socaliganbear said:

---

What in the world? Why would Cal need an arena? They're not starting their own league. UCI outfitted an existing space for 250k ...The endeavor already exists.

Sure it exists. And a national championship was already played. And how much revenue did Cal get from it? I'm betting zero. Zilch. Nada. And the same for all the other universities that were "represented". And that is how it will remain no matter how big esports gets unless Cal were to control the facility utilized. That is how you control the video feed and thus all the advertising/click revenue. Now if you were to assert that one could refurbish Wheeler Auditorium for say $500k, then sure that could be a cheap way to try and do it. But one way or another, you need to control the facility.

And I would not be so dismissive of the P12 network's claim or lack thereof on broadcast rights. Once it gets to be an official P12 sport, my guess is they have some claim. Maybe you can get away from that using a club sports label, but again my feeling is that if and when it were to be meaningfully profitable, their lawyers would get involved.

---

Cal84 said:

---

socaliganbear said:

---

What in the world? Why would Cal need an arena? They're not starting their own league. UCI outfitted an existing space for 250k ...The endeavor already exists.

Sure it exists. And a national championship was already played. And how much revenue did Cal get from it? I'm betting zero. Zilch. Nada. And the same for all the other universities that were "represented". And that is how it will remain no matter how big esports gets unless Cal were to control the facility utilized. That is how you control the video feed and thus all the advertising/click revenue. Now if you were to assert that one could refurbish Wheeler Auditorium for say $500k, then sure that could be a cheap way to try and do it. But one way or another, you need to control the facility.

And I would not be so dismissive of the P12 network's claim or lack thereof on broadcast rights. Once it gets to be an official P12 sport, my guess is they have some claim. Maybe you can get away from that using a club sports label, but again my feeling is that if and when it were to be meaningfully profitable, their lawyers would get involved.

---

---

You're confusing a team facility with an events space. You can outfit any available space on campus so these kids can practice. That's the great part about it being an esport. But that's not an events center. What you're talking is an events space to host a tournament. ASU just hosted the championship in their fitness center. Did you think they'd built an arena for it? Did you think their old gym space is specialized for esports? Do you think UC Irvine built an arena for their scholarship team? Do you think their football team is paying for it all?

dajo9 said:

---

I've been playing Overwatch with my kids (9 and 10). It's a lot of fun and highly addictive. Yes, my kids have caught me in the basement playing after our screen time was up. Very embarrassing.

We watched a live Overwatch competition once and it was fun. I don't think it would make sense if you haven't played though. With all the hours I've spent watching other people play sports I can't knock watching esports. It's all watching somebody else perform.

btw, my daughter plays a mean D-Va. Maybe she'll get a scholarship someday.

---

I do the same with my two boys (10 and 14). Although, lately we've gotten hooked on Fortnite which is a heck of a lot of fun especially in squad mode.

philbert said:

---

e-sports is big...

https://www.sfgate.com/business/article/E-sports-arena-set-to-open-in-Las-Vegas-10966708.php

---

My understanding is that Korea is ground zero for this stuff.

I have a nephew who blogs on this stuff and he seems to get countless hours of entertainment. But it's definitely a generational thing. At some point these games have always ended up feeling like glorified forms of a typing competition. I suspect that the future is less in button mashing as vr inevitably takes over. It's possible that at that point I'd be less disturbed by the word "sport" in its name.

Hey, fingers have muscles too!

SRBear said:

---

Hey, fingers have muscles too!

---

As do my eyelids.

beeasyed said:

---

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

You can't be serious with this ****.

I clicked the link, and the coach of Irvine looks like an obese Jon Luvitz. What a joke.

---

"I don't understand this trend. I'll just call this person fat to minimize its significance."

Awesome, dude.

---

1. I understand the trend perfectly fine. I've done plenty of gaming in my time. Gaming has very little to do with sports or a university.

2. Perhaps Cal should form a knitting team and call it "textile sports." Cal could offer scholarships and hold a "textile sports" championship. If Cal gets ahead of the curve on this, Cal could clearly become the dominant player in the space. We could win championships. As stupid as that idea is, I challenge you to clearly explain how it is different than the idea of a university setting up a video gaming team and potentially offering scholarships.

3. When an "esports" player is obese, yet that player is claiming that what they excel at is a sport, I feel that is something worthy of pointing out.

socaliganbear said:

---

GoldenBearofCalifornia said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

Been talking to Cal about this for years. It was even widely discussed at the meeting between the Chancellor and some athletic donors last summer. Every time I have the conversation Cal acts like I'm suggesting we get into competitive carrot peeling.

If you want to talk about the decline in attendance at college football this is part of that. Ask the average group of teenage boys what sports they follow and esports will beat out all the others and it's not close.

League of Legends, etc are outdrawing the NBA finals and the World Series. We may not like it but this is the future and we should figure out how to be part of it.

---

Would there be Title IX implications if Cal added an esports team (which I am guessing is entirely male)? Would adding those male athletes throw us out of compliance?

---

This is an interesting question as it's not a male sport. It's co-ed, that the roster is all male is not by rule. So how do you get around that?

---

I knew someone would eventually bring up the number of dudes in this.

If it were easy to get around, wouldn't schools just call football coed and have open try outs, with the results being zero women come out for positions other than kicker?

I would guess if gaming is externally funded, and no admission exceptions like with IAD, it would be fine. The minute internal resources are used, there could be scrutiny.

What I'd be curious about is how a school would choose what games to focus on? Not saying Nike or UA's sponsorship in college sports is much different, but these gaming companies aren't having championships and giving out small amounts of winnings for the purposes of sport, but they are doing it to sell games to the masses.

Unrelated, people need to get outside and be active more, and get their faces out of their cell phones and computers.

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

beeasyed said:

---

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

You can't be serious with this ****.

I clicked the link, and the coach of Irvine looks like an obese Jon Luvitz. What a joke.

---

"I don't understand this trend. I'll just call this person fat to minimize its significance."

Awesome, dude.

---

1. I understand the trend perfectly fine. I've done plenty of gaming in my time. Gaming has very little to do with sports or a university.

2. Perhaps Cal should form a knitting team and call it "textile sports." Cal could offer scholarships and hold a "textile sports" championship. If Cal gets ahead of the curve on this, Cal could clearly become the dominant player in the space. We could win championships. As stupid as that idea is, I challenge you to clearly explain how it is different than the idea of a university setting up a video gaming team and potentially offering scholarships.

3. When an "esports" player is obese, yet that player is claiming that what they excel at is a sport, I feel that is something worthy of pointing out.

---

I would like to enter CC Sabathia into the record as evidence

dajo9 said:

---

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

beeasyed said:

---

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

You can't be serious with this ****.

I clicked the link, and the coach of Irvine looks like an obese Jon Luvitz. What a joke.

---

"I don't understand this trend. I'll just call this person fat to minimize its significance."

Awesome, dude.

---

1. I understand the trend perfectly fine. I've done plenty of gaming in my time. Gaming has very little to do with sports or a university.

2. Perhaps Cal should form a knitting team and call it "textile sports." Cal could offer scholarships and hold a "textile sports" championship. If Cal gets ahead of the curve on this, Cal could clearly become the dominant player in the space. We could win championships. As stupid as that idea is, I challenge you to clearly explain how it is different than the idea of a university setting up a video gaming team and potentially offering scholarships.

3. When an "esports" player is obese, yet that player is claiming that what they excel at is a sport, I feel that is something worthy of pointing out.

---

I would like to enter CC Sabathia into the record as evidence

---

Giving new meaning to the term "a mountain of evidence."

ColoradoBear said:

---

socaliganbear said:

---

GoldenBearofCalifornia said:

---

Sebastabear said:

---

Been talking to Cal about this for years. It was even widely discussed at the meeting between the Chancellor and some athletic donors last summer. Every time I have the conversation Cal acts like I'm suggesting we get into competitive carrot peeling.

If you want to talk about the decline in attendance at college football this is part of that. Ask the average group of teenage boys what sports they follow and esports will beat out all the others and it's not close.

League of Legends, etc are outdrawing the NBA finals and the World Series. We may not like it but this is the future and we should figure out how to be part of it.

---

Would there be Title IX implications if Cal added an esports team (which I am guessing is entirely male)? Would adding those male athletes throw us out of compliance?

---

This is an interesting question as it's not a male sport. It's co-ed, that the roster is all male is not by rule. So how do you get around that?

---

I knew someone would eventually bring up the number of dudes in this.

If it were easy to get around, wouldn't schools just call football coed and have open try outs, with the results being zero women come out for positions other than kicker?

I would guess if gaming is externally funded, and no admission exceptions like with IAD, it would be fine. The minute internal resources are used, there could be scrutiny.

What I'd be curious about is how a school would choose what games to focus on? Not saying Nike or UA's sponsorship in college sports is much different, but these gaming companies aren't having championships and giving out small amounts of winnings for the purposes of sport, but they are doing it to sell games to the masses.

Unrelated, people need to get outside and be active more, and get their faces out of their cell phones and computers.

---

I certainly didn't assert that.

socaliganbear said:

---

Cal84 said:

---

socaliganbear said:

---

ASU just hosted the championship in their fitness center. Did you think they'd built an arena for it? Did you think their old gym space is specialized for esports? Do you think UC Irvine built an arena for their scholarship team? Do you think their football team is paying for it all?

---

---

---

Do you think they (ASU and UCI) got any revenue other than enough to cover their expenses? So my question would be, where is the money? Total prize money for this event was less than $50k, and it was previously stated that site rental cost was $250k. So where did the rest of the money go? Like I said before, Cal Athletics needs to be run as a business. And unless this particular venture makes a profit, there's zero reason Cal Athletics needs to add another "prestigious" money losing sport to its roster. It has enough of them already.

In practice I discern some obstacles to ever making esports part of the Cal Athletics roster. For starters, there is the issue of cash prize money for winning contestants. That's going to be a problem for any P12/NCAA official event. The entire concept of amateur, student athlete status seems dubious in a sport where there is no barrier to jumping to professional status. You just have a continuum of players with the best ones getting paid more. This gets back to what I said earlier, if Cal Athletics were to get into this business, their competition is not USC/Stanford/Oregon, it is the likes of Blizzard, Psyonix and Riot. And then you have to explain why Cal Athletics has a competitive advantage vs. entities that actually own the titles being played.

Cal84 said:

---

socaliganbear said:

---

Cal84 said:

---

socaliganbear said:

---

ASU just hosted the championship in their fitness center. Did you think they'd built an arena for it? Did you think their old gym space is specialized for esports? Do you think UC Irvine built an arena for their scholarship team? Do you think their football team is paying for it all?

---

---

---

Do you think they (ASU and UCI) got any revenue other than enough to cover their expenses? So my question would be, where is the money? Total prize money for this event was less than $50k, and it was previously stated that site rental cost was $250k. So where did the rest of the money go? Like I said before, Cal Athletics needs to be run as a business. And unless this particular venture makes a profit, there's zero reason Cal Athletics needs to add another "prestigious" money losing sport to its roster. It has enough of them already.

In practice I discern some obstacles to ever making esports part of the Cal Athletics roster. For starters, there is the issue of cash prize money for winning contestants. That's going to be a problem for any P12/NCAA official event. The entire concept of amateur, student athlete status seems dubious in a sport where there is no barrier to jumping to professional status. You just have a continuum of players with the best ones getting paid more. This gets back to what I said earlier, if Cal Athletics were to get into this business, their competition is not USC/Stanford/Oregon, it is the likes of Blizzard, Psyonix and Riot. And then you have to explain why Cal Athletics has a competitive advantage vs. entities that actually own the titles being played.

---

Cal should consider this not because it made UCI money this year, but because it's a massive and yet still growing industry. Although I can totally see typiCAL thinking along those lines as it usually does, because for as innovative as our students and alumni are, the university is anything but. And like has been pointed out, you can financially support it as a club sport.

Or you can do what Pac 12 Utah just did, and make them Varsity and give out scholarships. So far their athletics program hasn't crumbled to the ground. And again, fellow UC has done it as well. So no UC red tape excuse.

OaktownBear said:

---

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

socaliganbear said:

---

Of course this just came across my feed: https://www.morganstanley.com/ideas/esports-ecosystem

Anyhow, Cal has an advantage in a growing market, it should take advantage of that advantage. Especially when donors are willing to put up that money.

Or we can wait around for USC, UCLA or Oregon to take our spot, invest, and then come back to BI in 5 years and complain and moan about how Cal IA is so behind the big guys.

---

I promise to never complain. Cool?

---

I have zero interest in esports and it is mind boggling to me that anyone else does. However, they do. It is a hot field and is growing. It is tailor made for Cal's student body and with no help from the admin we've had national success. It would take minimal investment on the part of the school to cultivate this at this point. It is frankly stupid and short sighted not to. We could be the Alabama of esports and be ensconced before other schools know what hit them. There is a very good chance that this becomes a big deal that can be seriously monetized. If it doesn't, you haven't given up much.

There was a time when few cared about football. That is how it is with new things. The writing is already on the wall with this. It is stupid to miss out because we are too stodgy to care about things that are important to a new generation because they aren't important to us.

The response from Cal is quite frankly TypiCal.

---

If my oldest son didn't have me talking to him, he would have ZERO idea of how Cal football or basketball is doing. But he knows who the two-time Overwatch national champions are. I knew about it before reading this thread, because he texted me to let me know.

It is also mind boggling to me that anyone is interested. But they are. It is a different world we live in than the world of 30-40 years ago.

drizzlybears brother said:

---

philbert said:

---

e-sports is big...

https://www.sfgate.com/business/article/E-sports-arena-set-to-open-in-Las-Vegas-10966708.php

---

My understanding is that Korea is ground zero for this stuff.

I have a nephew who blogs on this stuff and he seems to get countless hours of entertainment. But it's definitely a generational thing. At some point these games have always ended up feeling like glorified forms of a typing competition. I suspect that the future is less in button mashing as vr inevitably takes over. It's possible that at that point I'd be less disturbed by the word "sport" in its name.

---

Is this the future? Is this but an inevitable step to a point where our existence transcends the physical to inhabit primarily a more imaginative and limitless digital world?

If we are in essence dopamine-chasing meat bags, and ai continues to develop (regardless of rate), and even becomes physically integrated into our persons, you can imagine the attraction of existing in experiences limited only by our imaginations with little or any contact to the physical world (assuming we reconcile the physical resources needed to power this existence). Think for example of the advantage the dorito has gained over the green bean. Our green bean physical world doesn't really stand a chance does it?

If machines continue to eclipse human physical capacity, and in time our mental capacity, then what's left to us but our imagination? Keep your eyes on the sex industry. It leads everything.

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

beeasyed said:

---

Chapman_is_Gone said:

---

You can't be serious with this ****.

I clicked the link, and the coach of Irvine looks like an obese Jon Luvitz. What a joke.

---

"I don't understand this trend. I'll just call this person fat to minimize its significance."

Awesome, dude.

---

1. I understand the trend perfectly fine. I've done plenty of gaming in my time. Gaming has very little to do with sports or a university.

2. Perhaps Cal should form a knitting team and call it "textile sports." Cal could offer scholarships and hold a "textile sports" championship. If Cal gets ahead of the curve on this, Cal could clearly become the dominant player in the space. We could win championships. As stupid as that idea is, I challenge you to clearly explain how it is different than the idea of a university setting up a video gaming team and potentially offering scholarships.

3. When an "esports" player is obese, yet that player is claiming that what they excel at is a sport, I feel that is something worthy of pointing out.

---

1. If you consider sport to be a competitive event which demands precision, reflexes, and consistency then gaming should be considered as much a sport as any target event like shooting, archery, darts, etc. Arguably also driving.

2. A knitting team would be no different than sponsoring individuals who compete in the arts like visual media, music, maybe even architecture competitions. There'd be no issue in making the investment if it looked like there is money in it. The difference is that the trajectory of eSports and knitting are vastly different and there's an argument to be made for the skyrocketing expansion of e-Sport and dollars to be made.

3. Coaches being obese certainly doesn't rule out sport legitimacy. Otherwise the NFL would be screwed. As far as the physical build of the competitors it's not really a salient point depending on your views on other events which don't demand peak performance.

>Cal should consider this not because it made UCI money this year, but because it's a massive and yet still growing industry.

It is. But that does not mean that any entity can enter the business and make money. The question I asked before still stands - "Where is the money?". That event cited clearly had some sponsorship from Blizzard. Either Blizzard broke even on it, happy just to promote their title and it's community or Blizzard made money on it. If it's the former, then it needs to be explained how Cal Athletics can conceivably compete and still make a profit against competitors who are happy to make no profit. If the later, it still needs to be explained how Cal Athletics can get control of gate and video feed revenues.

I also think you are severely underestimating the capital required to be competitive in this space. Citing UCI or Utah offering scholarships is not a really convincing argument since neither of those entities makes a profit. In contrast we do see numerous venture capital backed startups entering the space - they do intend to make a profit (eventually) and their initial capital raises are in the $25-35mm range. This is clearly beyond the amount of capital Cal Athletics can allocate to an entrance into the space, although obviously not beyond the capabilities of any number of UC Berkeley alumni.

If you want to see an example of how a collegiate entity has entered the esports space with a specific intent to make money, you should probably look at the B1G's attempt. They partnered with Riot, have matches on B1G premises and thus control the video feed which gets placed on the B1G network. Not sure if they also push video over IP. Overall it is an involved effort.

Could Cal Athletics do something similar? Well I know one thing. It would have a better chance if it had already gotten its financial house in order rather than having a -$20mm/yr overhang. So yeah that's another side effect of Cal Athletics inability to make the tough decision to kill off non-revenue sports. Not only does it place a drag on its one profitable business (football), it also handicaps any efforts at establishing new profitable business units.

Plenty on this thread from the "Cal sucks at everything; why add one more thing" crowd. They also seem to be of the "Sport? That ain't a sport!" crowd.

Hey, fellas, there's a bunch of kids on your lawn! You go chase them off while telling stories of how you scored four touchdowns in the city championship. The visionaries will get busy with the 21st century.

Cal84 said:

---

>Cal should consider this not because it made UCI money this year, but because it's a massive and yet still growing industry.

It is. But that does not mean that any entity can enter the business and make money. The question I asked before still stands - "Where is the money?". That event cited clearly had some sponsorship from Blizzard. Either Blizzard broke even on it, happy just to promote their title and it's community or Blizzard made money on it. If it's the former, then it needs to be explained how Cal Athletics can conceivably compete and still make a profit against competitors who are happy to make no profit. If the later, it still needs to be explained how Cal Athletics can get control of gate and video feed revenues.

I also think you are severely underestimating the capital required to be competitive in this space. Citing UCI or Utah offering scholarships is not a really convincing argument since neither of those entities makes a profit. In contrast we do see numerous venture capital backed startups entering the space - they do intend to make a profit (eventually) and their initial capital raises are in the $25-35mm range. This is clearly beyond the amount of capital Cal Athletics can allocate to an entrance into the space, although obviously not beyond the capabilities of any number of UC Berkeley alumni.

If you want to see an example of how a collegiate entity has entered the esports space with a specific intent to make money, you should probably look at the B1G's attempt. They partnered with Riot, have matches on B1G premises and thus control the video feed which gets placed on the B1G network. Not sure if they also push video over IP. Overall it is an involved effort.

Could Cal Athletics do something similar? Well I know one thing. It would have a better chance if it had already gotten its financial house in order rather than having a -$20mm/yr overhang. So yeah that's another side effect of Cal Athletics inability to make the tough decision to kill off non-revenue sports. Not only does it place a drag on its one profitable business (football), it also handicaps any efforts at establishing new profitable business units.

---

Profit is your concern, I get that. But we are having different conversations. You think I'm suggesting this as some money making scheme. I'm not. Im suggesting this because it's hugely popular, we're already good at it, and we're a natural fit, both as a school and as a community. The fact that esports at Cal is already thriving without any University support says there is minimal investment involved. Hence Utah and ICU. If eventually it evolves into a revenue source somehow, great. You are having an entirely different conversation, mostly with yourself.

AunBear89 said:

---

Plenty on this thread from the "Cal sucks at everything; why add one more thing" crowd. They also seem to be of the "Sport? That ain't a sport!" crowd.

Hey, fellas, there's a bunch of kids on your lawn! You go chase them off while telling stories of how you scored four touchdowns in the city championship. The visionaries will get busy with the 21st century.

---

I hope they're getting busy with the 21st century. Since it won't be with actual women.

Unless they are playing Sims

ayetee11 said:

---

AunBear89 said:

---

Plenty on this thread from the "Cal sucks at everything; why add one more thing" crowd. They also seem to be of the "Sport? That ain't a sport!" crowd.

Hey, fellas, there's a bunch of kids on your lawn! You go chase them off while telling stories of how you scored four touchdowns in the city championship. The visionaries will get busy with the 21st century.

---

I hope they're getting busy with the 21st century. Since it won't be with actual women.

Unless they are playing Sims

---

I would estimate that at least 75% of the football team is into esports.

socaliganbear said:

---

Cal84 said:

---

You think I'm suggesting this as some money making scheme. I'm not. Im suggesting this because it's hugely popular, we're already good at it, and we're a natural fit, both as a school and as a community. The fact that esports at Cal is already thriving without any University support says there is minimal investment involved. Hence Utah and ICU. If eventually it evolves into a revenue source somehow, great. You are having an entirely different conversation, mostly with yourself.

---

---

I responded because your posts advocated giving scholarships like UCI does. And you advocated investing money into the business before USC/Ohio State et al did. I demurred. Now you want to claim that I was responding to myself? Those were your posts, bub. I get that you don't want to hear my responses though.

Like I said, Cal Athletics has lots of opportunities to win national championships in sports that lose money. Some would prefer that to be in women's swimming. Others would prefer it to be in esports. I say let them raise the funding for their endeavors and proceed as they see fit.

socaliganbear said:

---

ayetee11 said:

---

AunBear89 said:

---

Plenty on this thread from the "Cal sucks at everything; why add one more thing" crowd. They also seem to be of the "Sport? That ain't a sport!" crowd.

Hey, fellas, there's a bunch of kids on your lawn! You go chase them off while telling stories of how you scored four touchdowns in the city championship. The visionaries will get busy with the 21st century.

---

I hope they're getting busy with the 21st century. Since it won't be with actual women.

Unless they are playing Sims

---

I would estimate that at least 75% of the football team is into esports.

---

I would agree that 75% are into video games. I would argue a very small percentage would consider it a sport.

Cal84 said:

---

socaliganbear said:

---

Cal84 said:

---

You think I'm suggesting this as some money making scheme. I'm not. Im suggesting this because it's hugely popular, we're already good at it, and we're a natural fit, both as a school and as a community. The fact that esports at Cal is already thriving without any University support says there is minimal investment involved. Hence Utah and ICU. If eventually it evolves into a revenue source somehow, great. You are having an entirely different conversation, mostly with yourself.

---

---

I responded because your posts advocated giving scholarships like UCI does. And you advocated investing money into the business before USC/Ohio State et al did. I demurred. Now you want to claim that I was responding to myself? Those were your posts, bub. I get that you don't want to hear my responses though.

Like I said, Cal Athletics has lots of opportunities to win national championships in sports that lose money. Some would prefer that to be in women's swimming. Others would prefer it to be in esports. I say let them raise the funding for their endeavors and proceed as they see fit.

---

That's the point. Donors want to. Either way, you are talking about Cal building something that I am not suggesting.

Cal84 said:

---

Scholarships? Sure. IF UC Berkeley makes a net profit on the team. Let's be clear here. This is a business. If it makes money, then it is worth investigating whether Cal Athletics should invest in that business (by offering scholarships, paying for coaches, etc.). If it doesn't make money, then I don't give a rats ass whether it is tennis, esports or competitive masturbation - Cal Athletics can't afford it.

So here's a question - did Cal Athletics get any revenue from that esports event? I'm betting they didn't get a cent. So why should Berkeley offer scholarships in that sport?

---

Don't need scholarshipsif you had "preferred walk-ons" i.e. a Cal admission spot, we would dominate more than our rugby team does.

socaliganbear said:

---

ayetee11 said:

---

AunBear89 said:

---

Plenty on this thread from the "Cal sucks at everything; why add one more thing" crowd. They also seem to be of the "Sport? That ain't a sport!" crowd.

Hey, fellas, there's a bunch of kids on your lawn! You go chase them off while telling stories of how you scored four touchdowns in the city championship. The visionaries will get busy with the 21st century.

---

I hope they're getting busy with the 21st century. Since it won't be with actual women.

Unless they are playing Sims

---

I would estimate that at least 75% of the football team is into esports.

---

I'm cool with staring an esports program, but it only if Tosh leads it.

It doesn't seem to be that hard to get around Title IX, you have two teams, the A team and the women's team. Not having a facility is BS, the biggest esports events happen in the standard giant arenas, they aren't esports specific.

Haas with its relatively new big screen makes hosting fairly easy I would think.

E-sports is big. There is money in it. I agree that I don't know that you need schollie's but even to recognize the team for athletic perks for preferential admission and study benefits would probably help.

socaliganbear said:

---

>That's the point. Donors want to. Either way, you are talking about Cal building something that I am not suggesting.

---

If donors want to contribute money to it, let them. But the fact is you DID suggest providing meaningful Cal Athletics financial support in the form of scholarships and financial investment (presumably paid coaches, equipment, etc.). Now you are not? You are entitled to change your mind. But stop claiming I was responding to something mythical.

As far as walk-on preferences, I'm fine with that. But once you take that step, you need a coach who would make that decision. That person needs to be paid, if for nothing else than to impose a level of responsibility on preference decision making. So again, raise the money, and let them fly.

You guys have inspired me to watch some New York Excelsior with the kids this weekend. They are in 1st place!

Cal84 said:

---

socaliganbear said:

---

>That's the point. Donors want to. Either way, you are talking about Cal building something that I am not suggesting.

---

If donors want to contribute money to it, let them. But the fact is you DID suggest providing meaningful Cal Athletics financial support in the form of scholarships and financial investment (presumably paid coaches, equipment, etc.). Now you are not? You are entitled to change your mind. But stop claiming I was responding to something mythical.

As far as walk-on preferences, I'm fine with that. But once you take that step, you need a coach who would make that decision. That person needs to be paid, if for nothing else than to impose a level of responsibility on preference decision making. So again, raise the money, and let them fly.

---

Again if donors want to pay for this, including scholarships, I'm for this.

If scholarships are offered for video games, wouldn't they have to create a women's video game team and offer scholarships? What about games that attract the inner cities? Maybe a Madden or FIFA team? NBA2K team? Not sure what kids play now.

As an interesting related note, some Cal donors have excellent contacts at EA. EA publishes Madden football. Virtually every Cal football player plays Madden religiously - and honestly I probably don't need the "virtually" qualifier. I was in a meeting where we discussed having Cal approach EA to make a Cal specific version of the game. Maybe even using some Cal plays etc for the exclusive use of the team. Can you imagine how cool the average 17/18 year old player would think that was? How great that would be for branding and recruiting?

But as far as I know, I don't believe Cal ever followed up on this (there are some contributors to this site who would know more than me on that topic. I would urge you to jump in if in fact that follow up took place and I just don't know about it - you know who you are).

Anyway, it just feels to me like I see too many of these ideas float by Cal where both the money and the contacts are there and Cal doesn't have the . . . I don't know . . . "will" maybe? to exploit them.

We really do have an extraordinary number of advantages in areas like this over even the biggest athletic programs in America. Ohio State, Alabama, Michigan et all don't have what we have. We just need to start using those.