I have noticed on many occasions when Stanford players in the NFL are spoken about, the words "smart" or "intelligent" are mentioned. Whether it is Luck or Ertz or Fleener or Trent Murphy or Baldwin et al first comes "out of Stanford" and then comes "a smart player". Sometimes their major in college is even mentioned. Even a couple of their offensive lineman get the smart label with a chuckle "well he should be. he is from Stanford".

OTOH, I have not heard that happen once relative to our players. Lynch, Rodgers, DeSean, Justin, Mebane, et al. Not once have I heard how smart they are or what our players majored in.

What accounts for this media bias? Is that Cal is no longer seen as an elite school academically or is it that our players don't project the image?

Letsroll;842427251 said:

---

I have noticed on many occasions when Stanford players in the NFL are spoken about, the words "smart" or "intelligent" are mentioned. Whether it is Luck or Ertz or Fleener or Trent Murphy et al first comes "out of Stanford" and then comes "a smart player". Sometimes their major in college is even mentioned. Even a couple of their offensive lineman get the smart label with a chuckle "well he should be. he is from Stanford".

OTOH, I have not heard that happen once relative to our players. Lynch, Rodgers, DeSean, Justin, Mebane, et al. Not once have I heard how smart they are or what our players majored in.

What accounts for this media bias?

---

Pretty sure it has less to do with where they graduated from and more to do with the fact that most Stanfurd NFLers are white while most Cal NFLers are black (or in the case of Conte tatted up)

Same reason why everyone thinks Kaep is a moron even though he scored higher on the Wonderlic than guys like Rodgers or Romo.

pingpong2;842427256 said:

---

Pretty sure it has less to do with where they graduated from and more to do with the fact that most Stanfurd NFLers are white while most Cal NFLers are black (or in the case of Conte tatted up)

---

So you are saying that our players don't project that image? or are you saying that the media is racist.

pingpong2;842427256 said:

---

Pretty sure it has less to do with where they graduated from and more to do with the fact that most Stanfurd NFLers are white while most Cal NFLers are black (or in the case of Conte tatted up)

Same reason why everyone thinks Kaep is a moron even though he scored higher on the Wonderlic than guys like Rodgers or Romo.

---

By the way, I have heard analysts describe Sherman as a "physical cornerback but let's not forget he graduated from Stanford. He is also very smart." I even heard them tell the story about his mother making him get 4.0 GPA in high school since he was being offered by Stanford. Never heard one Cal player spoken about like that.

Letsroll;842427257 said:

---

So you are saying that our players don't project that image? or are you saying that the media is racist.

---

Let's be fair, a large number of our players aren't all that eloquent or project an image that would give the impression of intelligence. Not saying they aren't, but the image they project does not always fit the bill.

I'd rather have them perceived as better football players.

Letsroll;842427262 said:

---

By the way, I have heard analysts describe Sherman as a "physical cornerback but let's not forget he graduated from Stanford. He is also very smart." I even heard them tell the story about his mother making him get 4.0 GPA in high school since he was being offered by Stanford. Never heard one Cal player spoken about like that.

---

Probably because nobody knows Cal = Berkeley. Hell even my coworker who's lived in the state for almost a decade was shocked when I mentioned that Cal is Berkeley (he thought I had all this Cal stuff at my desk because Berkeley didn't have a football team...)

pingpong2;842427256 said:

---

Pretty sure it has less to do with where they graduated from and more to do with the fact that most Stanfurd NFLers are white while most Cal NFLers are black (or in the case of Conte tatted up)

Same reason why everyone thinks Kaep is a moron even though he scored higher on the Wonderlic than guys like Rodgers or Romo.

---

With all due respect, that's crap. Stop making excuses. Richard Sherman is always touted as an intelligent guy. And Kaepernick comes across as a moron because he makes horrible decisions, gives one word answers at press conferences, and acts like a punk. Baldwin is an incredibly intelligent guy and Desean always shows he's very articulate. Marshawn is Marshawn and let's face it- no way in hell he gets in to Stanford. Nobody even talks about Mebane and Conte because they aren't scoring touchdowns.

Im sick of people bringing up race when it's not the case. It cheapens it when there really is an issue.

pingpong2;842427265 said:

---

Probably because nobody knows Cal = Berkeley. Hell even my coworker who's lived in the state for almost a decade was shocked when I mentioned that Cal is Berkeley (he thought I had all this Cal stuff at my desk because Berkeley didn't have a football team...)

---

Well, your co-worker is an idiot.

UCBerkGrad;842427277 said:

---

Well, your co-worker is an idiot.

---

Or perhaps we're morons for not taking a more cohesive branding strategy. You'd be surprised (or maybe not) by the sheer number of people in academia who don't even realize Berkeley = Cal. They know all about Berkeley, but not that Cal = Berkeley because nobody in academia calls it Cal. Hell I've even come across admissions officers from top-tier schools who didn't know Cal = Berkeley. I even had one think I was from Cal Tech when I said I went to Cal.

In any case, I'm pretty certain if we had branded our athletics as Berkeley rather than Cal that our players would get the same benefit of the doubt when it comes to intellect like Stanfurd players get (case in point Dick Sherman).

Ncsf;842427272 said:

---

With all due respect, that's crap. Stop making excuses. Richard Sherman is always touted as an intelligent guy. And Kaepernick comes across as a moron because he makes horrible decisions, gives one word answers at press conferences, and acts like a punk. Baldwin is an incredibly intelligent guy and Desean always shows he's very articulate. Marshawn is Marshawn and let's face it- no way in hell he gets in to Stanford. Nobody even talks about Mebane and Conte because they aren't scoring touchdowns.

Im sick of people bringing up race when it's not the case. It cheapens it when there really is an issue.

---

Plenty of people talk about Conte. Just check out any Chicago Bear's forum and you'll fine no less than 3 threads on the first page complaining about how much Conte sucks and is a thug and should be cut. There'd probably be more if there weren't so many other threads about how much Cutler sucks...

Cal is known for amazing academics. Berkeley, believe it or not (�� is known for hippies, protests, and general anarchy. I think branding Cal more makes a lot more sense.

pingpong2;842427278 said:

---

Or perhaps we're morons for not taking a more cohesive branding strategy. You'd be surprised (or maybe not) by the sheer number of people in academia who don't even realize Berkeley = Cal. They know all about Berkeley, but not that Cal = Berkeley because nobody in academia calls it Cal. Hell I've even come across admissions officers from top-tier schools who didn't know Cal = Berkeley. I even had one think I was from Cal Tech when I said I went to Cal.

In any case, I'm pretty certain if we had branded our athletics as Berkeley rather than Cal that our players would get the same benefit of the doubt when it comes to intellect like Stanfurd players get (case in point Dick Sherman).

---

Ncsf;842427283 said:

---

Cal is known for amazing academics. Berkeley, believe it or not (�� is known for hippies, protests, and general anarchy. I think branding Cal more makes a lot more sense.

---

We'll have to agree to disagree then. Outside of California (hell, even norcal) I haven't found a whole lot of people who connect Cal with Berkeley. Outside of the country it's even more bleak. And don't give me crap about how these people are dumb and it shouldn't matter what they think; these are students, engineers, lawyers, doctors, and other intellectuals. When a decent portion of the educated population don't know Cal = Berkeley, that's a problem.

pingpong2;842427278 said:

---

Or perhaps we're morons for not taking a more cohesive branding strategy. You'd be surprised (or maybe not) by the sheer number of people in academia who don't even realize Berkeley = Cal. They know all about Berkeley, but not that Cal = Berkeley because nobody in academia calls it Cal. Hell I've even come across admissions officers from top-tier schools who didn't know Cal = Berkeley. I even had one think I was from Cal Tech when I said I went to Cal.

In any case, I'm pretty certain if we had branded our athletics as Berkeley rather than Cal that our players would get the same benefit of the doubt when it comes to intellect like Stanfurd players get (case in point Dick Sherman).

---

With all due respect, I have heard the "He went to Stanford. He is smart" on more than a few occasions from none other than former UCLA great Troy Aikman. He knows that Cal is comparable. Never heard Mariucci give on air compliments for "He is from Cal. He must be smart". In the case of those two perhaps it comes down to our individual players and the way they project themselves.

Strange...

Letsroll;842427288 said:

---

With all due respect, I have heard the "He went to Stanford. He is smart" on more than a few occasions from none other than former UCLA great Troy Aikman. He knows that Cal is comparable. Never heard Mariucci give on air compliments for "He is from Cal. He must be smart". In the case of those two perhaps it comes down to our individual players and the way they project themselves.
Strange...

---

Maybe they looked at our APR numbers

Ncsf;842427283 said:

---

Cal is known for amazing academics. Berkeley, believe it or not (�� is known for hippies, protests, and general anarchy. I think branding Cal more makes a lot more sense.

---

This.

And didn't Desean have a perfect or near perfect SAT?

pingpong2;842427290 said:

---

Maybe they looked at our APR numbers

---

Well you said it not me but the thought did cross my mind.

I don't think that accounts for it.

It maybe a case that Stanford students and grads are perceived of by the media as being very smart and intelligent, and, unfortunately, more so than Cal students and grads. Come to think of it, Ivy League players get the same compliments as the Stanford guys even though they are few and far between in the NFL.

Maybe a new t shirt

Cal=Berkeley

A marketing opp

I like to think that it's because our players are typically very good and there is no reason from them to mention that he went to cal he must be smart. Watching Rodgers play there is no need to mention that he is smart because he is the best qb in the world:

Ncsf;842427283 said:

---

Cal is known for amazing academics. Berkeley, believe it or not (�� is known for hippies, protests, and general anarchy. I think branding Cal more makes a lot more sense.

---

This couldn't be more wrong. I have to believe you've spent most of your life in Northern California which is the only place this might be true. All across the world Berkeley is known for great academics. Cal is known very little except as a lower rung Pac 12 football team. The connection between Cal and Berkeley is tenuous at best. This is the truth outside Northern California.

What annoys me is so many announcers have annointed Luck, the Number 1 quarterback in the league. Even the fantasy leagues have Luck rated the Number 1 quarterback, with Rodgers being rated Number 2. Rodgers rates a head of luck in most offensive tangibles.

dajo9;842427336 said:

---

This couldn't be more wrong. I have to believe you've spent most of your life in Northern California which is the only place this might be true. All across the world Berkely is known for great academics. Cal is known very little except as a lower rung Pac 12 football team. The connection between Cal and Berkeley is tenuous at best. This is the truth outside Northern California.

---

Yes. I don't even understand why there's debate. The Cal/Berkeley connection is lost on MOST people, especially those who don't follow college sports closely. I'm saying this having grown up in Southern California, now living in NY. True in both places, and I can only imagine if its true in the two major cities with the most cross-pollination with the Bay Area, it has to be even more true elsewhere.

dajo9;842427336 said:

---

This couldn't be more wrong. I have to believe you've spent most of your life in Northern California which is the only place this might be true. All across the world Berkely is known for great academics. Cal is known very little except as a lower rung Pac 12 football team. The connection between Cal and Berkeley is tenuous at best. This is the truth outside Northern California.

---

I always use Cal when referencing where I went, and I have yet to come across somebody who didn't know it was Berkeley. Yes, I have lived in the Bay Area my entire 40 years, and I live down in Stanford territory. Take it for what that is worth.

As everyone's saying, at the academic level it's always Berkeley. None of the fantastic prospective graduate students or professors that want to work at our alma mater would ever say that they're applying to "Cal." Growing up in Fresno I had a number of friends who were Israeli, and when I told their parents that I was going to Berkeley they said "That's where all of the textbooks in Israel came from!" I worked at a summer camp for smart kids for several years, and as an experiment I told a few people (who all had, at a minimum, M.A.'s) that I went to Cal, and they didn't know what to do with that, some even asking "Cal State?"

What amazes me is that the Cal/Berkeley distinction is largely held up even in popular culture. There was an episode of Weeds where one of the kids did something stupid, and an adult character says something like "You'll never get into Berkeley if you do stuff like that." But my personal favorite comes in Frank Ocean's Novacane (not that I'd recommend the song, but it's fun when Cal shows up in unexpected ways):

I blame it on the model broad with the Hollywood smile,
aww stripper booty and a rack like wow, brain like Berkeley.

When the Berkeley/Cal distinction is used in a pun about fellatio (cf. Urban Dictionary: Brain), you know it's deeply engrained in the American consciousness.

Why do you need reassurance by the media?

It's like asking your wife if she's satisfied.

Herm knows what's up:
[video=youtube;oHOUutAZxJE][/video]

dajo9;842427336 said:

---

This couldn't be more wrong. I have to believe you've spent most of your life in Northern California which is the only place this might be true. All across the world Berkely is known for great academics. Cal is known very little except as a lower rung Pac 12 football team. The connection between Cal and Berkeley is tenuous at best. This is the truth outside Northern California.

---

Exactly. I have lived and worked on both coasts and in Asia, and the Middle East. I have had many business trips to South America and Africa. What you describe has been my experience.

My perception is that the migration of many players into the NFL before graduation, particularly during the Tedford years has given the Cal football players in the NFL the stereotype of enrolling mercenaries to only play football, outsiders to the academic mainstream. The recent push to upgrade academics of recruits, and the publicity surrounding it, has led to the simplified conclusion of those in media, that most of those now playing in the NFL must have been academically inferior. Clearly, this is unfair to some, perhaps even unfair to many, but may shade closer to the truth in individual cases.

gobears20;842427357 said:

---

I always use Cal when referencing where I went, and I have yet to come across somebody who didn't know it was Berkeley. Yes, I have lived in the Bay Area my entire 40 years, and I live down in Stanford territory. Take it for what that is worth.

---

Well therein lies the problem. You can't take a sample of a 50 mile radius and apply those results to everyone else in the rest of the state, much less country and world. For instance, we all know "The City" = San Francisco, but I guarantee that nobody else in the country or world makes that connection.

There's a time and place to use "Cal", and a time and place to use "UC Berkeley". For instance, if you're talking to someone that isn't familiar with business schools, it's more appropriate to MIT or University of Chicago or UPenn because it's very unlikely they'd have any idea what Sloan or Booth or Wharton are. In the Bay Area I can usually get away with saying Cal, but outside of the area I get a lot of "which Cal State" or "Cal Tech" or "Oh, is that a good school"?

I'm telling you Cal is a better brand than Berkeley. If you are referring to my thoughts on Marshawn, you should be smart enough to understand I'm implying that our standards for admission with athletes are far different than Stanford. That's simply a fact and everybody who is close to it understands that.

pingpong2;842427287 said:

---

We'll have to agree to disagree then. Outside of California (hell, even norcal) I haven't found a whole lot of people who connect Cal with Berkeley. Outside of the country it's even more bleak. And don't give me crap about how these people are dumb and it shouldn't matter what they think; these are students, engineers, lawyers, doctors, and other intellectuals. When a decent portion of the educated population don't know Cal = Berkeley, that's a problem.

---

Ncsf;842427386 said:

---

I'm telling you Cal is a better brand than Berkeley. If you are referring to my thoughts on Marshawn, you should be smart enough to understand I'm implying that our standards for admission with athletes are far different than Stanford. That's simply a fact and everybody who is close to it understands that.

---

And I'm telling you that outside of California most people don't know Cal is a strong academic school, and since our major sports program are subpar to medicore, how exactly is it a better brand? Our academic reputation both nationally and internationally is tied to the "Berkeley" brand, so are you suggesting we just dump that and begin promoting our school using our athletic moniker which is already very overloaded?

Let's get back to the OP. You were way off track. That said, iI will defer to you with the branding but I have seen it the other way in my travels back East.

pingpong2;842427389 said:

---

And I'm telling you that outside of California most people don't know Cal is a strong academic school, and since our major sports program are subpar to medicore, how exactly is it a better brand? Our academic reputation both nationally and internationally is tied to the "Berkeley" brand, so are you suggesting we just dump that and begin promoting our school using our athletic moniker which is already very overloaded?

---

southseasbear;842427293 said:

---

This.

And didn't Desean have a perfect or near perfect SAT?

---

Near perfect math score

Letsroll;842427251 said:

---

I have noticed on many occasions when Stanford players in the NFL are spoken about, the words "smart" or "intelligent" are mentioned. Whether it is Luck or Ertz or Fleener or Trent Murphy or Baldwin et al first comes "out of Stanford" and then comes "a smart player". Sometimes their major in college is even mentioned. Even a couple of their offensive lineman get the smart label with a chuckle "well he should be. he is from Stanford".

OTOH, I have not heard that happen once relative to our players. Lynch, Rodgers, DeSean, Justin, Mebane, et al. Not once have I heard how smart they are or what our players majored in.

What accounts for this media bias? Is that Cal is no longer seen as an elite school academically or is it that our players don't project the image?

---

Well some of the problem does deal with majors. OTOH, Cal players definitely get better babes. Rodgers' WAG superior to Luck's WAG.

DeSean gets no credit for his intelligence.

But....before DeSean, Andy Reid was hesitant to let rookie receivers get a lot of playing time because it took 3 seasons to master his complex playbook.

DeSean was different, though. His very first game, vs. the Rams in Philly, was an utterly dominant performance. And he helped get the Eagles to the NFC Championship game.

DeSean is now 28, in his 7th season, and he's still kicking butt. Yes, talent and speed are part of the equation. But playing the position smartly is also a big factor.

okaydo;842427442 said:

---

DeSean gets no credit for his intelligence.

But....before DeSean, Andy Reid was hesitant to let rookie receivers get a lot of playing time because it took 3 seasons to master his complex playbook.

DeSean was different, though. His very first game, vs. the Rams in Philly, was an utterly dominant performance. And he helped get the Eagles to the NFC Championship game.

DeSean is now 28, in his 7th season, and he's still kicking butt. Yes, talent and speed are part of the equation. But playing the position smartly is also a big factor.

---

Unfortunately, his two drop-the-ball-before-scoring gaffes belies that in the eyes of most football fans.