Boot said:

---

I saw Jim Ryun at Edwards.

---

ColoradoBear said:

---

BearSD said:

---

ColoradoBear said:

---

SFCALBear72 said:

---

With the potential of the grandstands behind Evans Diamond coming down, would they add outfield bleacher seats to increase capacity (potential added revenue) at Evans Diamond? Just a thought. Asking for a friend.

---

Would make more sense to shift the field towards Edwards and add seats in the infield on the 3b side which are actually decent seats. But then with the impending mandate for the AD to be revenue neutral by 2020, baseball might not be around in a few unless substantial money is raised.

---

What is the gap between the cost of the baseball program and the amount of money donated by Cal baseball supporters?

---

I believe it's break even now, but some is from the fundraising push from a few years ago, so unless another effort is made to raise money, baseball will exhaust those funds in a few years. They also do have significant year to year revenues, but it's an expensive sport with lots of travel.

---

The fundraising several years ago was supposed to create an endowment. In that it failed. The money raised is currently being used for expenses, and unless there is another--more serious--push, baseball will once again be in the red.

BearSD said:

---

ColoradoBear said:

---

SFCALBear72 said:

---

With the potential of the grandstands behind Evans Diamond coming down, would they add outfield bleacher seats to increase capacity (potential added revenue) at Evans Diamond? Just a thought. Asking for a friend.

---

Would make more sense to shift the field towards Edwards and add seats in the infield on the 3b side which are actually decent seats. But then with the impending mandate for the AD to be revenue neutral by 2020, baseball might not be around in a few unless substantial money is raised.

---

What is the gap between the cost of the baseball program and the amount of money donated by Cal baseball supporters?

---

This is a source of contention, as the endowment no longer is sufficient. The investment return has not been what was expected (some blame Cal), opaque campus fees have reduced available money, costs are up due to "full tuition" and stipends, etc. The fees likely are going away thanks thanks the new Chancellor, but the program is no longer self-funded.

There are a lot of tracks in the area--maybe we even put money into the Berkeley High track and use that (at least for practices?). Kezar might be cool for meets.

As for baseball--maybe the Giants sponsor the team and donate use of AT&T? They get to keep concessions (including beer) revenue. A lot of people would enjoy being able to afford taking their family to a game there.

I came back to live in Berkeley ten years ago after being away for 30. I was shocked to see how far interest, attendance and the number of meets in track had fallen. Edwards is more like a museum now for ghosts from track meets past. Sadly, this valuable property can now be put to better uses.

tabear82 said:

---

According to Wikipedia, there have been 12 world records set in Edwards Stadium. I was fortunate to see one of them, Henry Rono's world record in the 5000 m in 1978, in a dual meet with WSU.

---

I was there to see Rono's record too. I thought it was during the Pac-8 (or was it Pac-10 by then) championships but I could be wrong. It's among my favorite sports memories. There was an important baseball game being played at Evans Field at the same time. I was up at the top of Edwards Stadium and would turn one way to watch the track & field and the other way to watch baseball. As Rono was running, about 3 or 4 minutes in, they announced he was ahead of world record pace. The stadium roared and kept it up the rest of the race and then for a good 5-10 minutes after he set the record. The confusion on the faces of the people at the baseball was priceless, as they were trying to imagine what could possibly have us applauding for 10-15 minutes.

All the sports such as MBB, Softball, T&F, Tennis, Golf, Field Hockey, etc. should be given deadlines to break even through endowment programs or face the music of being closed down. It doesn't matter to me how many years out the deadline would be - just that there be an end date when the University gravy train ends for each of these money draining sports.

Men's Crew pays for itself. If they can do it, all of the other sports can. Especially baseball - they have professional BB player alums making serious money. If the graduates of all these teams don't care enough to self endow their sport, then so be it.

Bear19 said:

---

All the sports such as MBB, Softball, T&F, Tennis, Golf, Field Hockey, etc. should be given deadlines to break even through endowment programs or face the music of being closed down. It doesn't matter to me how many years out the deadline would be - just that there be an end date when the University gravy train ends for each of these money draining sports.

Men's Crew pays for itself. If they can do it, all of the other sports can. Especially baseball - they have professional BB player alums making serious money. If the graduates of all these teams don't care enough to self endow their sport, then so be it.

---

The university can't make that threat against any of the women's sports. The university entered into a settlement agreement with the federal government to avoid the feds filing a Title IX lawsuit against Cal. IIRC, part of that agreement is that Cal can't discontinue any women's sports unless the Dept. of Education permits it.

Bear19 said:

---

All the sports such as MBB, Softball, T&F, Tennis, Golf, Field Hockey, etc. should be given deadlines to break even through endowment programs or face the music of being closed down. It doesn't matter to me how many years out the deadline would be - just that there be an end date when the University gravy train ends for each of these money draining sports.

Men's Crew pays for itself. If they can do it, all of the other sports can. Especially baseball - they have professional BB player alums making serious money. If the graduates of all these teams don't care enough to self endow their sport, then so be it.

---

Questions/Comments:

Why include Mens Basketball in your list, but not baseball? Or did you mean MBB for baseball?

Although I personally, think your idea for endowments has its merits, it seems like it may be a Title IX non-starter. Can anyone with more knowledge of Title IX comment?

Men's Crew is not an NCAA sport (women's rowing is). Does that distinction matter?

Finally, my personal comment on baseball. I just don't see it as a college sport. It wasn't a part of the college experience in the 80s when I was a student and it has never been since then. Perhaps it was more so in years before the 80s, but it seems to me that is far enough in the realm of history to move on, From what I've heard, it has a pretty large cost for extremely little benefit to the campus, its students or alumni. I know its a small sample size, but I've gone to more 'other' sports than baseball and always experience larger crowds (crowd may be a bit euphemistic) for Gymnastics, T&F, even Field Hockey. The couple times I went to a baseball game, there was no 'there' there. When I expand my sample to everyone I know connected to Cal, their reaction to baseball is the same. I just haven't been able to find or meet that baseball fan base at Cal.

:gobears

:gogiants

BeachedBear said:

---

Bear19 said:

---

All the sports such as MBB, Softball, T&F, Tennis, Golf, Field Hockey, etc. should be given deadlines to break even through endowment programs or face the music of being closed down. It doesn't matter to me how many years out the deadline would be - just that there be an end date when the University gravy train ends for each of these money draining sports.

Men's Crew pays for itself. If they can do it, all of the other sports can. Especially baseball - they have professional BB player alums making serious money. If the graduates of all these teams don't care enough to self endow their sport, then so be it.

---

Questions/Comments:

Why include Mens Basketball in your list, but not baseball? Or did you mean MBB for baseball?

Although I personally, think your idea for endowments has its merits, it seems like it may be a Title IX non-starter. Can anyone with more knowledge of Title IX comment?

Men's Crew is not an NCAA sport (women's rowing is). Does that distinction matter?

Finally, my personal comment on baseball. I just don't see it as a college sport. It wasn't a part of the college experience in the 80s when I was a student and it has never been since then. Perhaps it was more so in years before the 80s, but it seems to me that is far enough in the realm of history to move on, From what I've heard, it has a pretty large cost for extremely little benefit to the campus, its students or alumni. I know its a small sample size, but I've gone to more 'other' sports than baseball and always experience larger crowds (crowd may be a bit euphemistic) for Gymnastics, T&F, even Field Hockey. The couple times I went to a baseball game, there was no 'there' there. When I expand my sample to everyone I know connected to Cal, their reaction to baseball is the same. I just haven't been able to find or meet that baseball fan base at Cal.

:gobears

:gogiants

---

Your question about Title IX was answered above--we can't do anything with women's sports w/out DOE approval. I assume he must have meant baseball, since basketball is a revenue generator and is a requirement for NCAA and P12. In answer to your question about NCAA v. non-NCAA, it doesn't matter for Title IX; what does matter is if the sport is varsity or not.

UrsaMajor said:

---

BeachedBear said:

---

Bear19 said:

---

All the sports such as MBB, Softball, T&F, Tennis, Golf, Field Hockey, etc. should be given deadlines to break even through endowment programs or face the music of being closed down. It doesn't matter to me how many years out the deadline would be - just that there be an end date when the University gravy train ends for each of these money draining sports.

Men's Crew pays for itself. If they can do it, all of the other sports can. Especially baseball - they have professional BB player alums making serious money. If the graduates of all these teams don't care enough to self endow their sport, then so be it.

---

Questions/Comments:

Why include Mens Basketball in your list, but not baseball? Or did you mean MBB for baseball?

Although I personally, think your idea for endowments has its merits, it seems like it may be a Title IX non-starter. Can anyone with more knowledge of Title IX comment?

Men's Crew is not an NCAA sport (women's rowing is). Does that distinction matter?

Finally, my personal comment on baseball. I just don't see it as a college sport. It wasn't a part of the college experience in the 80s when I was a student and it has never been since then. Perhaps it was more so in years before the 80s, but it seems to me that is far enough in the realm of history to move on, From what I've heard, it has a pretty large cost for extremely little benefit to the campus, its students or alumni. I know its a small sample size, but I've gone to more 'other' sports than baseball and always experience larger crowds (crowd may be a bit euphemistic) for Gymnastics, T&F, even Field Hockey. The couple times I went to a baseball game, there was no 'there' there. When I expand my sample to everyone I know connected to Cal, their reaction to baseball is the same. I just haven't been able to find or meet that baseball fan base at Cal.

:gobears

:gogiants

---

Your question about Title IX was answered above--we can't do anything with women's sports w/out DOE approval. I assume he must have meant baseball, since basketball is a revenue generator and is a requirement for NCAA and P12. In answer to your question about NCAA v. non-NCAA, it doesn't matter for Title IX; what does matter is if the sport is varsity or not.

---

URSAMAJOR Posting STRONG today!

Sorry, couldn't resist.

Bear19 said:

---

All the sports such as MBB, Softball, T&F, Tennis, Golf, Field Hockey, etc. should be given deadlines to break even through endowment programs or face the music of being closed down. It doesn't matter to me how many years out the deadline would be - just that there be an end date when the University gravy train ends for each of these money draining sports.

Men's Crew pays for itself. If they can do it, all of the other sports can. Especially baseball - they have professional BB player alums making serious money. If the graduates of all these teams don't care enough to self endow their sport, then so be it.

---

Exactly! It's time to stop bleeding football and men's basketball to fund all these minor sports teams.

I believe that the soccer teams men's and women's and intermural teams play on Edwards Field.

59bear said:

---

bearister said:

---

Lots of good memories for me. Among those I saw compete there: Pat Matzdorf (broke the World Record in the high jump in 1971); Steve Prefontaine; Tommy Smith; John Carlos; Lee Evans; Eamonn Coghlan; Steve Scott; John Walker; Mike Boit; Al Oerter; Ron Clarke; and George Frenn.

---

I also have great memories: 1954 state HS meet featuring future Bear greats Monte Upshaw (broke Jesse Owens' national LJ record), Don Bowden (broke his own half-mile national record) and Leamon King. Also future Oly gold medal decathlete Rafer Johnson and Charlie Dumas, who later was the first man to clear 7' in the HJ. In 1956, the U. S. Olympic team put on a meet that featured world record holders Glenn Davis (400 M hurdles) Al Oerter (discus) and Parry O'Brien (SP) as well as triple medal winning sprinter Bobby Morrow. IIRC, Morrow was beaten that day by King who was the alternate 100M guy on that team. Edwards was an iconic facility but it was pretty shabby by the time I got to Cal so I can imagine the shape it is in today.

---

No young person call understand what Track and Field were at Edwards in the 50's and 60's.

Boot said:

---

I saw Jim Ryan at Edwards.

---

Ryun

Golden One said:

---

Bear19 said:

---

All the sports such as MBB, Softball, T&F, Tennis, Golf, Field Hockey, etc. should be given deadlines to break even through endowment programs or face the music of being closed down. It doesn't matter to me how many years out the deadline would be - just that there be an end date when the University gravy train ends for each of these money draining sports.

Men's Crew pays for itself. If they can do it, all of the other sports can. Especially baseball - they have professional BB player alums making serious money. If the graduates of all these teams don't care enough to self endow their sport, then so be it.

---

Exactly! It's time to stop bleeding football and men's basketball to fund all these minor sports teams.

---

I just don't see the men's basketball business model for a school like Cal, but Im willing to be educated. Listening to the Midgley podcast was depressing. No more fan loyalty since there is massive movement of players, the top players just going to top programs in order to market themselves better for one year, bribing players, etc. Which doesn't even speak to absurd salaries in the latest round of coaching changes, and shrinking attendance. And they don't have anywhere near football's TV package.

The top 10 programs average revenues around $27 million last year and then there is a significant drop off. Last year's Pac winner Oregon, for example, had only $9 million in revenues. All per
the United States Department of Education. And the programs in the top 20 reek of scandal and indictments. The only Pac school in the top 20 is UofA.

Another Cal site did an article analyzing last year's profitability for Pac progams, when the Pac actually had an up year in terms of teams in post-season. Only two teams made money, Furd (which doesn't spend) and UofA. According to the United States Department of Education roughly half the basketball programs lost money in 2014-5, and I would assume the numbers in the red are increasing as coaching salaries rise, and full cost tuition and student stipends have increased costs. The revenues numbers simply are not there like in football. Basketball is trying to be sustainable for most programs. I can see investing in football, but basketball seems like a bad bet. Again, I'm willing to be educated.

Of the close to 350 men's college basketball programs, 116 programs turned a profit.

WIAF - great post as always. I think your last point touches on something: (100+ programs out of 350 are profitable).

1. I've been a Cal bball fan for 30+ years. Too lazy to look up the numbers, but there weren't 350 D1 programs back then. I recall lots of stories about programs moving to D1, since it was more economically feasible than, let's say football.

2. Harking back to my earlier comment above wrt baseball. Other than football, MBB has got to be the second most important sport in terms of connecting to the larger campus community (students, alumni, local fans). I for one lean more towards basketball than football, based on personal history with the game. If Cal eliminated MBB, I'd stop donating to Cal and drop my football season tickets. I'm confident that there are more that lean to football, but I know I am not alone. When you extend that point to sports beyond MBB, I think it dwindles to an even smaller population.

3. The whole profitability argument really digs deeper into 'WHY are there anything other than intramural sports on campus. Lot's of juicy tidbits on that slippery slope, but not enough data storage on the internet to handle it. If we are headed to a Football only or even a Football and Basketball only paradigm, well.....

4. While I wholeheartedly agree with all of the ugly things you mention about the state of MBB, I could probably dig up as many or more about college football. My gut feeling is that basketball as a sport has more lasting power than football (for many reasons - again too much data for the internet to handle today). I think MBB will maybe clean itself up a bit and move on. Football's problems (CTE, smaller pipeline of global talent, liability issues) seem more ingrained in the sport itself.

5. I have a handful friends, who played college football in the 70s and 80s. ALL OF THEM either would not let their sons play tackle football or strongly discouraged them. I've seen many other stories beyond my limited social circle as well. That tells me something about the long term viability of football. I don't think it's going away in my lifetime, but I think it will change more drastically than MBB and be less popular.

:gobears

:gocalMBBatleastuntilI'mtoooldtoattend

An investment in bball is worth it if the goal is being competitive in the Pac. This is doable. Our last decade tells us so.

Investing in bball as our financial savior won't get us anywhere.

I remember going to the meets at Edwards in the 70s and sitting at the top of the east side bleachers watching baseball between track events. I don't remember any names from that era as I was probably only about 10 years old.

kelly09 said:

---

59bear said:

---

bearister said:

---

Lots of good memories for me. Among those I saw compete there: Pat Matzdorf (broke the World Record in the high jump in 1971); Steve Prefontaine; Tommy Smith; John Carlos; Lee Evans; Eamonn Coghlan; Steve Scott; John Walker; Mike Boit; Al Oerter; Ron Clarke; and George Frenn.

---

I also have great memories: 1954 state HS meet featuring future Bear greats Monte Upshaw (broke Jesse Owens' national LJ record), Don Bowden (broke his own half-mile national record) and Leamon King. Also future Oly gold medal decathlete Rafer Johnson and Charlie Dumas, who later was the first man to clear 7' in the HJ. In 1956, the U. S. Olympic team put on a meet that featured world record holders Glenn Davis (400 M hurdles) Al Oerter (discus) and Parry O'Brien (SP) as well as triple medal winning sprinter Bobby Morrow. IIRC, Morrow was beaten that day by King who was the alternate 100M guy on that team. Edwards was an iconic facility but it was pretty shabby by the time I got to Cal so I can imagine the shape it is in today.

---

No young person call understand what Track and Field were at Edwards in the 50's and 60's.

---

That's because no young person can understand when track and field was culturally important, period.

Though not track, I spoke with a recent soccer grad about the potential move and his reaction was "oh cool, that's (Clark Kerr) where we held practices, always thought it'd make a great venue" .

GMP said:

---

kelly09 said:

---

59bear said:

---

bearister said:

---

Lots of good memories for me. Among those I saw compete there: Pat Matzdorf (broke the World Record in the high jump in 1971); Steve Prefontaine; Tommy Smith; John Carlos; Lee Evans; Eamonn Coghlan; Steve Scott; John Walker; Mike Boit; Al Oerter; Ron Clarke; and George Frenn.

---

I also have great memories: 1954 state HS meet featuring future Bear greats Monte Upshaw (broke Jesse Owens' national LJ record), Don Bowden (broke his own half-mile national record) and Leamon King. Also future Oly gold medal decathlete Rafer Johnson and Charlie Dumas, who later was the first man to clear 7' in the HJ. In 1956, the U. S. Olympic team put on a meet that featured world record holders Glenn Davis (400 M hurdles) Al Oerter (discus) and Parry O'Brien (SP) as well as triple medal winning sprinter Bobby Morrow. IIRC, Morrow was beaten that day by King who was the alternate 100M guy on that team. Edwards was an iconic facility but it was pretty shabby by the time I got to Cal so I can imagine the shape it is in today.

---

No young person call understand what Track and Field were at Edwards in the 50's and 60's.

---

That's because no young person can understand when track and field was culturally important, period.

---

Tastes change. In the 30's the second most popular college sport (in terms of attendance) was crew. The Cal-UW regattas routinely drew 40,000+. Professionally, boxing was second only to baseball.

I meant Baseball. "MBB" was not the best choice, I should have just stuck with baseball in the post.

I'd be surprised if MBB is a perpetual money loser though I dont have our numbers for every year. I know last year in what was relatively an off year, non-NCAA tournament year, we broke even.

Projecting to the future, if the FBI and justice department along with the NCAA can clean up the game and make the playing field more level, then I think interest in the game will pick up again. The big programs have taken out the fun of the game by essentially cheating their way to championships virtually every year. Nobody wants to watch outcomes that are essentially predetermined because the big programs cheated to get all the best players. Well some people will, but I dont think thats how you really build interest overall in the sport.

For those that say that we should drop MBB, I think that would be tremendously short sighted. It's essentially betting on college basketball being dead in terms of profitability and I really doubt that that outlook for the future is true.

I believe there are restrictions in agreements with the surrounding residents which limit what can be done with the field at Clark Kerr Campus.

BeachedBear said:

---

WIAF - great post as always. I think your last point touches on something: (100+ programs out of 350 are profitable).

1. I've been a Cal bball fan for 30+ years. Too lazy to look up the numbers, but there weren't 350 D1 programs back then. I recall lots of stories about programs moving to D1, since it was more economically feasible than, let's say football.

2. Harking back to my earlier comment above wrt baseball. Other than football, MBB has got to be the second most important sport in terms of connecting to the larger campus community (students, alumni, local fans). I for one lean more towards basketball than football, based on personal history with the game. If Cal eliminated MBB, I'd stop donating to Cal and drop my football season tickets. I'm confident that there are more that lean to football, but I know I am not alone. When you extend that point to sports beyond MBB, I think it dwindles to an even smaller population.

3. The whole profitability argument really digs deeper into 'WHY are there anything other than intramural sports on campus. Lot's of juicy tidbits on that slippery slope, but not enough data storage on the internet to handle it. If we are headed to a Football only or even a Football and Basketball only paradigm, well.....

4. While I wholeheartedly agree with all of the ugly things you mention about the state of MBB, I could probably dig up as many or more about college football. My gut feeling is that basketball as a sport has more lasting power than football (for many reasons - again too much data for the internet to handle today). I think MBB will maybe clean itself up a bit and move on. Football's problems (CTE, smaller pipeline of global talent, liability issues) seem more ingrained in the sport itself.

5. I have a handful friends, who played college football in the 70s and 80s. ALL OF THEM either would not let their sons play tackle football or strongly discouraged them. I've seen many other stories beyond my limited social circle as well. That tells me something about the long term viability of football. I don't think it's going away in my lifetime, but I think it will change more drastically than MBB and be less popular.

:gobears

:gocalMBBatleastuntilI'mtoooldtoattend

---

Just some context for my post, I was responding to a post about the "non-revenue" sports taking away from football and basketball, and at this point I don't see basketball making sufficient revenues to fund other sports, and thus be worthy of major investment. That doesn't mean basketball can't be sustainable and should be eliminated. But football is hugely profitable even with what is best a middle of the conference program and does fund many of these other sports. SoCal's post says it more concisely.

GivemTheAxe said:

---

I believe there are restrictions in agreements with the surrounding residents which limit what can be done with the field at Clark Kerr Campus.

---

Do know where they're at? Didn't stop Beach Volleyball setting up shop.

One of my fondest memories at Edwards was the 1970 Cal vs $C, Furd vs. UCLA Double Dual Meet. We had been planning on going to Rugby but it was cancelled because of the Kent State Shootings. It was my first Track Meet

$C was loaded but we beat them. Edie Hart and Isaac Curtis beating OJ Simpson in the relay.

We saw Pat Matzdorf and Henry Rono World Records.

USA-USSR Meet - so many big stars.

Edwin Moses long string of wins. James Robinson. Larry Cowlings. Wes Walker

GO BEARS!!!

So many names flooding my brain.

Winning the 1971 Championship only to have it taken away.

I thought Edwards was an Historical site.

We are not going to eliminate MBB or any women's sports regardless of revenue.

That leaves (in no particular order) baseball, track & field, cross country, swimming & diving, water polo, rugby, gymnastics, soccer, golf, crew, and I'm sure some others.

Rugby should be sustained due to its unparalleled success and tradition.

To a lesser degree, same with swimming & diving and water polo.

Track & field may not have enjoyed the success of 50-60 years ago, but it may help attract football recruits (including two currently on the team who participated in T&F in the Spring). (Also, I enjoy reading when Cal has more Olympic medalists than most countries!)

Soccer is an emerging sport in the US, and even though USC does not compete, I think we should.

Golf and crew are (I believe) pretty much self-sustaining. And we do have a long and proud tradition in crew.

That leaves baseball. We do have a tradition with national championships in 1947 (first ever) and 1957 and a recent appearance in 2011, but it is an expensive sport and one that has been eclipsed by the fact that the best high school players go directly into the minor leagues. In addition, the facility can be used for other purposes (and T&F can be moved to Clark Kerr). I would be sorry to see it go, but realistically, it would not be a difficult sacrifice.

Cutting one sport isn't going to make much of a dent in the athletic department expenses.

IMO, the administration will either drop four or more varsity sports, or none.