Why the chancellor drinks for free

16,571 Views | 81 Replies | Last: 11 yr ago by 93gobears
JeffEarlWarren
How long do you want to ignore this user?
[COLOR="RoyalBlue"] A CAL FAN'S NOTES[/COLOR]

A little bird flew through my window Thursday and told me (provided that I keep it to myself) that should anyone see Chancellor Dirks sidling up to a bar this week, they should buy him a brewski. He had earned a few free cold ones.

It’s not easy, so early in one’s tenure, to make an announcement that a major player in one’s department is "history."

We must be all try to be gracious. (This is three days late as it is my 7th re-write—it’s so hard to be polite and refrain from what one really wants to say).

But we (the tapeworm and I) would be remiss and less than honest, if we didn’t admit that a gigantic weight has been lifted from the shoulders of those who love Cal.

Sometimes it appears there are two camps. Those who love Cal and those who love “Berkeley.”

It’s kind of a Sunni/Shia thing, with slightly more be-headings here than there—at least metaphorically.

Our former Chancellor loves “Berkeley.” And his vision filtered down into the Athletic department. He saw Cal as a world-wide University, catering to the best minds around the globe. Financial pressures led him to sell desks to wealthy out of state students (who paid three times more than locals) to the detriment of in-state students whose parents, grandparents and great grand parents, built our school with their tax dollars.

He wasted money on a bloated administration and paid teachers like Professor Barsky (the one who attacked Cal athletics) to teach classes on “How to photograph demonstrations at Cal”—and others to give finals where kids had to make sock dolls--under the guise of academic excellence.

But I digress.

Chancellor Dirks now has an opportunity to “reset” Cal as the greatest University in the World. Like it or not, Athletics is in the forefront of any school’s “brand.”

Since I’m sure he wants my opinion (and he constantly calls and begs for it), the Chancellor could do worse than appoint a new Athletic Director who is “Cal-centric.” One that understands that each University is unique--and Cal is “uniquer” than most.

No. We don’t need some yahoo who can sing the Cal drinking song and “rally the troops.” We need an adult.

Under the previous administration Cal grads in the Athletic Department were edged out. The mantra was “We’ll never win over the traditionalists.” They openly treated us with disdain.

That’s why we lacked “Mos maiorum”—The old Roman concept of collectively adhering to the time-honored principles and social practices that made Rome, Rome. Mos maiorum was unwritten—traditional—but everyone knew (and most adhered) to the “code.” That has been missing for 10 years under this past administration.

Let’s hope the new AD hires people around her based on merit and on knowledge of the culture—that she finds roles for former Cal greats like Craig Morton, Dave Ortega and others.

The Chancellor now has the chance to say “no mas” when it comes to three consecutive years of A.P.R. scores of 934, 926, and 923—landing our football team at the very bottom of ALL division one schools! (High marks for bringing it up to a more modest 969 this year--but the obvious question is, "What took so long?").

Cal can never be at the very bottom of anything—especially the Pac 12 when it comes to graduation rates for our footballers and basketballers.

Let’s hope the new AD never thinks it’s a good idea to play the Cal Stanford Big game in a foreign stadium. And more important—(mos maiorum) she understands why such a concept is beyond silly—and downright insulting.

Let’s hope she never thinks that a program that graduates its kids, supports itself financially, and wins national championships like Rugby, ever gets demoted.

Should the new AD ever have to choose one sport over another (soccer vs. Rugby—roughly the same budget and same number of kids) let’s hope she never again bases it on the Director’s Cup. How silly is that?

When times get tough, let’s hope she turns to the Cal community for help and never makes unilateral decisions like cutting sports without giving clear cut guidelines—goals and benchmarks—for the sport’s supporters to meet in order to keep the sport on Campus. If they fail, fair enough—cut it.

(In fairness to the former AD, it is an open argument amongst those involved whether this insensitive approach, which turned off so many Cal supporters, was the brainchild of the former Chancellor or the AD).

Let’ hope she builds a culture where all coaches understand that they and they themselves are ultimately responsible for what happens on the field and that she never allows a coach to throw an assistant coach or a kid under the bus without acknowledging his own culpability. As another Bear, Bear Bryant used to say, “When something good happens, the kids did it. When something bad happens—that’s on me.”

Let’s hope she uses some gentle persuasion to stop the Campus cops from breathalizing students and making them wait 30 to 45 minutes to enter the stadium. We should do all we can to encourage student attendance.

Let’s hope she knows how to use a chain saw.

Let’s hope she reads the well written article on the demise of student and alumni participation at Michigan:

http://www.thepostgame.com/blog/road-saturday/201406/college-football-fan-stadium-students-business-tv-ncaa-michigan-tickets

Let’s hope she sees David Shaw’s TED conference 10 minute video:

https://www.google.com/#q=david+shaw+ted+talk

and sees what can be done at an academic institution when the focus is on kids and academics—not kids who (maybe if we play our cards right) can just barely get through school.

Let’s hope she understands why out of all the schools in the country we are the only one referred to as LOYAL Golden Bears.

Let’s hope she follows the S.E.C. lead and says no more cupcakes with names like Blue Hose and Stanford—er Southern Utah on the football schedule. Inflating coaches’ records, or rankings is a disservice to the kids who came to play the game and test themselves against authentic opponents.

Let’s hope she learns the value of the Cal band and bans all piped in music during football games and builds a game day experience rather than a TV oriented experience.

Let us hope she learns to say “thank you” when major donors try to help.

Clearly, college athletics are changing—the O’Bannon case may have serious ramifications and the Northwestern NLRB decision could change things radically.

That means we don’t need a new Athletic Director who majored in Sports Management (though my daughter did get her M.A. from Columbia in that field).

The Chancellor could take a page from the Wizard of Oz and realize that there is no place like home.

We need someone who can navigate the treacherous waters in this new age of intercollegiate athletics. It kills me to say it, but we need to follow the Stanford State’s Indians’ example.

Since the Chancellor keeps asking my advice on a daily basis, here’s a tip: It starts with an Athletic Czar. The Chancellor could look to local businessmen (or women) who have built and run successful companies. There is no surfeit of such gentlemen. Since I don’t have permission to print their names—in the tradition of anti-establishment Cal—I will—just to tick them off (hey, this is a private e-mail for Allah’s sake): Ned Speaker, Gary Rogers, Joe O’Donnell, Dwight Barker, Grant Inman, Bob or Wally Haas, Jim Fetherstone, Stu Gordon, Buddy Lyons, Rick Cronk, Bill Ausphal and Dick Beahrs are just a few of the Northern California names that come to mind.

There are dozens of talented ex-CEO’s on our bench—and I haven’t even touched Southern California.

Anyone of them could serve-–though each one will adamantly deny being willing to do it. (However, if you offered them $1 per year, they might give back and take it on for 12 months or so).

Remember, without men like them there would be no Cal sports today. Should I repeat that? Every achievement Cal has had over these past 10 years can be laid directly at their feet—plus a few others.

They know how to put together a team, hire the right people, establish a vision, develop a strategy and put metrics in place to measure progress in a meaningful way.

Plus they know what we all know: That like Dorothy in the Wizard of OZ she already possesses the secret to achieving her dream—she needn’t search any further than her own feet.

Click her heels and what does she get? Jack Clark, of course—not only the obvious—but the perfect choice for AD. (Although now that he’s been mentioned here, he’s doomed for life).

If the Chancellor doesn’t like that idea, he can always hire my daughter. That way I’ll be out of his hair because (like all kids) she never listens to anything I say, anyway.

Go Bears,
Jeffrey Earl Warren ‘70

"We don’t want men who will lie down bravely to die
But men who will fight valiantly to live.
Winning is not everything,
And it is far better to Play the game squarely and lose
Than to win at the sacrifice of an ideal"

ANDY SMITH
CalAlumnus13
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I'm very much a young'un, I know, but I agree with most of what you said. I write only to add this (which I have mentioned elsewhere here): under the current model, the AD has both financial and athletic responsibilities. I don't know if this model can work at Cal.

We need someone with financial knowledge, yes, but I'm not sure we'll find a single person with a love of Cal, knowledge and connections in the coaching world (specifically the revenue sports), and a deep financial management background. I think this is a "pick any two" situation. Clark would satisfy 1 and 2, but probably not 3. To be honest, I'm not sure Barbour satisfied any of them at the time of hire (though she seemed to grow to love Cal, and made some great non-revenue hires).

With that in mind, I think we may need to split the responsibilities between two people. How the chain of command will work is up for debate. The two could be equals, with Wilton acting as a tiebreaker. We could have an "Athletic AD" who fully delegates his or her financial duties to a "Financial AD", or vice versa.

Like I say, ideally we would find someone who could fulfill all three responsibilities, but I think that's wishful thinking.
93gobears
How long do you want to ignore this user?
JeffEarlWarren;842329403 said:

[COLOR="RoyalBlue"] A CAL FAN'S NOTES[/COLOR]

A little bird flew through my window Thursday and told me (provided that I keep it to myself) that should anyone see Chancellor Dirks sidling up to a bar this week, they should buy him a brewski. He had earned a few free cold ones.

It's not easy, so early in one's tenure, to make an announcement that a major player in one's department is "history."

...

Sometimes it appears there are two camps. Those who love Cal and those who love "Berkeley."

...

Our former Chancellor loves "Berkeley." And his vision filtered down into the Athletic department. He saw Cal as a world-wide University, catering to the best minds around the globe. Financial pressures led him to sell desks to wealthy out of state students (who paid three times more than locals) to the detriment of in-state students whose parents, grandparents and great grand parents, built our school with their tax dollars.

...

Go Bears,
Jeffrey Earl Warren '70

"We don't want men who will lie down bravely to die
But men who will fight valiantly to live.
Winning is not everything,
And it is far better to Play the game squarely and lose
Than to win at the sacrifice of an ideal"

ANDY SMITH


Go Bears!
MaximusArelliusDaBearius
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Great post, but I believe Sandy was Fired/Let Go/Demoted for circumventing the Chancellor when she leaked that she supported De Courie and it was the evil Chancellor that should take the blame for what we all now know was a great hire.
Of all she has done, lack of loyalty was her biggest failure. I remember thinking when it happened, wow, she's gone, but I didn't think it would happen this quickly.
Why else would you have a temporary unqualified person immediately take the reign when the current qualified person is available to finish the year. I agree there were a lot of reasons to let her go, but as we all know in business, sometimes, it is the personal one's that will get you gone, right now. I don't believe he could stomach to look her, the "traitor", in the face any more; even more I don't believe he could trust her.
93gobears
How long do you want to ignore this user?
JeffEarlWarren;842329403 said:

[COLOR="RoyalBlue"] A CAL FAN'S NOTES[/COLOR]


No. We don't need some yahoo who can sing the Cal drinking song and "rally the troops." We need an adult.
...

Go Bears,
Jeffrey Earl Warren '70

"We don't want men who will lie down bravely to die
But men who will fight valiantly to live.
Winning is not everything,
And it is far better to Play the game squarely and lose
Than to win at the sacrifice of an ideal"

ANDY SMITH


I'm tired of "administrators."
Cal Geek
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"Cal" or "Berkeley"?

Which do we call our great University, "Cal" or "Berkeley"?

Well, when most of the rest of the world much better identifies and better understands "Berkeley", maybe there are appropriate times to use "Berkeley".
Or one can be stubborn and keep using "Cal", and keep getting blank stares and confusion.
FiatSlug
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Many good thoughts here, Jeff. I would say only that Sandy Barbour accomplished her primary tasks when she was hired: get Memorial Stadium renovated and the High Performance Center built. From that narrow perspective, Sandy Barbour's tenure was an unqualified success. She also made many other contributions to Cal, but it is time for a new direction.

Cal needs a successor who will restore the prominent presence of the Marching Band, and other Spirit Groups to their rightful place front and center in the gameday experience. Cal football is college football, not a derivative product of the NFL. If you want the NFL, I suggest that there's plenty of opportunity for that product at the o.co Coliseum or Levi's Stadium.

We need an Athletic Director who will not only provide the resources for a successful football program, but will also demand excellence from the football coaching staff on and off the field. It's a high bar with high standards, but that's why they get paid the big bucks.

At the same time, this next Athletic Director will have to reach out to the broader campus community and alumni to get their commitment and involvement. There must be inclusion of the broader Cal community while eschewing the "go-it-alone" attitude that is so easy to fall back on when the critics of intercollegiate athletics at Cal come out of the woodwork.
GoldenBear1
How long do you want to ignore this user?
In the bye bye press conference she referred to the department as her baby and that she loved being in charge as boss lady.
California is OUR University, it's public and owned by the people. That simple fundamental fact seemed to always have alluded her and the former chancellor.
Enough, about their limitations and failures, the future is here and it's time to look forward.
College athletics is at a fork in the road. Our University is unique, in all the best ways, and I think it makes sense to have a modern leadership that is structured differently than how most everyone else does it.
We should do whatever necessary to produce success at Cal. It might be out of the box, good!
We need leaders, that are team players, great at what they do, understand Cal and will get results.
Bring everyone together for one common goal. The advancement of our great University at ALL levels!
We have the talent in our vast community of loyal and sturdy Golden Bear family.
Dirks is doing things right.
I think he will continue to listen and execute a smart agenda that makes loyal Californians believe and come together.

We should be like a college version of the Packers, a department full of stakeholders that all are part of the solution and are valued. In the NFL everyone is the same outside the Pack (Go Aaron!). Cal is different and to reach our potential we can't chase the sc or Ohio st way.
In this next era, let's do things the Cal way!
Here's to new heights at UC, Go Bears!
JeffEarlWarren
How long do you want to ignore this user?
FiatSlug;842329451 said:

Many good thoughts here, Jeff. I would say only that Sandy Barbour accomplished her primary tasks when she was hired: get Memorial Stadium renovated and the High Performance Center built. From that narrow perspective, Sandy Barbour's tenure was an unqualified success. She also made many other contributions to Cal, but it is time for a new direction.

Cal needs a successor who will restore the prominent presence of the Marching Band, and other Spirit Groups to their rightful place front and center in the gameday experience. Cal football is college football, not a derivative product of the NFL. If you want the NFL, I suggest that there's plenty of opportunity for that product at the o.co Coliseum or Levi's Stadium.

We need an Athletic Director who will not only provide the resources for a successful football program, but will also demand excellence from the football coaching staff on and off the field. It's a high bar with high standards, but that's why they get paid the big bucks.

At the same time, this next Athletic Director will have to reach out to the broader campus community and alumni to get their commitment and involvement. There must be inclusion of the broader Cal community while eschewing the "go-it-alone" attitude that is so easy to fall back on when the critics of intercollegiate athletics at Cal come out of the woodwork.


You said it better than i ever could
JeffEarlWarren
How long do you want to ignore this user?
goldenbear1;842329458 said:

in the bye bye press conference she referred to the department as her baby and that she loved being in charge as boss lady.
California is our university, it's public and owned by the people. That simple fundamental fact seemed to always have alluded her and the former chancellor.
Enough, about their limitations and failures, the future is here and it's time to look forward.
College athletics is at a fork in the road. Our university is unique, in all the best ways, and i think it makes sense to have a modern leadership that is structured differently than how most everyone else does it.
We should do whatever necessary to produce success at cal. It might be out of the box, good!
We need leaders, that are team players, great at what they do, understand cal and will get results.
Bring everyone together for one common goal. The advancement of our great university at all levels!
We have the talent in our vast community of loyal and sturdy golden bear family.
Dirks is doing things right.
I think he will continue to listen and execute a smart agenda that makes loyal californians believe and come together.

We should be like a college version of the packers, a department full of stakeholders that all are part of the solution and are valued. In the nfl everyone is the same outside the pack (go aaron!). Cal is different and to reach our potential we can't chase the sc or ohio st way.
In this next era, let's do things the cal way!
Here's to new heights at uc, go bears!


amazingly (is that a word?) on point and well said. Couldn't agree more
EchoOfSilence
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Agreed, but it wasn't Chancellor Dirks that made the decision, it was Vice Chancellor Wilton that did the heavy lifting. Dirks signed off.

Go Bears
socaliganbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Every year we do "poorly" (a word which doesn't quite capture how bad we really are) should be viewed as a generation of future donors lost. We allowed this to happen for decades while the state was footing the bill for everything. Dirks and Wilton understand we no longer have the luxury of letting that resource go largely untapped.
JeffEarlWarren
How long do you want to ignore this user?
EchoOfSilence;842329470 said:

Agreed, but it wasn't Chancellor Dirks that made the decision, it was Vice Chancellor Wilton that did the heavy lifting. Dirks signed off.

Go Bears


You are exactly correct. I didn't want to get off into a tangent and bring that in, but you are right. Wilton is calling the shots--and he's a rock star--we are lucky he is
JeffEarlWarren
How long do you want to ignore this user?
socaliganbear;842329472 said:

Every year we do "poorly" (a word which doesn't quite capture how bad we really are) should be viewed as a generation of future donors lost. We allowed this to happen for decades while the state was footing the bill for everything. Dirks and Wilton understand we no longer have the luxury of letting that resource go largely untapped.


Right on. This is an important fact which doesn't get the play it should
GoldenBear1
How long do you want to ignore this user?
No matter who is doing the heavy lifting buck stops with Dirks.

Great to have good people under you, listen to them and adopt anything that helps move the University forward.

We need more great people under Dirks and in the athletic department.

Can't be one or two people.

Has to be a winning team.

JeffEarlWarren;842329487 said:

You are exactly correct. I didn't want to get off into a tangent and bring that in, but you are right. Wilton is calling the shots--and he's a rock star--we are lucky he is
Sonofoski
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Cal needs a successor who will restore the prominent presence of the Marching Band, and other Spirit Groups to their rightful place front and center in the gameday experience. Cal football is college football, not a derivative product of the NFL. If you want the NFL, I suggest that there's plenty of opportunity for that product at the o.co Coliseum or Levi's Stadium.

This statement is so true. I gave up my season tickets this year because of the deterioration of the game day experience. If I wanted an NFL experience, I would go to an NFL game; I want a college experience.

We need to get rid of the garbage music the players are allowed to warm up to; the biased public address announcer; the piped in music; the endless commercials and Ashwin Peri.
JeffEarlWarren
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Sonofoski;842329670 said:

Cal needs a successor who will restore the prominent presence of the Marching Band, and other Spirit Groups to their rightful place front and center in the gameday experience. Cal football is college football, not a derivative product of the NFL. If you want the NFL, I suggest that there's plenty of opportunity for that product at the o.co Coliseum or Levi's Stadium.

This statement is so true. I gave up my season tickets this year because of the deterioration of the game day experience. If I wanted an NFL experience, I would go to an NFL game; I want a college experience.

We need to get rid of the garbage music the players are allowed to warm up to; the biased public address announcer; the piped in music; the endless commercials and Ashwin Peri.


This couldn't be more right on! No one (apparently) has "focused grouped" this aspect of the ticket holder. When people like you leave, who will replace you? A sailor from Mare Island? Maybe. A welder from Antioch? Perhaps. A hedge fund guy from Silicon Valley. It's possible. That's what Larry Scott is betting on. But anyone trying to sell a product, (from Bleach to Ford Trucks) knows that it is suicide to try and expand one's market at the expense of its loyal customers. Loyal customers are "free." It costs nothing to keep them. So, expanding the market is fine and well, but it should be done without offending the ones one owns. VERY POOR MARKETING DECISION.
UrsaMajor
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Jeff:

Some important points here, but as is typical of over-long posts, there is a lot of chaff mixed into the wheat. While I think that Birgeneau handled athletics fairly poorly, in many other ways he was an excellent Chancellor. Your comments about out-of-state students are way off. In the first place, that was not the Chancellor's decision, it came from UCOP, and was a direct response to reduced funding from the state. The only alternatives would have been to raise tuition (or lower financial aid), thus ensuring that only sons and daughters of the wealthy came to Cal (i.e., people like you) or decrease the student body--hardly a viable approach. Secondly, your suggestions for a new AD are interesting, but I can't help but notice that they are all white men in their 70's or 80's with little or no athletic administration experience. Jack Clark is the exception, but I don't know of his financial background. At this point in time, Athletic administration is much more complicated field than it was in the past--especially with the changes coming down the pike. Nick Dirks is doing a nationwide search, which is the best approach, IMO.
JeffEarlWarren
How long do you want to ignore this user?
UrsaMajor;842329699 said:

Jeff:

Some important points here, but as is typical of over-long posts, there is a lot of chaff mixed into the wheat. While I think that Birgeneau handled athletics fairly poorly, in many other ways he was an excellent Chancellor. Your comments about out-of-state students are way off. In the first place, that was not the Chancellor's decision, it came from UCOP, and was a direct response to reduced funding from the state. The only alternatives would have been to raise tuition (or lower financial aid), thus ensuring that only sons and daughters of the wealthy came to Cal (i.e., people like you) or decrease the student body--hardly a viable approach. Secondly, your suggestions for a new AD are interesting, but I can't help but notice that they are all white men in their 70's or 80's with little or no athletic administration experience. Jack Clark is the exception, but I don't know of his financial background. At this point in time, Athletic administration is much more complicated field than it was in the past--especially with the changes coming down the pike. Nick Dirks is doing a nationwide search, which is the best approach, IMO.


Thanks for taking the time to comment, but you couldn't be more wrong about the only response is to raise tuition or lower financial aid. Our administration is BLOATED. The classes being taught (I had three kids go through there recently) are silly and wasteful. Your racist comment about the names being mentioned is hardly worth comment--except to say we are in a time frame in history where (if one accepts the argument that "old blues" with business experience matter) the majority of the names are going to be white Men with athletic back grounds who have run successful companies. Such will not be the case 50 years from now, or maybe even 20. But that is the state of the Universe, today, and if one wants to succeed, she has to chose from those candidates who are available, competent, knowledgable about Cal and loyal. Please, by all means, give me the names of some women and people of Color who fit the fill and I will back them 100%. I've never met you, but your kind of thinking (social engineering) is what got us into this predicament in the first place. Your gratuitous comment about wealthy alumni was fatuous, inaccurate and disgusting. We happen to have gotten to Cal by merit--nothing was handed to any of us, since 1908.
socaliganbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Wilton's paper from last year on the state of our finances made a decent point about our bloated administration and trimming the fat. Essentially, he has been cutting the fat ever since he got here, and there is still more work to do on that front, but realistically, the amount saved on said fat does not come close to covering the disinvestment from the state. Other sources, like out of state tuition are needed.

Even then, cutting the fat and out of state tuition has so far only allowed us to keep pace with our status quo. Even more is needed to surpass that, which is the ultimate goal. Enter my mantra: Do not waste an opportunity to rope in future donors. Make them love Cal. Make us a winner.
JeffEarlWarren
How long do you want to ignore this user?
socaliganbear;842329738 said:

Wilton's paper from last year on the state of our finances made a decent point about our bloated administration and trimming the fat.........Enter my mantra: Do not waste an opportunity to rope in future donors. Make them love Cal. Make us a winner.


Read the paper. It is straight forward and honest, like Wilton himself. Clearly, this change was his call (I get all my knowledge from gossip).

Roping in donors is what it is all about. That is the major reason why cutting sports--IN THE FASHION THEY WERE CUT--was such an institutional disaster.

Why make enemies one doesn't have to make?

There was a way to cut them without causing all the ill will--giving donors and backers time tables and bench marks to reach was the polite, correct way to do it. Don't make the numbers--cut the sport. But that is not what they did and it is costing us dearly. Thanks for taking the time to comment
socaliganbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
JeffEarlWarren;842329765 said:

Read the paper. It is straight forward and honest, like Wilton himself. Clearly, this change was his call (I get all my knowledge from gossip).

Roping in donors is what it is all about. That is the major reason why cutting sports--IN THE FASHION THEY WERE CUT--was such an institutional disaster.

Why make enemies one doesn't have to make?

There was a way to cut them without causing all the ill will--giving donors and backers time tables and bench marks to reach was the polite, correct way to do it. Don't make the numbers--cut the sport. But that is not what they did and it is costing us dearly. Thanks for taking the time to comment


Yes, I agree. Another slap in the face was the way Jack Clack was informed his team was being demoted. Anyway, enough of that. I'm very glad we have Wilton. He may be the administrator that saves us.

Going forward, I would like to see an increase in young alumni outreach. We are fortunate to be one of the biggest filters to (young) Silicon Valley and I still don't feel that resource has been maximized. Not even close. We can't possibly rely on the same 15 families for the rest of time.
JeffEarlWarren
How long do you want to ignore this user?
socaliganbear;842329772 said:

Yes, I agree. Another slap in the face was the way Jack Clack was informed his team was being demoted. Anyway, enough of that. I'm very glad we have Wilton. He may be the administrator that saves us.

Going forward, I would like to see an increase in young alumni outreach. We are fortunate to be one of the biggest filters to (young) Silicon Valley and I still don't feel that resource has been maximized. Not even close. We can't possibly rely on the same 15 families for the rest of time.


Had drinks with the Goldman twins about two weeks ago (I'm not telling anything out of school here as it is no secret). They're trying to get Cal to work on young Silicon Valley Alumni. Naturally, they're getting resistance. But it's kids like them who will be our saviors as the years go by. If you can do anything to support their efforts, please do.
socaliganbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
JeffEarlWarren;842329780 said:

Had drinks with the Goldman twins about two weeks ago (I'm not telling anything out of school here as it is no secret). They're trying to get Cal to work on young Silicon Valley Alumni. Naturally, they're getting resistance. But it's kids like them who will be our saviors as the years go by. If you can do anything to support their efforts, please do.


Good to hear. Their office is close to mine, might have to stop by G2.
UrsaMajor
How long do you want to ignore this user?
I wasn't going to bother and respond, but what the hell. The administration is bloated and, more importantly, not functioning well, but that doesn't begin to cover the gap in the loss of state funding; increasing donations is a crucial part, but that's a slow process--remember at a standard payout, it takes a quarter of a billion to cover 10 million in yearly expenses. Frankly, since the state of California is unwilling/uninterested in supporting the university, I don't see why we should bend over backward to reserve slots for Californians.
If you re-read my post, I never suggested that you didn't get in by merit--I know nothing of your academic record; nor was I "insulting" wealthy alums--my comment actually had more to do with the age--are you really suggesting that folks at or near 80 are likely to be effective athletic directors? As for giving you names--interesting that you omitted the current interim, Mike Williams; there are also numerous successful women in leadership positions in the Foundation (that you used to be part of) who are as qualified as those you mentioned (I don't think many of them are qualified--not because of gender or race, but because they don't have the experience in athletic administration; we are not in a position to provide on the job training).

I wasn't meaning to insult you or anyone else; sorry you got your panties in a twist.
BearlyCareAnymore
How long do you want to ignore this user?
JeffEarlWarren;842329403 said:

[COLOR="RoyalBlue"] A CAL FAN'S NOTES[/COLOR]

A little bird flew through my window Thursday and told me (provided that I keep it to myself) that should anyone see Chancellor Dirks sidling up to a bar this week, they should buy him a brewski. He had earned a few free cold ones.

It's not easy, so early in one's tenure, to make an announcement that a major player in one's department is "history."

We must be all try to be gracious. (This is three days late as it is my 7th re-writeit's so hard to be polite and refrain from what one really wants to say).

But we (the tapeworm and I) would be remiss and less than honest, if we didn't admit that a gigantic weight has been lifted from the shoulders of those who love Cal.

Sometimes it appears there are two camps. Those who love Cal and those who love "Berkeley."

It's kind of a Sunni/Shia thing, with slightly more be-headings here than thereat least metaphorically.

Our former Chancellor loves "Berkeley." And his vision filtered down into the Athletic department. He saw Cal as a world-wide University, catering to the best minds around the globe. Financial pressures led him to sell desks to wealthy out of state students (who paid three times more than locals) to the detriment of in-state students whose parents, grandparents and great grand parents, built our school with their tax dollars.

He wasted money on a bloated administration and paid teachers like Professor Barsky (the one who attacked Cal athletics) to teach classes on "How to photograph demonstrations at Cal"and others to give finals where kids had to make sock dolls--under the guise of academic excellence.

But I digress.

Chancellor Dirks now has an opportunity to "reset" Cal as the greatest University in the World. Like it or not, Athletics is in the forefront of any school's "brand."

Since I'm sure he wants my opinion (and he constantly calls and begs for it), the Chancellor could do worse than appoint a new Athletic Director who is "Cal-centric." One that understands that each University is unique--and Cal is "uniquer" than most.

No. We don't need some yahoo who can sing the Cal drinking song and "rally the troops." We need an adult.

Under the previous administration Cal grads in the Athletic Department were edged out. The mantra was "We'll never win over the traditionalists." They openly treated us with disdain.

That's why we lacked "Mos maiorum"The old Roman concept of collectively adhering to the time-honored principles and social practices that made Rome, Rome. Mos maiorum was unwrittentraditionalbut everyone knew (and most adhered) to the "code." That has been missing for 10 years under this past administration.

Let's hope the new AD hires people around her based on merit and on knowledge of the culturethat she finds roles for former Cal greats like Craig Morton, Dave Ortega and others.

The Chancellor now has the chance to say "no mas" when it comes to three consecutive years of A.P.R. scores of 934, 926, and 923landing our football team at the very bottom of ALL division one schools! (High marks for bringing it up to a more modest 969 this year--but the obvious question is, "What took so long?").

Cal can never be at the very bottom of anythingespecially the Pac 12 when it comes to graduation rates for our footballers and basketballers.

Let's hope the new AD never thinks it's a good idea to play the Cal Stanford Big game in a foreign stadium. And more important(mos maiorum) she understands why such a concept is beyond sillyand downright insulting.

Let's hope she never thinks that a program that graduates its kids, supports itself financially, and wins national championships like Rugby, ever gets demoted.

Should the new AD ever have to choose one sport over another (soccer vs. Rugbyroughly the same budget and same number of kids) let's hope she never again bases it on the Director's Cup. How silly is that?

When times get tough, let's hope she turns to the Cal community for help and never makes unilateral decisions like cutting sports without giving clear cut guidelinesgoals and benchmarksfor the sport's supporters to meet in order to keep the sport on Campus. If they fail, fair enoughcut it.

(In fairness to the former AD, it is an open argument amongst those involved whether this insensitive approach, which turned off so many Cal supporters, was the brainchild of the former Chancellor or the AD).

Let' hope she builds a culture where all coaches understand that they and they themselves are ultimately responsible for what happens on the field and that she never allows a coach to throw an assistant coach or a kid under the bus without acknowledging his own culpability. As another Bear, Bear Bryant used to say, "When something good happens, the kids did it. When something bad happensthat's on me."

Let's hope she uses some gentle persuasion to stop the Campus cops from breathalizing students and making them wait 30 to 45 minutes to enter the stadium. We should do all we can to encourage student attendance.

Let's hope she knows how to use a chain saw.

Let's hope she reads the well written article on the demise of student and alumni participation at Michigan:

http://www.thepostgame.com/blog/road-saturday/201406/college-football-fan-stadium-students-business-tv-ncaa-michigan-tickets

Let's hope she sees David Shaw's TED conference 10 minute video:

https://www.google.com/#q=david+shaw+ted+talk

and sees what can be done at an academic institution when the focus is on kids and academicsnot kids who (maybe if we play our cards right) can just barely get through school.

Let's hope she understands why out of all the schools in the country we are the only one referred to as LOYAL Golden Bears.

Let's hope she follows the S.E.C. lead and says no more cupcakes with names like Blue Hose and Stanforder Southern Utah on the football schedule. Inflating coaches' records, or rankings is a disservice to the kids who came to play the game and test themselves against authentic opponents.

Let's hope she learns the value of the Cal band and bans all piped in music during football games and builds a game day experience rather than a TV oriented experience.

Let us hope she learns to say "thank you" when major donors try to help.

Clearly, college athletics are changingthe O'Bannon case may have serious ramifications and the Northwestern NLRB decision could change things radically.

That means we don't need a new Athletic Director who majored in Sports Management (though my daughter did get her M.A. from Columbia in that field).

The Chancellor could take a page from the Wizard of Oz and realize that there is no place like home.

We need someone who can navigate the treacherous waters in this new age of intercollegiate athletics. It kills me to say it, but we need to follow the Stanford State's Indians' example.

Since the Chancellor keeps asking my advice on a daily basis, here's a tip: It starts with an Athletic Czar. The Chancellor could look to local businessmen (or women) who have built and run successful companies. There is no surfeit of such gentlemen. Since I don't have permission to print their namesin the tradition of anti-establishment CalI willjust to tick them off (hey, this is a private e-mail for Allah's sake): Ned Speaker, Gary Rogers, Joe O'Donnell, Dwight Barker, Grant Inman, Bob or Wally Haas, Jim Fetherstone, Stu Gordon, Buddy Lyons, Rick Cronk, Bill Ausphal and Dick Beahrs are just a few of the Northern California names that come to mind.

There are dozens of talented ex-CEO's on our benchand I haven't even touched Southern California.

Anyone of them could serve-though each one will adamantly deny being willing to do it. (However, if you offered them $1 per year, they might give back and take it on for 12 months or so).

Remember, without men like them there would be no Cal sports today. Should I repeat that? Every achievement Cal has had over these past 10 years can be laid directly at their feetplus a few others.

They know how to put together a team, hire the right people, establish a vision, develop a strategy and put metrics in place to measure progress in a meaningful way.

Plus they know what we all know: That like Dorothy in the Wizard of OZ she already possesses the secret to achieving her dreamshe needn't search any further than her own feet.

Click her heels and what does she get? Jack Clark, of coursenot only the obviousbut the perfect choice for AD. (Although now that he's been mentioned here, he's doomed for life).

If the Chancellor doesn't like that idea, he can always hire my daughter. That way I'll be out of his hair because (like all kids) she never listens to anything I say, anyway.

Go Bears,
Jeffrey Earl Warren '70

"We don't want men who will lie down bravely to die
But men who will fight valiantly to live.
Winning is not everything,
And it is far better to Play the game squarely and lose
Than to win at the sacrifice of an ideal"

ANDY SMITH


I wouldn't have minded Clark for interim AD and I love having him involved in many AD functions, especially looking at coaches. That being said, I don't think he is the right permanent AD at this point. Cal needs a big time AD who can handle marketing, outreach, and lots of administration, not to mention flat out revamping administration. While I would never count Clark out of any challenge, I don't think that is his strong suit.

Somebody joked about Larry Baer, and obviously he is not available, but I believe he is the model of what the next AD should be. And then I would assume that Larry Baer clone would be smart enough to bring in people like Clark in the right capacity.
bluehenbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
One correction:
I believe it is the Big10 (B1G) conference that is no longer scheduling FCS opponents in football, not SEC (link: http://www.footballscoop.com/news/8904-big-ten-agrees-to-no-longer-schedule-fcs-opponents). Scheduling FCS opponents is still alive and well in the SEC (link: http://www.timesfreepress.com/news/2014/may/28/fcs-foes-to-remain-part-of-sec-scheduling/).

One comment about "Cal" vs "Berkeley"...if you watched the Barbour demotion press conference, that "visual" confusion was more than striking.
buster99
How long do you want to ignore this user?
JeffEarlWarren;842329765 said:

Read the paper. It is straight forward and honest, like Wilton himself. Clearly, this change was his call (I get all my knowledge from gossip).

Roping in donors is what it is all about. That is the major reason why cutting sports--IN THE FASHION THEY WERE CUT--was such an institutional disaster.

Why make enemies one doesn't have to make?

There was a way to cut them without causing all the ill will--giving donors and backers time tables and bench marks to reach was the polite, correct way to do it. Don't make the numbers--cut the sport. But that is not what they did and it is costing us dearly. Thanks for taking the time to comment


I agree on the timetables and benchmarks being give in advance. But I'm curious, which sports, if any , would you cut? Besides the bloated administration we naturally have, Cal supporting so many sports means the AD throws in more managers to "administer" the programs.
Bearacious
How long do you want to ignore this user?
UrsaMajor;842329804 said:

I wasn't going to bother and respond, but what the hell. The administration is bloated and, more importantly, not functioning well, but that doesn't begin to cover the gap in the loss of state funding; i--interesting that you omitted the current interim, Mike Williams; there are also numerous successful women in leadership positions in the Foundation (that you used to be part of) who are as qualified as those you mentioned (I don't think many of them are qualified--not because of gender or race, but because they don't have the experience in athletic administration; we are not in a position to provide on the job training).

I wasn't meaning to insult you or anyone else; sorry you got your panties in a twist.


Sandy wasn't perfect but she moved mountains: the griping about Big Game/Band etc. barely covers the fact that there's an element of old boy anti- feminism in the opposition to her and it comes through loud and clear. The good old days were old and not good for women. Let's move forward not backthanks Ursa.
JeffEarlWarren
How long do you want to ignore this user?
UrsaMajor;842329804 said:

I wasn't going to bother and respond, but what the hell. The administration is bloated and, more importantly, not functioning well, but that doesn't begin to cover the gap in the loss of state funding; increasing donations is a crucial part, but that's a slow process--remember at a standard payout, it takes a quarter of a billion to cover 10 million in yearly expenses. Frankly, since the state of California is unwilling/uninterested in supporting the university, I don't see why we should bend over backward to reserve slots for Californians.
If you re-read my post, I never suggested that you didn't get in by merit--I know nothing of your academic record; nor was I "insulting" wealthy alums--my comment actually had more to do with the age--are you really suggesting that folks at or near 80 are likely to be effective athletic directors? As for giving you names--interesting that you omitted the current interim, Mike Williams; there are also numerous successful women in leadership positions in the Foundation (that you used to be part of) who are as qualified as those you mentioned (I don't think many of them are qualified--not because of gender or race, but because they don't have the experience in athletic administration; we are not in a position to provide on the job training).

I wasn't meaning to insult you or anyone else; sorry you got your panties in a twist.


To have a successful record as a turn-around artist, one needs at least 25 t0 30 years experience. There may be some, but I've never met a 29 year old who turned around more than one company.

Ergo: To find a qualified, Cal grad, who participated in athletics, who has a successful rep as a CEO or turn-around cat, that person would have had to graduate in 1984 or later. Back then there just weren't the jobs for women or people of color (not that they weren't qualified)--they just didn't exist.
Twenty years from now, when some curmmudgingly old guy is complaining about the Athletic department, she may mention Missy Franklin, Natlie Coughlin or Sarah Huarte. Mike is a finance guy--great at what he does, but has no reputaion for starting up or turning around companies.

We are stuck in a certain period in history. It's like saying in 1954, we need to hire black coaches with lots of years of experience. Back then there were none!

The world (thanks in no small part to Cal) has gotten better. Women are finally allowed to strut there stuff on the business front, and foreign nationals and people of color have risen to the tops of their professions. It's just that (and you may come up with some and I will support them) there are VERY few women and people of color who fill the bill in terms of experience and reputation.

Twenty years from now that will not be the case.

Your "Agist" and racist comment was totally gratuitous. The names I listed (there were plenty I didn't) have only one thing in common--and it's not that they are old or white. It's that they have a track record of competence.

I'd like to see what names you would care to submit. Perhaps I could learn something
JeffEarlWarren
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Bearacious;842329846 said:

Sandy wasn't perfect but she moved mountains: the griping about Big Game/Band etc. barely covers the fact that there's an element of old boy anti- feminism in the opposition to her and it comes through loud and clear. The good old days were old and not good for women. Let's move forward not back—thanks Ursa.


Where is the anti-feminism? We are talking facts and competence. I, as the father of two daughters (both of whom were involved in athletics at Cal) was once a member of the Women's Athletic board, before the departments merged.

We have a women's tennis scholarship in my mother's name. Give me a break. You know not of what you speak.

In fact, I was one of the few who fought the merger and thought that Lou Lilly should be rewarded for being successful as opposed to pushed aside under the one umbrella theory.

You people who hide behind racism and feminism--instead of adhering to the facts are simply silly. It was a fact that a man and a woman (The former Chancellor and the former AD) BOTH insulted the entire Cal community by cutting sports without giving donors a chance to save them.

What is sexist about a man like me complaining that a man and a woman (the former AD and former football coach) produced APR rates of 936, 924, 923 the past three years?

You insult womanhood by not being willing to be accountable, and hiding behind sexism. I certainly didn't raise my daughters to think like you. It's the facts that matter--not the sex of the one responsible for them.
JeffEarlWarren
How long do you want to ignore this user?
buster99;842329838 said:

I agree on the timetables and benchmarks being give in advance. But I'm curious, which sports, if any , would you cut? Besides the bloated administration we naturally have, Cal supporting so many sports means the AD throws in more managers to "administer" the programs.


buster99;842329838 said:

I agree on the timetables and benchmarks being give in advance. But I'm curious, which sports, if any , would you cut? Besides the bloated administration we naturally have, Cal supporting so many sports means the AD throws in more managers to "administer" the programs.


Actually, I would not cut sports. I would cut the travel. Kids love to play games--it doesn't matter where.

Did you evert play poker at the Key Club when you were at Cal? I did. Winning or losing 20 bucks was a huge deal. It was "table stakes."

What interested me, was that after sweating profusely one night with 10 bucks riding, the next night I could be with my friends and would fold for a nickel! it's the game that counts--not what rides on it.

So I would cut the travel.

We could play all our games right here in the Bay area, with maybe a "reward" in L.A. or Washington.

The kids would love it and we could cut our budget in half.
GoBears58
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Bearacious;842329846 said:

Sandy wasn't perfect but she moved mountains: the griping about Big Game/Band etc. barely covers the fact that there's an element of old boy anti- feminism in the opposition to her and it comes through loud and clear. The good old days were old and not good for women. Let's move forward not backthanks Ursa.


silly post. The vast majority of comments against her are due to the APR fiasco and her failure to manage the football program properly.
Bockrath received similar treatment from knowledgeable fans for his incompetence with the Snyder situation.
JeffEarlWarren
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GoBears58;842329882 said:

silly post. The vast majority of comments against her are due to the APR fiasco and her failure to manage the football program properly.
Bockrath received similar treatment from knowledgeable fans for his incompetence with the Snyder situation.


You are so right. And Bockroth hurt us big time by losing Snyder--a guy who wanted to stay and knew how to build a program
GoBears58
How long do you want to ignore this user?
JeffEarlWarren;842329886 said:

You are so right. And Bockroth hurt us big time by losing Snyder--a guy who wanted to stay and knew how to build a program


Set the program back more than a decade after clueless Bob told Snyder not to expect an extension on the plane ride back from Florida.
Last Page
Page 1 of 3
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.