for their respective university. I do wonder if boosters are less likely to commit to helping student athletes who weren't a multi-year commitment to the university program

As someone who is still paying off PLUS loans for putting two offspring through another UC campus (at a total cost of about $200,000) I think the FREE education is a valuable asset. In addition to tuition and fees, room and board, scholarship athletes get priority registration and free tutoring. Yes, I think they could and should have received stipends to allow them to live as most college students do, but the million dollar annual "salaries" are too much. One day, we will read about an student athlete who took a pay cut to enter the NFL or NBA.

I agree with Charles Barkley: the majority of colleges and universities will withdraw from an unaffordable arms race, leaving only 25-30 remaining. That means more money for a significantly smaller number of students nationwide.

southseasbear said:

---

As someone who is still paying off PLUS loans for putting two offspring through another UC campus (at a total cost of about $200,000) I think the FREE education is a valuable asset. In addition to tuition and fees, room and board, scholarship athletes get priority registration and free tutoring. Yes, I think they could and should have received stipends to allow them to live as most college students do, but the million dollar annual "salaries" are too much. One day, we will read about an student athlete who took a pay cut to enter the NFL or NBA.

I agree with Charles Barkley: the majority of colleges and universities will withdraw from an unaffordable arms race, leaving only 25-30 remaining. That means more money for a significantly smaller number of students nationwide.

---

That is called capitalism. Are you some sort of communist?

Of Note:

https://nypost.com/2024/12/24/sports/duke-paid-whopping-8-million-for-transfer-qb-darian-mensah/

bearsandgiants said:

---

southseasbear said:

---

Bobodeluxe said:

---

southseasbear said:

---

As someone who is still paying off PLUS loans for putting two offspring through another UC campus (at a total cost of about $200,000) I think the FREE education is a valuable asset. In addition to tuition and fees, room and board, scholarship athletes get priority registration and free tutoring. Yes, I think they could and should have received stipends to allow them to live as most college students do, but the million dollar annual "salaries" are too much. One day, we will read about an student athlete who took a pay cut to enter the NFL or NBA.

I agree with Charles Barkley: the majority of colleges and universities will withdraw from an unaffordable arms race, leaving only 25-30 remaining. That means more money for a significantly smaller number of students nationwide.

---

That is called capitalism. Are you some sort of communist?

---

Unbridled capitalism is what led to destructive monopolies. (I can still hear Professor Richard Sutch's Econ 1 lecture on the evil of monopolies.)

Antitrust laws were good for America, good for business (in general), and were not communist. Indeed, communism is government run monopoly.

---

Capitalism would be a lot better if it weren't the fact that is actually just socialism for corporations.

---

where is my laugh emoji?

bearsandgiants said:

---

southseasbear said:

---

Bobodeluxe said:

---

southseasbear said:

---

As someone who is still paying off PLUS loans for putting two offspring through another UC campus (at a total cost of about $200,000) I think the FREE education is a valuable asset. In addition to tuition and fees, room and board, scholarship athletes get priority registration and free tutoring. Yes, I think they could and should have received stipends to allow them to live as most college students do, but the million dollar annual "salaries" are too much. One day, we will read about an student athlete who took a pay cut to enter the NFL or NBA.

I agree with Charles Barkley: the majority of colleges and universities will withdraw from an unaffordable arms race, leaving only 25-30 remaining. That means more money for a significantly smaller number of students nationwide.

---

That is called capitalism. Are you some sort of communist?

---

Unbridled capitalism is what led to destructive monopolies. (I can still hear Professor Richard Sutch's Econ 1 lecture on the evil of monopolies.)

Antitrust laws were good for America, good for business (in general), and were not communist. Indeed, communism is government run monopoly.

---

Capitalism would be a lot better if it weren't the fact that is actually just socialism for corporations.

---

I smell Pinko!

bearsandgiants said:

---

southseasbear said:

---

Bobodeluxe said:

---

southseasbear said:

---

As someone who is still paying off PLUS loans for putting two offspring through another UC campus (at a total cost of about $200,000) I think the FREE education is a valuable asset. In addition to tuition and fees, room and board, scholarship athletes get priority registration and free tutoring. Yes, I think they could and should have received stipends to allow them to live as most college students do, but the million dollar annual "salaries" are too much. One day, we will read about an student athlete who took a pay cut to enter the NFL or NBA.

I agree with Charles Barkley: the majority of colleges and universities will withdraw from an unaffordable arms race, leaving only 25-30 remaining. That means more money for a significantly smaller number of students nationwide.

---

That is called capitalism. Are you some sort of communist?

---

Unbridled capitalism is what led to destructive monopolies. (I can still hear Professor Richard Sutch's Econ 1 lecture on the evil of monopolies.)

Antitrust laws were good for America, good for business (in general), and were not communist. Indeed, communism is government run monopoly.

---

Capitalism would be a lot better if it weren't the fact that is actually just socialism for corporations.

---

Corporations are people, too. Show some love.