I came to Berkeley for a post-doc. I learned about Cal and California at Berkeley.

When I went back to Oz I cannot tell you how many times I heard about events happening at the University of California, only to find they were at UCLA, UCSD whatever. But when they happened at Berkeley, everyone knew what that meant.

Now I deal with people in the Midwest who have no clue that Cal, California, Berkeley and UC Berkeley are the same institutions. FWIW, Indiana University is now being branded as IU Bloomington (IUB). As one who works at the other major IU campus, this can only be a good thing as it gives clarity to course/campus selection. There has been no suggestion that IU be replaced by IUB for athletics which, I believe is similar to the approach being taken at Cal. You could also argue about a similar situation at Illinois (formally known as UIUC, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign). When was the last time you saw UIUC in an athletics context? Its just not that not that difficult to separate branding for academics and sports.

-AB

Aussie Bear;842737131 said:

---

I came to Berkeley for a post-doc. I learned about Cal and California at Berkeley.

When I went back to Oz I cannot tell you how many times I heard about events happening at the University of California, only to find they were at UCLA, UCSD whatever. But when they happened at Berkeley, everyone knew what that meant.

Now I deal with people in the Midwest who have no clue that Cal, California, Berkeley and UC Berkeley are the same institutions. FWIW, Indiana University is now being branded as IU Bloomington (IUB). As one who works at the other major IU campus, this can only be a good thing as it gives clarity to course/campus selection. There has been no suggestion that IU be replaced by IUB for athletics which, I believe is similar to the approach being taken at Cal. You could also argue about a similar situation at Illinois (formally known as UIUC, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign). When was the last time you saw UIUC in an athletics context? Its just not that not that difficult to separate branding for academics and sports.

-AB

---

If everything you say is true, why did the administration change the signage at Memorial? If sports omits "Berkeley," why the change?

BTW, I have had the same issue when I travel. People have no idea that Berkeley and the University of California are the same school. When you tell them Berkeley, they say "I didn't know they had a football team."

To the average "Joe," we have an identity crisis. With these different names, the public is not sure who we are. More than once, we have been referred to as CAL State-Berkeley.

Having a different identity for academics and for sports is just plain stupid. If the administration would just call us the University of California, no one would be confused as to who we are because all the other UC's are identified by their city.

okaydo;842737054 said:

---

Here's my argument: I don't mind it being used in sports settings. In fact, hearing "California vs. Texas" is awesome and much preferable to "Berkeley vs. Texas."

But in an academic setting, the thing is (as I've argued before) is that the University of California system ended up becoming a prestigious system.

"University of California" brings to mind a network of prestigious schools, not a single university.

The same can't be said for other university systems. There are other schools besides University of Texas at Austin, but are they well-known?

Same for the University of Tennessee system, etc., etc.

"Berkeley," on the other hand, brings to mind a prestigious university, nationally and internationally. (The annoying city of Berkeley is not the first thing people around the world think about when you mention "Berkeley.")

---

I just want one or the other-the dual branding ("Cal" for sports, "Berkeley" as a more academic reference) drives me crazy. If it was just "Berkeley" like "Auburn" or "Clemson," I think it would find its way?

They should just make this a sticky

wifeisafurd;842737094 said:

---

Don't always like my alma mater being associated with the City and the branding implications, but this is dead on. People have been thinking of the school as Berkeley for a long time, whether we like it or not. I'm not taking a position on the sign change however.

---

I agree with both you and NYC. If you travel overseas or even elsewhere around the country and you tell someone you went to the university of California, you'll get blank stares. Berkeley has significant brand equity worldwide albeit mostly (entirely?) in a academic sense. I don't mind the usage of Berkeley and most people outside the Bay Area don't think much of anything about any negative associations due to the city. Our problem seems to be constantly changing things and not focusing on marketing the same message. Just commit to something and invest in it.

Go!Bears;842737150 said:

---

They should just make this a sticky

---

No kidding. I say we change the name of the school to Berkeley University and force the city of Berkeley to change its name to I don't care what, build a wall around campus to keep the commoners out, and raise money to take the school private. I am so tired of the state of California and the city of Berkeley messing with us.

As an aside, I grew up on the east coast and the name Berkeley, in terms of academics, is synonymous with any top tier academic institution in the world. If you say went to the University of California, I doubt most people would equate that to much, other than perhaps surfers and palm trees.

My resume & bio says U.C. Berkeley. When people ask where I got my degree, I say Berkeley. When talking sports, I say Cal (not California or Cal-Berkeley or UC anything). Pretty much been this way with me and everyone I know (tailgating, socializing, career) for over 30 years. Hasn't been a problem - not sure any signage is going to change anything. And I sort of like it when people are surprised to learn that Cal and Berkeley are the same place.

:gobears: