Matier & Ross are pretty well respected writers, unfortunately, this reads like a drive-by swipe with more piling-on by the Chronicle. At least a spokesperson from the University was cited but, gives a plain vanilla answer rather than emphasizing the positives of hitting various benchmarks while acknowledging the existing challenges as the season approaches.


http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/06/11/BADI1OVAI2.DTL&tsp=1

Quote:

---

Cal Memorial Stadium opening doubts

Phillip Matier,Andrew Ross, Chronicle Columnist

Monday, June 11, 2012

Construction crews are working up to 12 hours a day, seven days a week, to finish the $321 million makeover of Memorial Stadium before Cal's home football opener Sept. 1.

One subcontractor on the job, who spoke on the condition that he not be named, told us he'd be "very surprised" if the stadium is done on time.

The subcontractor identified a list of items that have proceeded slowly - everything from putting in the field to fireproofing the press box. Those types of delays set everything else back, he said.

University spokeswoman Christine Shaff acknowledged that there had been obstacles in fireproofing the press box, saying cold weather lengthened the special paint's already long curing time and that fire inspectors required extra coats.

As for the playing field, where a new drainage system is being installed, she said the work had been "delayed slightly" by late spring rains and wet soil.

Still, Shaff said, "the overall schedule is not a concern" and that Cal is "moving ahead to have the stadium ready for a football game on Sept. 1" - whether the stadium is finished or not.

Read more: http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/06/10/BADI1OVAI2.DTL#ixzz1xUrCV7Ec

---

Check the caption under the first pic - "UC Berkeley's Cal Memorial Stadium..."

Really? They needed both the UC Berkeley and Cal references? lol. Typical Chronicle.

It was a slow sports news day for them so they decided to berate Cal. Giants, A's lost. And their darling Stanfurd got hammered (and eliminated) in the baseball Super Regionals.

Interesting because I talked to a subcontractor of a subcontractor, they want to remain nameless, who told me the whole stadium is going to be finished this friday.

Haven't we been told, all along, by the AD (who just can't avoid being a target, it seems) that there may be minor things left to do, and that the stadium will be game ready by Sept 1st? So is it a big surprise that an anonymous sub thinks it may not be totally finished?

Serious post for a moment

I may not know anything about construction, but we have 82 days left untill kick off. I doubt it takes that long to finish the field, fireproof the press box, and reinstall all the chairs. Sounds like most of the interior is done, and with all major earthquake safety finished I'm feeling pretty confident I'll be standing in the band section come Sept 1st.

I for one don't care. Let's assume the stadium doesn't open on time and we have to miss a couple of early home games...possibly relocate to Oakland or SF on a temp basis...so be it.

We waited how long for a new Memorial? I am prepared waiting a few extra weeks if necessary. No big deal.

With that said, I do hope CMS will be game ready by the opening game!

UCBerkGrad;841899383 said:

---

I for one don't care. Let's assume the stadium doesn't open on time and we have to miss a couple of early home games...possibly relocate to Oakland or SF on a temp basis...so be it.

We waited how long for a new Memorial? I am prepared waiting a few extra weeks if necessary. No big deal.

With that said, I do hope CMS will be game ready by the opening game!

---

Sports is all about winning and momentum. Begging for the use of another field for the games against Nevada and Utah, then going on the road to tOSU and $C, is not the way to start a season where you are chasing the ghost of the Holiday Bowl.

The athletic center still has some missing pieces (notably flat screens and dining center), but it's open and impressive. The stadium needs to be in that state on Sep 1 or it's a loss.

Channel 5 News ran the same piece this morning, with a reporter standing in front of the stadium. Same anonymous sub-contractor, same delays, same concerns. Don't think they attributed Matier & Ross, though.

What do we think of the stadium?
* Historic
* Pageantry
* Home

Ask your non-Cal friends about the stadium, especially NFL-centric sports fans or people who aren't sports fans. What do they think of?
* Tree Sitters
* Expensive
* Long

The only way this story gets turned around is with a packed house in Blue and Gold streaming into CMS on Sep. 1 to watch Cal pummel Nevada while it's a slow news day for the 49ers and Raiders and nobody does an Andrew Luck impersonation against SJ State on the Farm.

CMS wil be ready for football on September 1, but it won't be finished. That's not news, as that was the plan all along. It would be nice, though, if the AD would keep the webcam up to date; the current photo is a week out of date (June 6).

Golden One;841899395 said:

---

CMS wil be ready for football on September 1, but it won't be finished. That's not news, as that was the plan all along. It would be nice, though, if the AD would keep the webcam up to date; the current photo is a week out of date (June 6).

---

I think the person doing the webcam and written updates was on vacation last week. I expect it to be updated today or tomorrow

How many people would stand for the first game if the seats were not installed in time?

I enjoy reading Matier and Ross, but every now and then their lack of thoroughness annoys me. It's impossible to figure out whether M&R and their anonymous sources are implying that the construction won't be completely finished by 9/1, or worse that the stadium won't even be "football ready" by then.

If it's the former, then this is really not news, as Cal has been making no secret about the fact that work will continue past 9/1. If it's the latter, then M&R really ought to say that.

86Oski;841899409 said:

---

I enjoy reading Matier and Ross, but every now and then their lack of thoroughness annoys me. It's impossible to figure out whether M&R and their anonymous sources are implying that the construction won't be completely finished by 9/1, or worse that the stadium won't even be "football ready" by then.

If it's the former, then this is really not news, as Cal has been making no secret about the fact that work will continue past 9/1. If it's the latter, then M&R really ought to say that.

---

Indeed. This is the $64k question. Nameless sub says "... he'd be very surprised if the stadium is done on time." What exactly does that mean? If it means not football ready, that is a very bad thing. I don't think though that Cal will let that happen. This would just be too high profile a face plant (particularly given all the attention this issue has received and how relatively close we are to the completion date). I'm fully confident we'll be playing a game at CMS on September 1st.

Tree Cutter;841899369 said:

---

Matier & Ross are pretty well respected writers, unfortunately, this reads like a drive-by swipe with more piling-on by the Chronicle. At least a spokesperson from the University was cited but, gives a plain vanilla answer rather than emphasizing the positives of hitting various benchmarks while acknowledging the existing challenges as the season approaches.


http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/06/11/BADI1OVAI2.DTL&tsp=1

---

It's easy to make someone a scapegoat and play the blame game.

Bear_Territory;841899382 said:

---

Serious post for a moment

I may not know anything about construction, but we have 82 days left untill kick off. I doubt it takes that long to finish the field, fireproof the press box, and reinstall all the chairs. Sounds like most of the interior is done, and with all major earthquake safety finished I'm feeling pretty confident I'll be standing in the band section come Sept 1st.

---

IMO all that needs to be done are:
1. Field and goal posts (definitely).
2. locker rooms for home and visiting team (definitey).
3. seats (maybe for big donors)
4. Restrooms (portapotties may be sufficient)
5. Press Box (nah, we can do without these)
6. Scoreboards (who cares we can all count)
7. concessions (nah, BYOB)
8. Tightwad hill amenities (definitely)

Who to believe: a nameless subcontactor who may or may not have all the info or the CAL spokesperson who stated that there are some minor setbacks? If you ask me this is another cheap piece of writing by the lazy clowns at Chronicle.

1) Its the Cronicle, home of such articles about how Cal lost the CEQA litigation, issued its own bonds to pay for the stadium and other really incorrect headlines/articles. There poor reporting extends way beyond the sports sphere. This is a newspaper that deserves to go bankrupt again and die.

2) Media writers think the can write generally about topics they no nothing about. The two guys repeat a comment from a minor contractor who doesn't even have the plans for the entire stadium or know the scheduling. Do they ask for plans, details, specs, timelines or anything a responsible journalist who knows construction would ask for? Of course not. These writers don't even know what to ask, and are to lazy to find someone to help them. There is incompetent journalist named Jones at the Chronicle who continued to get everything wrong about the CEQA lawsuit, instead focusing on quoting the gadfly litigator that represented the tree nuts, and no doubt these two turkeys will continue to follow in her path of constantly getting it wrong.

Finally, the position of the AD is that the stadium will be ready for the first game. That means a certificate of occupancy, and ready for fans. It does not mean construction will be completed. The AD has been very honest in saying some construction will likely occur after the games start. At some point you have to hope people will listen, even people so stupid they have to work for the Comical.

Bear_Territory;841899396 said:

---

I think the person doing the webcam and written updates was on vacation last week. I expect it to be updated today or tomorrow

---

The Web Cam has been clunky for weeks. That someone was on holiday last week does not address the problem. Sheesh, if your going to do something, take the time to do it right! Just say'n................

As my social studies teacher asked me nearly 50 years ago, "Is that true, or did you read it in the Chronicle?"

dinan3;841899467 said:

---

The Web Cam has been clunky for weeks. That someone was on holiday last week does not address the problem. Sheesh, if your going to do something, take the time to do it right! Just say'n................

---

All along they have said it won't be completed be Sept.1.I've seen Jan. 2013 listed for completion.
It's almost time to email and find out what's up with the webcam.i suspect it's about power now that the trailers are moving out

LudwigsFountain;841899472 said:

---

As my social studies teacher asked me nearly 50 years ago, "Is that true, or did you read it in the Chronicle?"

---

Jason Robards, as Ben Bradlee in 'All the President's Men', when discussing some worthless piece of newspaper filler - "Give it to the San Francisco Chronicle - they'll print anything."

(and that's from memory, so don't crucify me if I'm wrong)

The whole stadium construction saga has been a fascinating case study in local journalism. Since we here are able to pretty effectively piece together actual facts, we're in a great position to judge the quality of reporting. And it's not pretty.

I recall vividly when the ruling came down on the CEQA lawsuit, which was a crushing defeat and a nail in the coffin for the tree sitters, city, and Panoramic Hill. Some idiot reporter on the local TV news stood in front of the camera and said it was a victory for stadium opponents.

Yeah, it's not like they had any resources available to them...like...I don't know...an article from their own f***ing newspaper published just three months ago.

Quote:

---

The project is on pace for a state of football readiness on that date, meaning some details not relevant to the playing of a game might not be complete. In fact, finishing work will continue throughout the 2012 football season.

"There's nothing aside from a catastrophic event that would prevent us from having a game Sept. 1," assistant athletic director Bob Milano Jr. said. "When the project was launched, we always knew the timeline was going to be tight. Everybody is committed to opening the building by Sept. 1."

---

(emphasis added)

http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=/c/a/2012/03/01/SPCQ1NE00R.DTL

As an aside, it's a sad, sad day for newspapers, free speech and indeed America itself when an article by John Crumpacker is held up as an example of thorough journalism!

gotta paste this post from wifeisafurd, hope ya don't mind:

Quote:

---

"Remember Caroline Jones? Lazy Chron writer that constantly relied on quoting the attorney representing the tree people to discuss what happened at the CEQA trail and was always wrong. Remember those big headlines that said Cal lost the case and the SAHPC would never happen or be delayed for a long time?

These two Comical reporters (I would say lazy, but that appears to be redundant) don't know anything about construction, quoted one unnamed sub, didn't ask for plans, specs, timelines, scheduling or anything else someone knowing one iota knowledge on construction would ask for, and didn't bother to find someone in construction to know what the right questions were to ask the sub.

I am thinking of calling the Chron up to tell them the US is invading China. No doubt they will publish an article on the impending war.

The AD has maintained that the stadium will be ready for the first game. That means a CUP and fan access. It does not mean all construction work is completed, and in fact she has said there likely will be continuing work. She always has said this, even if two reporters from the Comical never understood any of this.

I don't know if this is a function of the instant news society due to the internet, but the Comical continues to get it wrong because their writers fail to take their time to understand the issues they write about, and just rely on random quotes."

---

so OP, how do you expect Cal to "get ahead of" sh*t that some amateur writers just concocted? the whole "anonymous source" or "unnamed contractor" thing only goes so far in journalism--and i've actually been in journalism.

beeasyed;841899500 said:

---

gotta paste this post from wifeisafurd, hope ya don't mind:




so OP, how do you expect Cal to "get ahead of" sh*t that some amateur writers just concocted? the whole "anonymous source" or "unnamed contractor" thing only goes so far in journalism--and i've actually been in journalism.

---

Me thinks the OP just wanted an excuse to bash Sandy....again....:headbang

beeasyed;841899500 said:

---

so OP, how do you expect Cal to "get ahead of" sh*t that some amateur writers just concocted? the whole "anonymous source" or "unnamed contractor" thing only goes so far in journalism--and i've actually been in journalism.

---

is the true issue.

JSC 76;841899387 said:

---

Channel 5 News ran the same piece this morning, with a reporter standing in front of the stadium. Same anonymous sub-contractor, same delays, same concerns. Don't think they attributed Matier & Ross, though.

---

Phil Matier does reporting for Channel 5 news as well as The Chronicle. It was probably him at CMS.

1. A subcontractor will always claim the schedule is too tight. ALWAYS.
Gives them an excuse when they dont hit it and they can claim to be heros when they do.

2. This is a non-story anyway having known for some time that they would still be working after Sep1.





BTW, I am as disappointed as anyone in Cal's handling of the Stadium story in the media (seems like their position is "we are building it, who cares what people say), but I agree that you cant expect anyone to be able to defend against nonsense.

It is like Nasa not being on point with every story about the Moon landing "hoax." Some things are just not worth the time, and the people that believe them were never going to see your side as anything but spin. Set up a page with facts, and F-Em-All.

GummyGrizzly;841900056 said:

---

While I agree the article seems more "alarmist" than what the facts support, I don't see any criticism of the AD in it. Barbour wasn't even mentioned. And the delays mentioned were literally blamed on bad weather, not on Barbour or anyone else.

---

I think the OP is blaming Sandy for not preventing the story.

GummyGrizzly;841900197 said:

---

Well I don't see how an AD is supposed to prevent the media from writing whatever they write. She isn't the Chief of Police.

---

And by that do you mean she can't send her assistant to the writer's home in the middle of the night?

GummyGrizzly;841900216 said:

---

Exactly the reference =)

---

We can't expect him to infringe on people's rights in person, there is serious crime to be fought. Iphones to be found!

Now that so many people get their news online, its not practical to get up early and dump a run of a newspaper in the trash Tom Bates style.

beeasyed;841899500 said:

---

so OP, how do you expect Cal to "get ahead of" sh*t that some amateur writers just concocted? the whole "anonymous source" or "unnamed contractor" thing only goes so far in journalism--and i've actually been in journalism.

---

Back in the land of wi-fi; I'm not a journalist but, one would've thought that with the crown jewel of the athletic department being built, the AD would've made some bridges with the local press, if for anything the ability to get some positive press about their teams and what their doing. Since relationships take awhile to cultivate, we could've hoped that the AD had taken the time to build a handful of relationships with the local writers (in the infancy of this project), that would've given Cal athletics the time of day and a fair shake. In other words, built some equity with the local scribes so that little hit-pieces like this don't come trickling out or, be allowed to provide a counter-article/rebuttal. For all the griping here, we've answered our own questions, the Chronicle is no supporter of Cal sports nor, do they have any desire to get the story straight.

Bear_Territory;841899382 said:

---

Serious post for a moment

I may not know anything about construction, but we have 82 days left untill kick off. I doubt it takes that long to finish the field, fireproof the press box, and reinstall all the chairs. Sounds like most of the interior is done, and with all major earthquake safety finished I'm feeling pretty confident I'll be standing in the band section come Sept 1st.

---

Inspections and permitting can take forever, what with the underworked state bureaucracy these days.