bearchamp said:

---

Socaliganbear,
You might want to rethink your message. "County club sport players" sounds like an inappropriate and offensive "code". Additionally, the start of these posts was critical comments on the expenditure of funds for hotel stays: the issue is not cutting budgets, but effective allocation of resources. Finally, you insult Cal athletes when you suggest they don't care about their performance in any competition. Taking swimming as an example, to suggest that each performance is not important is beyond naive. I posit that the swimming athletes, whether taken individually, or as a team, compete at a much higher level than the football players. Football competes for league supremacy, swimmers compete at the world level and frequently are the best in the world. World level competition requires regimentation and discipline. The difference between football and swimming appears to be that the demands on swimmers are met through individual discipline, whereas the football culture seems to believe its athletes cannot be trusted to be disciplined. I never recall a bed check, but apparently football requires such babysitting. My argument is not that football athletes are lesser people, but that, perhaps, they perform to what is expected of them by the coaches and the culture and that the effort to advance football performance might benefit from developing the kind of individual discipline found in other sports, and thus, perhaps, the hotel expenditures might be better applied elsewhere in the program.

---

Apples and oranges. Sorry, but I'm not buying the argument at all that swimmers compete at a higher level than football players because it's a more global sport. Or that more is expected of a swimming athlete. Or that discipline and "regimentation" don't appy to football players. That got a little bizarre for me.

OK, if not swimming, try water polo; a "team" sport. Maybe compare home-game hotel stays for water polo and football to wins and losses?Water polo players are notorious for rowdiness, but get their business together for competition without "babysitting". Or, how about crew? And, one doesn't find water polo at many country clubs.
Cal is famous for being unconventional (see, television ads). Again, perhaps conventional doesn't and shouldn't work at Cal.

bearchamp said:

---

Socaligan Bear and Wifesafurd,
The issue is performance. My observation of football and basketball is that they don't perform all that well. Thus, I question the popular wisdom that a hotel stay is the difference. I also question treating the athletes like children: if every minute is not regulated they won't perform, show up for meetings, show up sober???? Are you serious? Additionally, I have known many elite athletes in football and basketball, that is, NFL and NBA, and I have never heard any of them suggest their athletic performance was enhanced by staying in a hotel. To the contrary, I have heard that the advantage of a home game is staying in your own bed. Cal is a different kind of place. I was advised to go elsewhere for athletic excellence when I was being recruited. My teammates and I did just fine. Perhaps "money" sports at Cal need to be different and need a different approach and a different culture than the ACC and SEC. Maybe the recruit who is impressed by staying at a hotel is not the recruit we need. Maybe the paternalism inherent in the current approach handicaps our "money" athletes. Perhaps, the "good ol' boy" orthodoxy of the historical approach to "money" athletes doesn't work at Cal. The wins and losses seem to bear out that conclusion.

---

I get the reason behind the hotel stay the night before a game...control, prep. It's basically military prep mentality for a mission. Heck they even want to show the march into the stadium...like gladiators ready for some blood. Does it work? Who knows. But for a home night game, there's really no reason for a hotel stay if the game is a 6 p.m. Just set a grown up call time when players have show up. Let them have the evening and morning...like grown ups.

Of course the other reason for the hotel stay is curfew and keeping the boys out of trouble. I don't buy that. Heck if the game is at 6 p.m. a kid could stay up until 3 and still get enough rest.

So does MBB or WBB stay at a hotel the night before? Why or why not?

While I'm not going to argue costs...it's a perfectly fair question for a public university. As to hostility towards football...well I'll just say it. The University of California Berkeley is an academic school, first and foremost. (There was also a big payola scandal at Cal in the 50s that soured things.) The nerds run the institution because they're SMART and that's the business of the university: education, academics and research. UCB can survive without FB. But FB can't survive without UCB at Cal. I made this peace long ago despite enjoying FB as a game. I'd hate to see FB gone at Cal but at a certain point you go with the core and it's not FB.

Another Bear said:

---

Boy what a bunch of borderline fascists...don't like the message so kill off and/or attack the press. Hmmm...why does that sound familiar right now? Yes I understand the difference in scale and importance but this is where and how this crap starts.

Look I get disagreeing about an op-ed but killing off funding? Puh-lease...STFU or FB is next on the chopping block.

I always figured the team in the hotel the night before was game prep, bonding...and about curfew, i.e., don't want the 70s era Raiders on the prowl and lose the game and the university $$$. I'm fine with it.

But then I'm also fine with a student writer asking a budget question? It is a public institaution. You can rate it dumb or stupid but question is still legit even if you don't agree with the question.

p.s. nice stalking job on the young frosh reporter's info...Daivd Pecker is that you and AMI ready to collect recon to swap and trade later? Or are you Uber and going to track and harass that reporter? Yeah, knock it the EF off.

---

Questioning whether a reporter has a balanced article or an agenda is killing the press? Do you agree with people in the Stop Funding Hate movement , or advertising boycotts called by unions of anti-union newspapers, or adverting boycotts of Tucker Carlson because he said immigrants were dirty, etc.? You have the first amendment right to say what you want and people have the right to object, not read your news source or even call for boycotts of where you get your money. Odds are your calling people you support politically (both the right and left do this) borderline fascists.

As for a student newspaper which drains money and a football team which generates revenue to pay tuition and costs for say 400 students, I think I know who gets cut and who doesn't.

I did find that someone knew so much about the author somewhat creepy. Also, I'm not for cutting funding to the Daily Cal, but I understand why that people have the right to express that view w/o being labeled fascists.

bearchamp said:

---

Socaliganbear,
You might want to rethink your message. "County club sport players" sounds like an inappropriate and offensive "code". Additionally, the start of these posts was critical comments on the expenditure of funds for hotel stays: the issue is not cutting budgets, but effective allocation of resources. Finally, you insult Cal athletes when you suggest they don't care about their performance in any competition. Taking swimming as an example, to suggest that each performance is not important is beyond naive. I posit that the swimming athletes, whether taken individually, or as a team, compete at a much higher level than the football players. Football competes for league supremacy, swimmers compete at the world level and frequently are the best in the world. World level competition requires regimentation and discipline. The difference between football and swimming appears to be that the demands on swimmers are met through individual discipline, whereas the football culture seems to believe its athletes cannot be trusted to be disciplined. I never recall a bed check, but apparently football requires such babysitting. My argument is not that football athletes are lesser people, but that, perhaps, they perform to what is expected of them by the coaches and the culture and that the effort to advance football performance might benefit from developing the kind of individual discipline found in other sports, and thus, perhaps, the hotel expenditures might be better applied elsewhere in the program.

---

Code for what? I have always associated the term with "little rich kids" the meaning that golf, club sports in swimming, WP, soccer, lacrosse, and then tennis lessons and tourneys all takes a lot of cash. And for a few of those sports I know it is from the costs attendant kids and grandkids.

When I see the word "code" come up usually the next step goes to racism. If you want to say that people of color populate CCSs less, you could very well be right, but I have never seen any restriction in participating in these sports growing up other than affordability. Matter of fact it would be nice if more of color could afford same because not only are a number of potentially good athletes being denied, but the quality of the sport is too.

Also country club sport players usually have the highest GPAs for athletes at any school they are at. Why? Not because of their race or origin, but because of the general wealth from which they come that affords practice SAT/ACTs, hired advisors, tutors, etc.

So I see the code as "rich" and I can't see why that is offensive.

wifeisafurd said:

---

Another Bear said:

---

Boy what a bunch of borderline fascists...don't like the message so kill off and/or attack the press. Hmmm...why does that sound familiar right now? Yes I understand the difference in scale and importance but this is where and how this crap starts.

Look I get disagreeing about an op-ed but killing off funding? Puh-lease...STFU or FB is next on the chopping block.

I always figured the team in the hotel the night before was game prep, bonding...and about curfew, i.e., don't want the 70s era Raiders on the prowl and lose the game and the university $$$. I'm fine with it.

But then I'm also fine with a student writer asking a budget question? It is a public institaution. You can rate it dumb or stupid but question is still legit even if you don't agree with the question.

p.s. nice stalking job on the young frosh reporter's info...Daivd Pecker is that you and AMI ready to collect recon to swap and trade later? Or are you Uber and going to track and harass that reporter? Yeah, knock it the EF off.

---

Questioning whether a reporter has a balanced article or an agenda is killing the press? Do you agree with people in the Stop Funding Hate movement , or advertising boycotts called by unions of anti-union newspapers, or adverting boycotts of Tucker Carlson because he said immigrants were dirty, etc.? You have the first amendment right to say what you want and people have the right to object, not read your news source or even call for boycotts of where you get your money. Odds are your calling people you support politically (both the right and left do this) borderline fascists.

As for a student newspaper which drains money and a football team which generates revenue to pay tuition and costs for say 400 students, I think I know who gets cut and who doesn't.

I did find that someone knew so much about the author somewhat creepy. Also, I'm not for cutting funding to the Daily Cal, but I understand why that people have the right to express that view w/o being labeled fascists.

---

Questioning is one thing...saying funding for the DC should be pulled is another...even if it's self supporting. That's the fascist move I object to. Don't like what's being written...threaten to shut it down. KILL THE MESSENGER and replace with a pliant press. That is the definition of fascism...and yes there is a much larger societal context to this playing out before our eyes.

In any case, the Daily Cal is a student paper and the University of California Berkeley is an educational institution with a long, long tradition of producing writers of all kinds...journalists, novelists and heavy duty hardline academics. I'd argue a student newspaper is more important than FB because writing and communication is the life blood of an university. So a student newspaper fits in with the mission of the university far better than FB...despite who makes money or not. It's called training the future.

In any case, anyone who has NEVER made a dumb mistake or written something dumb or less than thought out at age 18 or under 21 as a student...please step forward and collect your brownie points.

I get why there's a hotel stay the night before a game. I agree that's it's othrodoxy and it might help, might not. Whatever....but I still think it's totally fair to question it because a) it's not proven to work, and b) questioning is at the core of what the University of California does. Again, UCB is an educational instituation first and foremost. It might look like a dumb op-ed to FB fans but to me it shows that the university is still doing its core job and provoking students to ask WHY.

Staying at the Claremont makes sense to me for all parties concerned.

The seismic upgrade to Memorial Stadium was necessary ,regardless of whether Cal football plays there or not. Otherwise, you'd have a historic structure that can't be torn down and can't be used for anything. That part of the stadium cost should not be tied to Cal athletics. They didn't make the Architecture Department pay for seismic upgrades to Wurster Hall. The SAHPC is for the benefit up all sports, not just football.

bearchamp said:

---

Socaligan Bear and Wifesafurd,
The issue is performance. My observation of football and basketball is that they don't perform all that well. Thus, I question the popular wisdom that a hotel stay is the difference. I also question treating the athletes like children: if every minute is not regulated they won't perform, show up for meetings, show up sober???? Are you serious? Additionally, I have known many elite athletes in football and basketball, that is, NFL and NBA, and I have never heard any of them suggest their athletic performance was enhanced by staying in a hotel. To the contrary, I have heard that the advantage of a home game is staying in your own bed. Cal is a different kind of place. I was advised to go elsewhere for athletic excellence when I was being recruited. My teammates and I did just fine. Perhaps "money" sports at Cal need to be different and need a different approach and a different culture than the ACC and SEC. Maybe the recruit who is impressed by staying at a hotel is not the recruit we need. Maybe the paternalism inherent in the current approach handicaps our "money" athletes. Perhaps, the "good ol' boy" orthodoxy of the historical approach to "money" athletes doesn't work at Cal. The wins and losses seem to bear out that conclusion.

---

To an earlier post, down here in the SoCal beach cities, where water polo rosters are filled from, it is very much a country club or gated community sport. Almost every country club with an appropriate pool has a team (actually two with both genders). The tiny gated community of Emerald Bay currently has 37 kids on college H2O polo rosters.

The logic in this post that everything is performance driven is bizarre. So top football school stay at hotels and others don't? Cal is good at aquatics, and not as good at football. So what? There are plenty or school that suck at aquatics. The water polo comment above in a joke. Name any school outside California that even wins the national championship? That would be zero. In fact how many times has a team outside a California Pac school won? So we have just 4 teams that use hotels? Water polo athletes are impressive, but realize that when you win that championship you are the best or 22 schools, not hundreds.

Nearly 1.1 million high school athletes and 70,000 college athletes play football. According to ESPN, NCAA college football now generates over $1 billion. There are 22 men's intercollegiate water polo teams with say 17 players per roster. For the women there are approaching 40 D1 and 8 D2 schools. You can do the math. None of these program make a surplus and most, particularly women's teams, eat money, and odds are football revenue is making up the shortfall. No one knows the sport's revenues because they are so small. You tell me which sport is more competitive and has more at stake for the university? if the water polo team losses, who really cares other than those involved with the sport? Hell yes, football coaches and administrators want and get as much control over their 100 to 110 players because of what is at stake.

You are also ignoring the practical. Game day at the pool area is a snooze until the 17 athletes come out and the game starts. Not so with football where the logistics are a major undertaking. I have been to both and they are not even close to comparable.

Most alums feel the reasons Cal doesn't perform well in revenue sorts is because of the administrators at Cal are unwilling to make the commitments required to become a top team. Just look at basketball if you want a glaring example of that administrative mindset.

As for mixing the intercollegiate money, donors to football want the money spent on football. Get over it.

Big Dog said:

---

Quote:

---

The author of the article, Alexandra Stassinopoulos, is a Freshman at Cal.

---

The vast majority of writers on college newspapers have little critical thinking skills, so expecting a Frosh to ask/think about diferrent points of view is foolish.

---

Maybe the writers and editors on college newspapers are developing their critical thinking skills on the job, so if they go into the profession later, they will have learned a few things and become wiser.

Big C said:

---

Big Dog said:

---

Quote:

---

The author of the article, Alexandra Stassinopoulos, is a Freshman at Cal.

---

The vast majority of writers on college newspapers have little critical thinking skills, so expecting a Frosh to ask/think about diferrent points of view is foolish.

---

Maybe the writers and editors on college newspapers are developing their critical thinking skills on the job, so if they go into the profession later, they will have learned a few things and become wiser.

---

OMG, students getting on-the-job training in an educational environment? Who would have thunk this could happen at an university!

Another Bear said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

Another Bear said:

---

Boy what a bunch of borderline fascists...don't like the message so kill off and/or attack the press. Hmmm...why does that sound familiar right now? Yes I understand the difference in scale and importance but this is where and how this crap starts.

Look I get disagreeing about an op-ed but killing off funding? Puh-lease...STFU or FB is next on the chopping block.

I always figured the team in the hotel the night before was game prep, bonding...and about curfew, i.e., don't want the 70s era Raiders on the prowl and lose the game and the university $$$. I'm fine with it.

But then I'm also fine with a student writer asking a budget question? It is a public institaution. You can rate it dumb or stupid but question is still legit even if you don't agree with the question.

p.s. nice stalking job on the young frosh reporter's info...Daivd Pecker is that you and AMI ready to collect recon to swap and trade later? Or are you Uber and going to track and harass that reporter? Yeah, knock it the EF off.

---

Questioning whether a reporter has a balanced article or an agenda is killing the press? Do you agree with people in the Stop Funding Hate movement , or advertising boycotts called by unions of anti-union newspapers, or adverting boycotts of Tucker Carlson because he said immigrants were dirty, etc.? You have the first amendment right to say what you want and people have the right to object, not read your news source or even call for boycotts of where you get your money. Odds are your calling people you support politically (both the right and left do this) borderline fascists.

As for a student newspaper which drains money and a football team which generates revenue to pay tuition and costs for say 400 students, I think I know who gets cut and who doesn't.

I did find that someone knew so much about the author somewhat creepy. Also, I'm not for cutting funding to the Daily Cal, but I understand why that people have the right to express that view w/o being labeled fascists.

---

Questioning is one thing...saying funding for the DC should be pulled is another...even if it's self supporting. That's the fascist move I object to. Don't like what's being written...threaten to shut it down. KILL THE MESSENGER and replace with a pliant press. That is the definition of fascism...and yes there is a much larger societal context to this playing out before our eyes.

In any case, the Daily Cal is a student paper and the University of California Berkeley is an educational institution with a long, long tradition of producing writers of all kinds...journalists, novelists and heavy duty hardline academics. I'd argue a student newspaper is more important than FB because writing and communication is the life blood of an university. So a student newspaper fits in with the mission of the university far better than FB...despite who makes money or not. It's called training the future.

In any case, anyone who has NEVER made a dumb mistake or written something dumb or less than thought out at age 18 or under 21 as a student...please step forward and collect your brownie points.

I get why there's a hotel stay the night before a game. I agree that's it's othrodoxy and it might help, might not. Whatever....but I still think it's totally fair to question it because a) it's not proven to work, and b) questioning is at the core of what the University of California does. Again, UCB is an educational instituation first and foremost. It might look like a dumb op-ed to FB fans but to me it shows that the university is still doing its core job and provoking students to ask WHY.

---

I think a student newspaper and football should be part of a college community, and I realize others think opposite. I would even argue a band is part of a university, but all facets of the university are subject to criticism (I'm thinking of the Furd band in particular). I don's see any reason why the school newspaper should be excluded from criticism.

As for he fascism remark you called by your definition the following fascists:

John Podesto, Hillary Clinton, Eric Bruns, Barney Frank, various labor unions, Paul Krugman, Al Sharpton, the Koch Brothers, George Soros, Jonah Goldberg, Alan Derrshowitz, Kathleen Kennedy, Sidney Blumenthal, Babs Streisand, The New Yorker, Fox News, The New Hampshire Republican Party, Move-On, Media Matters, Judd Apatow and a bunch of Hollywood dumbs!ts, The Financial Times, Mother Jones, Ann Coulter, the NRA, RedState.com, Brietbart, and on and on have called for boycotting advertisers on news agencies.

After looking at this list maybe you do have a point.

BTW, Nate Silver, the pollster, has concluded that media boycotts are ineffective generally, but lead to blander media landscape, as advertisers generally return to the fold, but force more constrained speech.

wifeisafurd said:

---

packawana said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

packawana said:

---

wifeisafurd said:

---

packawana said:

---

I largely see this as a battle of value systems. If it came down to it, there's people who would rather not have a football team than to know that money is being spent on one instead of other things.

However it does raise an important structural question - in the current state of college athletics, it is reasonable to ask if it's a fools errand to try to make the enterprise profitable.

---

The problem is the money likely would not be spent on other things related to Cal. Most donors don't donate to the football restricted fund to forego other Cal activities the author would want to benefit from the donor's voluntary donations that pay for the coach's salary/benefits and where the team stays. People like the author simply don't get that there are competing uses for charitable giving, and in fact, there is a whole industry of non-profits looking for their money.

And there Is no structural issue either. Cal football is vastly profitable. If you want to discuss a fools errand as being in terms of profits (which is an unusual concept in this sector), go look at non-revenue sports that will never make a profit and cut them. But when you do so at Cal, just realize that means even larger cuts on the academic side as the non-revenue sports have their benefactors who when the teams were previously cut, withheld money from academics in about twice the amount of the cost savings in the cut sports. My guess is the author is too young and uniformed to appreciate that either.

---

I don't think it's hard to venture that the author and students like her understand that. I get that this is the way things are. I guess my big contention is whether this is the way things should be, and I like articles like this because it does bring up the opportunity to have that discussion. Though I suppose no one is interested in having that discussion.

---

I don't think a frosh journalism student has a f'ing clue about how the university gets funded. In fact, putting in the comments from the moron faculty member: " that the money used to pay for the hotel rooms could be better spent on other campus programs" shows a complete lack of how the expenses are funded, legal requirements governing those funds and of fund accounting rules the university follows. My guess is that most of this board doesn't get the technicalities either, not less someone who has been in college for a few months.

Maybe we should have a discussion of why uniformed faculty members keep attacking another sider of the University?

---

With all due respect, that's a straw man argument. Yes, we can agree that within the confines of the way the system is currently set up, the money must be earmarked for spending on the team. My point is that it's fair to also question why we're trying to attract donors who are interested in funding the educational aspect if their sports needs are met. That, to me, sounds like a bad fundraising strategy on the long term for a public university that doesn't seem to be interested in going whole hog on athletics (and personally, I'm not sure it should, but then again, I'm of the mind that Cal should have its public funding increased and we all know that's not happening).

---

You do understand that what is being suggested is illegal, not simply the confides of a system?You can't take what becomes governmental funds dedicated for one purpose and use those funds for another purpose. I am not aware of state that permits this, and you can forget anyone trying to raise money succeeding once a state does that. This isn't a straw man, it's a dumb professor.

If you want to switch gears and say we should eliminate sports because in your opinion, the basic premise for supporting sports, donor participation in academics, is invalid, that is another discussion. But it is not the discussion that was raised by the Daily Cal. Not even close. This is called bait and switch, not straw man.

As for last sentence, Cal didn't used to have to rely on donors decades ago, and that has changed dramatically. How do you think this article is playing with donors who only support academics and think somehow these are funds going to put some football players up in a resort vs. people who do donate to sports and consider the bias of the article? Think about that in the actual confides of the reality of the situation

---

This thread has been an enjoyable one. It has fostered a discussion at a level that makes me proud to be a Cal graduate.

What Wife says is totally accurate. Money donated to Cal for one purpose cannot be diverted for another purpose. Money donated without designation of a particular purpose can be used for any purpose.

I do a lot of volunteer fundraising for the Cal Alumni Assn. One selling point is that the donor can require all donations to be used for a particular purpose. Such funds cannot be used for other purposes.

Personally I regularly make donations for scholarships and other academic purposes. The only money I give to Cal athletics is for FB season tickets and parking.
I would be up in arms if any of my donations to academics were diverted to athletics.
But I would be equally up in arms if some other Cal fan's donations to Cal FB were diverted to academics.

greater East Bay Cal Berkeley cultural understanding, politics, amusements, country music recs

I could be wrong, and I'm not taking sides,but.......
I'm pretty sure Cal had a winning record while staying at the Double Tree at Berkeley Marina.

I am taking sides, and I am certain that Cal's most successful sports (measured by wins and losses) have a vast majority of wins without staying at the Doubletree. LOL.

wifeisafurd said:

---

I did find that someone knew so much about the author somewhat creepy.

---

Since the article was publicity posted, learning about the author is not "creepy." It can help one understand the writer's background, which can better help understand the writer's viewpoint, biases, etc. For example, since the writer is a Freshman, just a couple of months at Cal, was a swimmer, has won awards for her writing, etc. all suggests to me that she does not have an inherant bias against Cal football that I might associate with the DC. Just my opinion.

I was a History major at Cal, and was taught that this type of research is SOP when understanding what someone publically writes. (For example, if you look at the Wikipedia article about Samual Adams, you'll see a good part of it calls out facts about his personal information & how that influenced his views about colonial independence from England). In this case, the writer is writing now, not 200 years ago, so perhaps my post struck you the way it did.

Others have pointed out that the writer's inexperience may have contributed to her not contacting Cal Athletics to get a response or give their input, which would have shown that the money for staying at the Claremont does not come from the University.

It took me 15 minutes using Google to get the info, all posted on public web sites. I usually agree with a lot of what you post, thought it might help to understand my motive in posting the writer's background info.

dbush518 said:

---

In some ways it is a frivolous expense to put the team up at a hotel before a home game. But it has been done for decades and every FBS team does it. If Cal should stop, how soon do you think it would take UCLA tp point that out to recruits. Young men that age want things like that. If Cal wants to play with the big boys it has to do what the big boys do. Like it or not, that's the way it is,

---

It's not frivolous at all! A lot of game preparation occurs through having the team together that is essential. You cannot compete in a Power 5 conference or be one of the 130 D-1A teams and not do it.

jackieridgle.
Why? Meetings can't be held in meeting rooms on campus?

Big Dog said:

---

Quote:

---

Maybe the writers and editors on college newspapers are developing their critical thinking skills on the job, so if they go into the profession later, they will have learned a few things and become wiser.

---

No doubt, but isn't it the job of the Senior (supposedly older and wiser) Editors to send a Rookie story back to re-write to flesh out more details/material?

---

Sure. Maybe the "Senior Editors" are also learning their job, though. Maybe everybody concerned at the Daily Cal reads this thread and it helps them.

Truth be told, I'm trying to give them the benefit of the doubt, but a lot of what passes for journalism nowadays comes from people who can't see outside their bubble. Maybe these DC people just go on to write similar articles for a certain local newspaper.

But maybe not... To Daily Cal staff: You're welcome!

Big Dog said:

---

Quote:

---

Maybe the writers and editors on college newspapers are developing their critical thinking skills on the job, so if they go into the profession later, they will have learned a few things and become wiser.

---

No doubt, but isn't it the job of the Senior (supposedly older and wiser) Editors to send a Rookie story back to re-write to flesh out more details/material?

---

I think vetting is very thin now given the new era of publish first and ask questions later. There's also a major push to produce/fill content ASAP. Mainstream print media and web have taken a hit regarding editorial control like copywriters proofing, basic vetting and all kinds of stuff. You see errors and mistakes all the time now. To expect a student newspaper to do what even major mainstream shops are struggling to do might be asking for a lot. Ideally senior vetting should happen but reality is something else.

Quote:

---

I think vetting is very thin now given the new era of publish first and ask questions later. There's also a major push to produce/fill content ASAP. Mainstream print media and web have taken a hit regarding editorial control like copywriters proofing, basic vetting and all kinds of stuff. You see errors and mistakes all the time now. To expect a student newspaper to do what even major mainstream shops are struggling to do might be asking for a lot. Ideally senior vetting should happen but reality is something else.

---

Of course you are correct, but that still doesn't mean that we shouldn't hold out for high standards from everything associated with Cal. Instead of joining the race to the journalistic bottom, why not try to raise the (critical thinking) standards? (It can only help their careers....)

Another Bear said:

---

Big Dog said:

---

Quote:

---

Maybe the writers and editors on college newspapers are developing their critical thinking skills on the job, so if they go into the profession later, they will have learned a few things and become wiser.

---

No doubt, but isn't it the job of the Senior (supposedly older and wiser) Editors to send a Rookie story back to re-write to flesh out more details/material?

---

I think vetting is very thin now given the new era of publish first and ask questions later. There's also a major push to produce/fill content ASAP. Mainstream print media and web have taken a hit regarding editorial control like copywriters proofing, basic vetting and all kinds of stuff. You see errors and mistakes all the time now. To expect a student newspaper to do what even major mainstream shops are struggling to do might be asking for a lot. Ideally senior vetting should happen but reality is something else.

---

So it is not happening makes is right. Hmmm. Roll over for stupidity.

bearchamp said:

---

I am taking sides, and I am certain that Cal's most successful sports (measured by wins and losses) have a vast majority of wins without staying at the Doubletree. LOL.

---

FYI....
Tedford's best years, as well as Cal's best years in forever......
2004 10-2
2006 10-3.

Pregame hotel.......... DOUBLE TREE @ BERKELEY MARINA

Oh.......
And Cal's worse season in modern history....
2001. 1-10

Pregame team hotel........... Claremont Hotel

Go Bears!!!

Bears2thDoc said:

---

Oh.......
And Cal's worse season in modern history....
2001. 1-10

Pregame team hotel........... Claremont Hotel

Go Bears!!!

---

Actually the 2013 season under Dykes would be the worst season at 1-11...with one win over Portland State (FCS) and zero wins over a FBS team. Holmoe's Bears beat Rutgers in 2001.

I don't know what hotel the Bears stayed in in '13.

I stand corrected.....

2013..... pretty sure, though not totally sure.....

Claremont Hotel

Go Bears!!!

After reading through this thread I have several thoughts and far too many posts I would like to quote.

First, the interrogation of the biases and background of the author of this piece in The Daily Californian has been excessive, aggressive, and insulting. I concur with others here who think the topic has every right to be discussed, regardless of the familiarity with the student with the campus. Claiming that this student needed to do research in how this is a common practice is gatekeeping which we should be above. Claiming the same for commenters here is dismissive and purposefully attempts to shut down discussion of the topic. I do not see this as an anti-athletics piece, rather as one that raises an important question: what do these stays actually do, and are they necessary to gain the results desired?

I would echo the suggestions that we should be looking at cost saving measures where ever possible in Athletics. The tradition of pre-game hotels is a long one for football and men's basketball when at home, but I agree is a waste of money, and this is a position I held when Tedford's teams were down at the Double Tree. There are hundreds of student-athletes at Cal who appear to be prepared and excel as a team and individuals without these accommodations, and it is silly that we assume that it is absolutely necessary for our two revenue sports to stay competitive, whether sports associated with higher socioeconomic backgrounds or not impact the assumptions of responsibility. Track and Field is a great comparison, as we often have two sport athletes on the Football and Track teams, yet only for one sport are they given this added privilege. Our women's basketball team only gets the privilege of a hotel when going to a conference tournament or the NCAA, and they are one of the more competitive teams year in and year out we have. There are even hundreds of students who wake earlier than the football team to get to Memorial Stadium and practice every Saturday morning and seem to do so on a regular basis, while getting all around praise for their performance later that day. The only cost these students incur for this task is that of doughnuts and some coffee.

As a dorm resident for two years and then holding an apartment across from the dorms my remaining years as an undergraduate, Friday nights before football games were rarely loud. Saturday nights were a different matter. I managed to wake before 5 am each Saturday morning my freshman year for my responsibilities every football gameday and seemed to have no issues with it.

Suggesting that removing this perk would lead to sniping of recruits I find silly. Are we truly trying to impress high school boys who think staying in a hotel is going to be the decision between schools? If so, our recruiting pitch has failed already, and we need to do a better job targeting students who understand what it means to be a Berkeley student and the humble mentality and hard work that comes with it. You're not a super star, and you have personal responsibilities to take care of. Set your alarm. If you don't trust yourself, have a teammate who will call you in the morning or knock on your door.

If the greatest need is that teams position groups still want to have early meetings, then I hesitate to understand what the investment in the Simpson High Performance Center was all about if the players cannot wake early and hold these position and team meetings at Memorial prior to the games (even early in the morning) rather than at a hotel.

RayofLight said:

---

After reading through this thread I have several thoughts and far too many posts I would like to quote.

First, the interrogation of the biases and background of the author of this piece in The Daily Californian has been excessive, aggressive, and insulting. I concur with others here who think the topic has every right to be discussed, regardless of the familiarity with the student with the campus. Claiming that this student needed to do research in how this is a common practice is gatekeeping which we should be above. Claiming the same for commenters here is dismissive and purposefully attempts to shut down discussion of the topic. I do not see this as an anti-athletics piece, rather as one that raises an important question: what do these stays actually do, and are they necessary to gain the results desired?

I would echo the suggestions that we should be looking at cost saving measures where ever possible in Athletics. The tradition of pre-game hotels is a long one for football and men's basketball when at home, but I agree is a waste of money, and this is a position I held when Tedford's teams were down at the Double Tree. There are hundreds of student-athletes at Cal who appear to be prepared and excel as a team and individuals without these accommodations, and it is silly that we assume that it is absolutely necessary for our two revenue sports to stay competitive, whether sports associated with higher socioeconomic backgrounds or not impact the assumptions of responsibility. Track and Field is a great comparison, as we often have two sport athletes on the Football and Track teams, yet only for one sport are they given this added privilege. Our women's basketball team only gets the privilege of a hotel when going to a conference tournament or the NCAA, and they are one of the more competitive teams year in and year out we have. There are even hundreds of students who wake earlier than the football team to get to Memorial Stadium and practice every Saturday morning and seem to do so on a regular basis, while getting all around praise for their performance later that day. The only cost these students incur for this task is that of doughnuts and some coffee.

As a dorm resident for two years and then holding an apartment across from the dorms my remaining years as an undergraduate, Friday nights before football games were rarely loud. Saturday nights were a different matter. I managed to wake before 5 am each Saturday morning my freshman year for my responsibilities every football gameday and seemed to have no issues with it.

Suggesting that removing this perk would lead to sniping of recruits I find silly. Are we truly trying to impress high school boys who think staying in a hotel is going to be the decision between schools? If so, our recruiting pitch has failed already, and we need to do a better job targeting students who understand what it means to be a Berkeley student and the humble mentality and hard work that comes with it. You're not a super star, and you have personal responsibilities to take care of. Set your alarm. If you don't trust yourself, have a teammate who will call you in the morning or knock on your door.

If the greatest need is that teams position groups still want to have early meetings, then I hesitate to understand what the investment in the Simpson High Performance Center was all about if the players cannot wake early and hold these position and team meetings at Memorial prior to the games (even early in the morning) rather than at a hotel.

---

Ray, you must understand that it's not just the hotel matter that opposing coaches will use. They will gather a list of negative things about Cal and then end it with, "Hell, they even leave you in your dorm room the night before the game. How you gonna get yourself and your team right when you're alone like that?"

We're talking about high school kids who don't know who they are. Kids who have been coddled and expect to get whatever they want and hadn't even thought of. The vast majority of them have their coaches as the main male influence in their lives.

And, the fact is that the night before, in the hotel, is not only for game plan review, but for team building, too. If you want these guys to play together, you've got to GET them together.

Rushinbear said:

---

RayofLight said:

---

After reading through this thread I have several thoughts and far too many posts I would like to quote.

First, the interrogation of the biases and background of the author of this piece in The Daily Californian has been excessive, aggressive, and insulting. I concur with others here who think the topic has every right to be discussed, regardless of the familiarity with the student with the campus. Claiming that this student needed to do research in how this is a common practice is gatekeeping which we should be above. Claiming the same for commenters here is dismissive and purposefully attempts to shut down discussion of the topic. I do not see this as an anti-athletics piece, rather as one that raises an important question: what do these stays actually do, and are they necessary to gain the results desired?

I would echo the suggestions that we should be looking at cost saving measures where ever possible in Athletics. The tradition of pre-game hotels is a long one for football and men's basketball when at home, but I agree is a waste of money, and this is a position I held when Tedford's teams were down at the Double Tree. There are hundreds of student-athletes at Cal who appear to be prepared and excel as a team and individuals without these accommodations, and it is silly that we assume that it is absolutely necessary for our two revenue sports to stay competitive, whether sports associated with higher socioeconomic backgrounds or not impact the assumptions of responsibility. Track and Field is a great comparison, as we often have two sport athletes on the Football and Track teams, yet only for one sport are they given this added privilege. Our women's basketball team only gets the privilege of a hotel when going to a conference tournament or the NCAA, and they are one of the more competitive teams year in and year out we have. There are even hundreds of students who wake earlier than the football team to get to Memorial Stadium and practice every Saturday morning and seem to do so on a regular basis, while getting all around praise for their performance later that day. The only cost these students incur for this task is that of doughnuts and some coffee.

As a dorm resident for two years and then holding an apartment across from the dorms my remaining years as an undergraduate, Friday nights before football games were rarely loud. Saturday nights were a different matter. I managed to wake before 5 am each Saturday morning my freshman year for my responsibilities every football gameday and seemed to have no issues with it.

Suggesting that removing this perk would lead to sniping of recruits I find silly. Are we truly trying to impress high school boys who think staying in a hotel is going to be the decision between schools? If so, our recruiting pitch has failed already, and we need to do a better job targeting students who understand what it means to be a Berkeley student and the humble mentality and hard work that comes with it. You're not a super star, and you have personal responsibilities to take care of. Set your alarm. If you don't trust yourself, have a teammate who will call you in the morning or knock on your door.

If the greatest need is that teams position groups still want to have early meetings, then I hesitate to understand what the investment in the Simpson High Performance Center was all about if the players cannot wake early and hold these position and team meetings at Memorial prior to the games (even early in the morning) rather than at a hotel.

---

Ray, you must understand that it's not just the hotel matter that opposing coaches will use. They will gather a list of negative things about Cal and then end it with, "Hell, they even leave you in your dorm room the night before the game. How you gonna get yourself and your team right when you're alone like that?"

We're talking about high school kids who don't know who they are. Kids who have been coddled and expect to get whatever they want and hadn't even thought of. The vast majority of them have their coaches as the main male influence in their lives.

And, the fact is that the night before, in the hotel, is not only for game plan review, but for team building, too. If you want these guys to play together, you've got to GET them together.

---

I remember John Madden talking on the raisin about having the Raiders stay at local hotels the night before home games for exactly all the reasons being mentioned in this thread.
I wonder if that practice is still followed today.
Be that as it may.
What I am hearing from the discussion on this thread is:
1 there are some good reasons for following the practice of having the team stay in hotels the night before a home game.
2. This practice is followed by most if not all Div 1 FB coaches.
3. There are a number of posters (some who played intercollegiate sports at Cal) who feel the practice is unnecessary
4. There are some posters who feel the practice is too expensive (even though the expense is borne primarily by specific donors)
5. None of the people arguing against the practice are now or have been Div 1 FB coaches.

To me if the coach believes it is important and if the majority (or even a large minority) of similarly situated coaches have made the same decision, we cannot say the coach's decision is wrong or stupid (especially if some one else is picking up the check..or most of it) The coach should be allowed to follow the custom and practice.

To me the people arguing against the practice sound a lot like parents I have heard discussing the proper way to raise a child.
"I did it this way and it worked so every parent should follow my advice. "

Q: When dealing with an elite academic institution who regularly loses recruits because of the perception it is not serious about football, how do you improve the recruiting and performance of the team?

A: By cutting an expenditure made by every other team in Division 1 football and felt to be critical by the coaches to maximize the performance of the team on game day.

Yup that sounds like a winner. We are clearly just spending our way into losses.

bearchamp said:

---

jackieridgle.
Why? Meetings can't be held in meeting rooms on campus?

---

Said by someone who clearly has not been through the process. For example, it is a noon game. You want to control what they eat (different units eat different things) and have meetings. Okay, you send them around the SAHPC and then move them to the eating area where specific units are fed differently, they have to get back to their dorms or living situations (often apartments in Oakland hills) really late, then they have to get up early to beat the traffic and street closures, find a place to park (which by the way doesn't exist since it is all donor parking) near there stadium and be in the locker at approximately 9:30. And there coaches get to run around trying to finds out where every player is, who car pooled with who, all for a 100 plus players arriving at different times, rather than focus on football. So you get a tired players coming into a logistics nightmare.

The hotel visit is regimented. After meetings and food, in the same place, they walk five minutes to a movie for 90 minutes (or some players choose to walk 5 minutes to rooms to study), lights out at 10:30 (as opposed to probably after midnight under your approach), they get up at 6:30, in suits, eat at 7:00, buses at 8:30, where everyone is accounted for, with the police escort at 9:30 to the lockers, and the well rested players get dressed and prepare. Tell me how this happens under your approach? What you missing is how much of a controlled environment is necessary to make this all happen.

For a noon time game, or even early afternoon, I can see a hotel stay the night before for organizational reasons. However if it's a 6 or 7 p.m. game at home, a 10 a.m. call time at CMS is reasonable. A change up from othrodoxy and routine isn't a bad thing. It might actually help.

If anything, the stay at a hotel the night before is demarcation/signifier of professional athletics. It's not a coincidence it only happens in the revenue sports of FB and MBB. Does it happen for WBB? I'm not saying it's good or bad but at least know the context and other underlying factors.

p.s. as to the business of the University of California...it's to ask why and then figure out how, etc. There are no dumb questions and a student questioning things is exactly what an university should be proud of. But threaten FB and yeah...it's just like the SEC.