If you need a sixth man @CalMBBall, @Kd_2Three has got you covered.
— Cal Football (@CalFootball) August 18, 2021
The Bear Olympics roll on with a post-practice game of knockout. #GoBears pic.twitter.com/FC9mmXuTDu
Not sure if correct board...
4,832 Views |
42 Replies |
Last: 3 yr ago by SFCityBear
pretty good form!
how tall is he? don't we need a stretch 4?
how tall is he? don't we need a stretch 4?
HoopDreams said:
pretty good form!
how tall is he? don't we need a stretch 4?
He is listed at 6'6" but that might be understated for football and his listed basketball height would likely be higher. He was originally a sought after basketball recruit. Football was his second sport. The muscle he has added for football plus his long wingspan would help him play bigger.
From his bio: "Earned All-State and 4A Conference (Northern Virginia) Player of the Year honors as a 2015-16 senior when he averaged 19.2 points per game for a team that finished 23-5 overall and reached the quarterfinals of the (Virginia) 4A state playoffs"
He would not cost Fox a scholarship. He could join the team after football season ended. The biggest issue is his agent might be worried about injury hurting his draft stock.
We need a 5, desperately, and we need a 1, almost as desperately. Next year, we will need a 4 of any kind, stretch or not, possibly both kinds. Plugging big holes is an ongoing task for our recruiters. My memory is not so good, but I think the last good footballer we had on the BB team was Tony Gonzalez. Before him, Joe Kapp. I'd take either one today in a heartbeat.HoopDreams said:
pretty good form!
how tall is he? don't we need a stretch 4?
SFCityBear
I'd take Tony Gonzales at his current age.
Most famously, Tony played in a Big Game during the day, then came off the bench for hoops that night.
Me too. He's only 45. He did not play basketball in his senior year. Maybe he has a year of eligibility left.stu said:
I'd take Tony Gonzales at his current age.
SFCityBear
Yeah, two sports and two games in one day is unreal. And whatever happened to guys like that? Guys who played 2 or 3 sports in college and played them at a high level. Bob Albo and Earl Robinson played both baseball and basketball. Clarence Johnson competed in the high jump for Cal and also played basketball. Craig Morton, Mike Epstein, and Steve Bartkowski played both football and baseball. Grover Klemmer, Jack Yerman, Isaac Curtis, and Khalfani Muhammad all played football and ran track at Cal. It is becoming a rarity.Jeff82 said:
Most famously, Tony played in a Big Game during the day, then came off the bench for hoops that night.
SFCityBear
Wes Howell
Ah, Clarence Johnson, perennial starter and non-factor in our games against UCLA with Kareem (Lew). The only time we came close to beating them was the game where we played a stall well into the second half.SFCityBear said:Yeah, two sports and two games in one day is unreal. And whatever happened to guys like that? Guys who played 2 or 3 sports in college and played them at a high level. Bob Albo and Earl Robinson played both baseball and basketball. Clarence Johnson competed in the high jump for Cal and also played basketball. Craig Morton, Mike Epstein, and Steve Bartkowski played both football and baseball. Grover Klemmer, Jack Yerman, Isaac Curtis, and Khalfani Muhammad all played football and ran track at Cal. It is becoming a rarity.Jeff82 said:
Most famously, Tony played in a Big Game during the day, then came off the bench for hoops that night.
Jackie Jensen, Earl Robinson, Dave Maggard, Wayne Stewart, Tom Blanchfield, Bernie Simpson, Loren Hawley, Wesley Walker ...
Richmondbear2 said:
Wes Howell
He would be the opposite of Howell, who exhausted his basketball eligibility, played a single year of football in Kapp's first year, made some amazing catches in the 82 Big Game and then got drafted by the Jets and had an NFL career.
I seriously hope Fox extends an offer. We need as many things that can interest the fans as possible.
I wish Cal could do some things like this to attract more students to the games. To design an arena for a major college sport and make the student rooting section thinner, wider, and smaller was inappropriate, if we hoped to encourage students to come to the games and support the team. We need to get that support back to replenish the alumni and adult fans who will be buying the tickets in the future.calumnus said:Richmondbear2 said:
Wes Howell
He would be the opposite of Howell, who exhausted his basketball eligibility, played a single year of football in Kapp's first year, made some amazing catches in the 82 Big Game and then got drafted by the Jets and had an NFL career.
I seriously hope Fox extends an offer. We need as many things that can interest the fans as possible.
SFCityBear
SFCityBear said:I wish Cal could do some things like this to attract more students to the games. To design an arena for a major college sport and make the student rooting section thinner, wider, and smaller was inappropriate, if we hoped to encourage students to come to the games and support the team. We need to get that support back to replenish the alumni and adult fans who will be buying the tickets in the future.calumnus said:Richmondbear2 said:
Wes Howell
He would be the opposite of Howell, who exhausted his basketball eligibility, played a single year of football in Kapp's first year, made some amazing catches in the 82 Big Game and then got drafted by the Jets and had an NFL career.
I seriously hope Fox extends an offer. We need as many things that can interest the fans as possible.
agree. one of the worst thing cal admin has done was convert the store to an exclusive (sterile) reception room and cut the sideline student section into 3 parts to put the two access doors. It's been a failure on all levels, including on the revenue side
It was bad enough that they added the 2 rows of courtside seats and took out rows of student benches.
Although it would cost money, Cal should close off both doorways and restore "the bench"
HoopDreams said:SFCityBear said:I wish Cal could do some things like this to attract more students to the games. To design an arena for a major college sport and make the student rooting section thinner, wider, and smaller was inappropriate, if we hoped to encourage students to come to the games and support the team. We need to get that support back to replenish the alumni and adult fans who will be buying the tickets in the future.calumnus said:Richmondbear2 said:
Wes Howell
He would be the opposite of Howell, who exhausted his basketball eligibility, played a single year of football in Kapp's first year, made some amazing catches in the 82 Big Game and then got drafted by the Jets and had an NFL career.
I seriously hope Fox extends an offer. We need as many things that can interest the fans as possible.
agree. one of the worst thing cal admin has done was convert the store to an exclusive (sterile) reception room and cut the sideline student section into 3 parts to put the two access doors. It's been a failure on all levels, including on the revenue side
It was bad enough that they added the 2 rows of courtside seats and took out rows of student benches.
Although it would cost money, Cal should close off both doorways and restore "the bench"
Agreed. And a lively student section creates more desirable seating for the alumni opposite of them (versus a sleepy Haas).
I had forgotten they had messed with the Bench. I refer to long ago when the rooting section was about 3 sections wide, and went from floor to roof, with the straw hat band in the first few rows in the center. The rooting section was loud, and I do mean loud. I remember going many years later (still before Haas) when my cousin was a song girl, and got me a couple of tickets in the rooting section, and after I left the game, I was practically deaf, it took an hour for my hearing to fully recover.HoopDreams said:SFCityBear said:I wish Cal could do some things like this to attract more students to the games. To design an arena for a major college sport and make the student rooting section thinner, wider, and smaller was inappropriate, if we hoped to encourage students to come to the games and support the team. We need to get that support back to replenish the alumni and adult fans who will be buying the tickets in the future.calumnus said:Richmondbear2 said:
Wes Howell
He would be the opposite of Howell, who exhausted his basketball eligibility, played a single year of football in Kapp's first year, made some amazing catches in the 82 Big Game and then got drafted by the Jets and had an NFL career.
I seriously hope Fox extends an offer. We need as many things that can interest the fans as possible.
agree. one of the worst thing cal admin has done was convert the store to an exclusive (sterile) reception room and cut the sideline student section into 3 parts to put the two access doors. It's been a failure on all levels, including on the revenue side
It was bad enough that they added the 2 rows of courtside seats and took out rows of student benches.
Although it would cost money, Cal should close off both doorways and restore "the bench"
I couldn't find a photo (I'll need Bearister for that) but, here is a video from the High School Tournament of Champions in 1966, and at about 1:23, it shows a high school rooting section in Harmon, floor to roof, about two sections wide, and some comments about that. You might enjoy the basketball too. It was pretty good. The pace was fast, and they were even knocking down threes when they only counted for two
points:
SFCityBear
Students don't come. End of story.
Build a winning team and they will come.
joe amos yaks said:
Build a winning team and they will come.
I went to games as a student when Kutchen was our coach.
I think the key is returning the student section to being a difference maker. As a student, I felt like we could alter the outcome of the game. Maybe get in the head of an opposing player. Even if Cal was not very good, we might pull an upset with a big assist from the student section. It was therefore your duty to go to the games and help our poor team. More than anything, it was fun.
The Bench needs to be extended to the courtside, forming one unified section opposite of the TV cameras, the announcers, the chairbscks and the floor seating. The areas behind the baskets should be general admission, student overflow, young alumni, neighborhood kids, old alumni who don't mind standing and making some noise.
When Haas becomes a "scene" alumni will pay more for season tickets, recruits will want to come. Yes, a good coach is the other piece, but we need both, and the changes to the student section were a huge mistake that needs to be reversed.
Not going to happen. Cal wants the money from Premium seats. The students cant even fill the few rows they have. Thats why the section was reduced. They tried free food, games etc. nothing worked. Different students now than 20;years ago. Lots of foreign students who are not interested. Yeah, when Jason Kidd was here more came but still not enough to fill a whole side. Times have changed. They could fill the whole place with standing screaming people and it would not cause the current team to win more games. Talent wins games. We don't pay players. The good ones get paid and go to those places. Its not like Pete Newell could turn you and me into 5 Star players.
Just my opinion and observations. The whole area under the south baskets is for student overflow. No one is there. At Duke it would be full because the south has a different set of values and priorities and type of student
Just my opinion and observations. The whole area under the south baskets is for student overflow. No one is there. At Duke it would be full because the south has a different set of values and priorities and type of student
We could use Cal's competitive admissions by awarding extra points to those who have displayed exceptional feats of fandom.
But it would help if we could put on a better show than losing to mid-majors in low-scoring games.
But it would help if we could put on a better show than losing to mid-majors in low-scoring games.
oskidunker said:
Not going to happen. Cal wants the money from Premium seats. The students cant even fill the few rows they have. Thats why the section was reduced. They tried free food, games etc. nothing worked. Different students now than 20;years ago. Lots of foreign students who are not interested. Yeah, when Jason Kidd was here more came but still not enough to fill a whole side. Times have changed. They could fill the whole place with standing screaming people and it would not cause the current team to win more games. Talent wins games. We don't pay players. The good ones get paid and go to those places. Its not like Pete Newell could turn you and me into 5 Star players.
Just my opinion and observations. The whole area under the south baskets is for student overflow. No one is there. At Duke it would be full because the south has a different set of values and priorities and type of student
I think it is chicken and egg. We used to fill the student section when there was lots of room for students, it was more of a happening, a place to be on a Thursday night. And we made a difference.
A winning team with a roust student section will create more demand for premium seats and thus more income even if the seats aren't as good.
The state the sends the most students to Duke? New York. 2nd? New Jersey. On the East Cosst Duke is viewed more as an Ivy , comparable to Penn, Brown, or Cornell, that has a better basketball team and just happens to be in North Carolina.
I too, went to games as a student when Kutchen was coach. Back then a student could show up 15 minutes before tip off and get a courtside seat. Maybe 2000 people attended games that weren't against UCLA or Furd (which were packed with 6000).calumnus said:joe amos yaks said:
Build a winning team and they will come.
I went to games as a student when Kutchen was our coach.
I think the key is returning the student section to being a difference maker. As a student, I felt like we could alter the outcome of the game. Maybe get in the head of an opposing player. Even if Cal was not very good, we might pull an upset with a big assist from the student section. It was therefore your duty to go to the games and help our poor team. More than anything, it was fun.
The Bench needs to be extended to the courtside, forming one unified section opposite of the TV cameras, the announcers, the chairbscks and the floor seating. The areas behind the baskets should be general admission, student overflow, young alumni, neighborhood kids, old alumni who don't mind standing and making some noise.
When Haas becomes a "scene" alumni will pay more for season tickets, recruits will want to come. Yes, a good coach is the other piece, but we need both, and the changes to the student section were a huge mistake that needs to be reversed.
From my observation/recollection, paying season ticket holders have generally been more resilient to attendance fluctuations, but by and large they correlate to what the students are doing. Attendance is not a uniquely student issue.
I agree with HD, that moving the student section around to cater to some premium seating was a huge mistake, but my sense is that is NOT the primary reason why students aren't coming. I think it is your point about being a difference maker. That was fun! Otherwise, the dance cam, poor concessions and a losing team just don't cut it for students or anyone.
Personally, I think the biggest factor impacting students was scheduling away from the Thurs 7p, Sat game schedule. As a student (and I was one the bball fans), most game attendance involved. "Hey it's Thursday evening. We just finished dinner and haven't started partying yet, so let's kill a couple hours at Harmon. When tip off is at 6, we're still eating and if it as at 8 or 9 - it conflicts with party schedule.
I think the attitude of young people towards school sports has changed significantly in the last 15 years or so in California, starting in high school.
Back in the day, "everybody" went to the high school game on Friday nights, if only for the dance afterward, and the basketball games were packed if the team was any good.
That has changed dramatically in the Bay Area, and in much of California, and since Cal students do reflect the state, it's not surprising the college kids don't care that much about sports either.
On top of that, Cal is now so competitive academically that getting in requires a huge focus on school and grades, and doing well demands long hours of study (something I did only intermittently).
So the student body a) comes in without a background in attending games in high school; and b) needs to study much more than in the past.
Back in the day, "everybody" went to the high school game on Friday nights, if only for the dance afterward, and the basketball games were packed if the team was any good.
That has changed dramatically in the Bay Area, and in much of California, and since Cal students do reflect the state, it's not surprising the college kids don't care that much about sports either.
On top of that, Cal is now so competitive academically that getting in requires a huge focus on school and grades, and doing well demands long hours of study (something I did only intermittently).
So the student body a) comes in without a background in attending games in high school; and b) needs to study much more than in the past.
These are key points and I'll add a third (somewhat biased by my own two millennials): many kids keep playing sports in college that they played in high school. This could be at the club level (in which case there are also practices and occasional travel) or intramurals. These kids are oriented towards sports participation, not viewing.ClayK said:
I think the attitude of young people towards school sports has changed significantly in the last 15 years or so in California, starting in high school.
Back in the day, "everybody" went to the high school game on Friday nights, if only for the dance afterward, and the basketball games were packed if the team was any good.
That has changed dramatically in the Bay Area, and in much of California, and since Cal students do reflect the state, it's not surprising the college kids don't care that much about sports either.
On top of that, Cal is now so competitive academically that getting in requires a huge focus on school and grades, and doing well demands long hours of study (something I did only intermittently).
So the student body a) comes in without a background in attending games in high school; and b) needs to study much more than in the past.
ClayK said:
I think the attitude of young people towards school sports has changed significantly in the last 15 years or so in California, starting in high school.
Back in the day, "everybody" went to the high school game on Friday nights, if only for the dance afterward, and the basketball games were packed if the team was any good.
That has changed dramatically in the Bay Area, and in much of California, and since Cal students do reflect the state, it's not surprising the college kids don't care that much about sports either.
On top of that, Cal is now so competitive academically that getting in requires a huge focus on school and grades, and doing well demands long hours of study (something I did only intermittently).
So the student body a) comes in without a background in attending games in high school; and b) needs to study much more than in the past.
Even when Cal was good (Snyder years for me) it was difficult to convince fellow students to go to games except for the Big Game.
You were either a fan of sports or you weren't and most students weren't. Even the ones who were sometimes missed games because they had a midterm or some other academic-related conflict. Some students were even downright hostile to the presence of athletes on the Cal campus. I remember outright conflict between some Cal football players and students at Clark-Kerr when some students allegedly took food from the football team's table.
Jason Kidd managed to engage the larger community, but that was unusual. Even then, I couldn't convince most of my fellow students to come to games with me until his second year when the hype level was off the charts. It was usually just three of us from the entire floor of my dorm.
When I was in school most of the crowd at sporting events, especially football, was comprised of Greeks. Not that many Cal students were Greeks (about 20% according to the stats) and I am guessing the numbers are even lower now given shifting demographics. Greeks are predominantly upper class WASPs and Cal's student population is gradually moving away from that.
Also, I have to say, the Greeks weren't particularly nice or accommodating to the rest of the student body either. One time we arrived at Memorial early and found a good place to sit. Some frat guys told us that area was reserved so we moved and then they said that area was also reserved. One of my friends (a bigger guy) started to protest that you can't save entire sections of seats for people who aren't there but we saw we were outnumbered. It left a sour taste in my mouth, especially when already-drunk sorority girls finally showed up to sit next to us and proceeded to be annoying by talking to each other instead of watching the game, yelling loudly in our ears, and using us for balance when they attempted to stand.
For students who aren't already interested in sporting events and who aren't interested in Greek culture it becomes a hard sell to want to stand in the sun all afternoon with a bunch of drunk frat guys watching Cal lose again. They can do that back at the dorm for free with a better view and a textbook cracked open.
The only cure for this problem is winning. Winning generates excitement. I hate to think of Cal fans as bandwagon fans, but the truth is that most of them are - especially the students. And it's not just Cal either. I met a guy who got his MS at Stanford and when I told him I went to Cal he said: "Yeah, I never got into that rivalry thing. I was only there two years and focused on my degree." That describes 80%+ of the Cal (and Stanford) student body. We're not a schools like Auburn or Alabama, where a lot of people choose which school to attend based on the success of the football team.
Students will attend games if its fun. Losing isn't fun.
dimitrig said:ClayK said:
I think the attitude of young people towards school sports has changed significantly in the last 15 years or so in California, starting in high school.
Back in the day, "everybody" went to the high school game on Friday nights, if only for the dance afterward, and the basketball games were packed if the team was any good.
That has changed dramatically in the Bay Area, and in much of California, and since Cal students do reflect the state, it's not surprising the college kids don't care that much about sports either.
On top of that, Cal is now so competitive academically that getting in requires a huge focus on school and grades, and doing well demands long hours of study (something I did only intermittently).
So the student body a) comes in without a background in attending games in high school; and b) needs to study much more than in the past.
Even when Cal was good (Snyder years for me) it was difficult to convince fellow students to go to games except for the Big Game.
You were either a fan of sports or you weren't and most students weren't. Even the ones who were sometimes missed games because they had a midterm or some other academic-related conflict. Some students were even downright hostile to the presence of athletes on the Cal campus. I remember outright conflict between some Cal football players and students at Clark-Kerr when some students allegedly took food from the football team's table.
Jason Kidd managed to engage the larger community, but that was unusual. Even then, I couldn't convince most of my fellow students to come to games with me until his second year when the hype level was off the charts. It was usually just three of us from the entire floor of my dorm.
When I was in school most of the crowd at sporting events, especially football, was comprised of Greeks. Not that many Cal students were Greeks (about 20% according to the stats) and I am guessing the numbers are even lower now given shifting demographics. Greeks are predominantly upper class WASPs and Cal's student population is gradually moving away from that.
Also, I have to say, the Greeks weren't particularly nice or accommodating to the rest of the student body either. One time we arrived at Memorial early and found a good place to sit. Some frat guys told us that area was reserved so we moved and then they said that area was also reserved. One of my friends (a bigger guy) started to protest that you can't save entire sections of seats for people who aren't there but we saw we were outnumbered. It left a sour taste in my mouth, especially when already-drunk sorority girls finally showed up to sit next to us and proceeded to be annoying by talking to each other instead of watching the game, yelling loudly in our ears, and using us for balance when they attempted to stand.
For students who aren't already interested in sporting events and who aren't interested in Greek culture it becomes a hard sell to want to stand in the sun all afternoon with a bunch of drunk frat guys watching Cal lose again. They can do that back at the dorm for free with a better view and a textbook cracked open.
The only cure for this problem is winning. Winning generates excitement. I hate to think of Cal fans as bandwagon fans, but the truth is that most of them are - especially the students. And it's not just Cal either. I met a guy who got his MS at Stanford and when I told him I went to Cal he said: "Yeah, I never got into that rivalry thing. I was only there two years and focused on my degree." That describes 80%+ of the Cal (and Stanford) student body. We're not a schools like Auburn or Alabama, where a lot of people choose which school to attend based on the success of the football team.
Students will attend games if its fun. Losing isn't fun.
Cal's undergraduate student body is 20,000. Our student section seats 7,000 and we regularly get 5,000 students for football? That's pretty good. That is still 1 in 4.
For basketball Harmon accommodated 1,300 students right on the court (and more if we squeezed). The Bench is now 900 in a stadium that is more than twice as big? And split up and moved back from the court with chairs in between.
So really, we just need 1,000 basketball fans out of 20,000 undergrads. I think the key is making them feel like they are part of the game, "the sixth man" as we used to say. The floor chairs really prevent the yell leader from getting in front of the students and leading yells and prevent the students from really getting after opposing players. It is just a "viewing ticket" and for a losing team. "No one else goes, so why should I?"
I went to Michigan for an MBA in the late '70s, lived three blocks from the stadium, and only went to a couple of games each year. My reasons were the same as your MS example from Stanfurd. I suspect that anybody on this forum who went to grad school will agree that your attitude is different from undergrad - especially if you're doing it on your own nickel. It[s not necessarily that you work harder, but you are more aware of prioritizing your time.dimitrig said:.ClayK said:
I think the attitude of young people towards school sports has changed significantly in the last 15 years or so in California, starting in high school.
Back in the day, "everybody" went to the high school game on Friday nights, if only for the dance afterward, and the basketball games were packed if the team was any good.
That has changed dramatically in the Bay Area, and in much of California, and since Cal students do reflect the state, it's not surprising the college kids don't care that much about sports either.
On top of that, Cal is now so competitive academically that getting in requires a huge focus on school and grades, and doing well demands long hours of study (something I did only intermittently).
So the student body a) comes in without a background in attending games in high school; and b) needs to study much more than in the past.
.
.
The only cure for this problem is winning. Winning generates excitement. I hate to think of Cal fans as bandwagon fans, but the truth is that most of them are - especially the students. And it's not just Cal either. I met a guy who got his MS at Stanford and when I told him I went to Cal he said: "Yeah, I never got into that rivalry thing. I was only there two years and focused on my degree." That describes 80%+ of the Cal (and Stanford) student body. We're not a schools like Auburn or Alabama, where a lot of people choose which school to attend based on the success of the football team.
Students will attend games if its fun. Losing isn't fun.
HearstMining said:I went to Michigan for an MBA in the late '70s, lived three blocks from the stadium, and only went to a couple of games each year. My reasons were the same as your MS example from Stanfurd. I suspect that anybody on this forum who went to grad school will agree that your attitude is different from undergrad - especially if you're doing it on your own nickel. It[s not necessarily that you work harder, but you are more aware of prioritizing your time.dimitrig said:.ClayK said:
I think the attitude of young people towards school sports has changed significantly in the last 15 years or so in California, starting in high school.
Back in the day, "everybody" went to the high school game on Friday nights, if only for the dance afterward, and the basketball games were packed if the team was any good.
That has changed dramatically in the Bay Area, and in much of California, and since Cal students do reflect the state, it's not surprising the college kids don't care that much about sports either.
On top of that, Cal is now so competitive academically that getting in requires a huge focus on school and grades, and doing well demands long hours of study (something I did only intermittently).
So the student body a) comes in without a background in attending games in high school; and b) needs to study much more than in the past.
.
.
The only cure for this problem is winning. Winning generates excitement. I hate to think of Cal fans as bandwagon fans, but the truth is that most of them are - especially the students. And it's not just Cal either. I met a guy who got his MS at Stanford and when I told him I went to Cal he said: "Yeah, I never got into that rivalry thing. I was only there two years and focused on my degree." That describes 80%+ of the Cal (and Stanford) student body. We're not a schools like Auburn or Alabama, where a lot of people choose which school to attend based on the success of the football team.
Students will attend games if its fun. Losing isn't fun.
Exactly. I went to Columbia for grad when they set the NCAA record for consecutive losses in football (and that is playing in the Ivy League and FCS patsies). The basketball team was worse. Too much time studying or exploring NYC to bother with the sports teams.
You had to go to Columbia to understand how impressive it was Kyle Smith having a winning record, drawing crowds, and in his final year taking them to 25-10 and then beating UC Irvine to win the CIT.
What evidence is there that today's Cal student has to study harder than those in the past? Give me one shred... Unless you consider staring at an effing cell phone screen to be study time...
I buy some of the other arguments about declining attendance, but not this one...
I buy some of the other arguments about declining attendance, but not this one...
I graduated.Chapman_is_Gone said:
What evidence is there that today's Cal student has to study harder than those in the past? Give me one shred...
Well, I studied my ass off, yet I never missed a football game.stu said:I graduated.Chapman_is_Gone said:
What evidence is there that today's Cal student has to study harder than those in the past? Give me one shred...
I didn't study much (and I still regret it).Chapman_is_Gone said:
Well, I studied my ass off.
By far the worst example was Zoology 10 which I took to fulfill a breadth requirement. The first lecture was pretty dull and I thought I'd heard it all before. But I did pick up that the grade would be based only on the final exam (common at that time). So I skipped the next lecture, then the next, and so on. I showed up at Harmon Gym at the scheduled time for the final and was surprised to see nobody except a TA, who asked: "Where's your paper?" A short and awkward discussion revealed that sometime in the middle of the quarter the prof had decided to give a take-home final. So I sat down and wrote what I could remember from high school biology class 5 or 6 years before. Fortunately that was enough for a C.
I also put off the required second reading & composition course till my last quarter. At that time (1970) we experienced rioting serious enough to force many classes off campus. So I got a break and ended up having to write only one paper. Being a science major I did what I could, when my paper was returned the only mark was: "C- with D+ tendencies"
Chapman_is_Gone said:
What evidence is there that today's Cal student has to study harder than those in the past? Give me one shred... Unless you consider staring at an effing cell phone screen to be study time...
I buy some of the other arguments about declining attendance, but not this one...
Overall quality of the students has increased over time.
"The crown jewel of the University of California system, Berkeley is arguably one of the most selective public universities in the country. In 1999, it denied over 70 percent of its applicants. But the competition to get into the University of California's flagship campus wasn't always so steep. Before 1960, 15 percent of California's high school graduates were eligible to attend the school, and until 1964, the school admitted anyone who met its requirements."
"Throughout the 1970s, competition for admission at Berkeley gradually increased. By the early 80s, the school was denying nearly half of its applicants, and by the end of that decade, it was denying almost two thirds of those who applied."
(Reference: History of Admissions at UC Berkeley)
Now the number accepted is something like 17%.
More selective means smarter kids so they should have it EASIER, right?
Well, no, because a lot of classes at Berkeley grade on a curve which means stiffer competition to get good grades. That means more studying for a lot of students.
It also means that kids who developed strong study habits in high school (in order to get in) often continue those habits in college.
But this probably means that the average Cal student accepted during this period was BETTER at studying and did so more efficiently - which sort of supports Chapmans pointdimitrig said:Chapman_is_Gone said:
What evidence is there that today's Cal student has to study harder than those in the past? Give me one shred... Unless you consider staring at an effing cell phone screen to be study time...
I buy some of the other arguments about declining attendance, but not this one...
Overall quality of the students has increased over time.
"The crown jewel of the University of California system, Berkeley is arguably one of the most selective public universities in the country. In 1999, it denied over 70 percent of its applicants. But the competition to get into the University of California's flagship campus wasn't always so steep. Before 1960, 15 percent of California's high school graduates were eligible to attend the school, and until 1964, the school admitted anyone who met its requirements."
"Throughout the 1970s, competition for admission at Berkeley gradually increased. By the early 80s, the school was denying nearly half of its applicants, and by the end of that decade, it was denying almost two thirds of those who applied."
(Reference: History of Admissions at UC Berkeley)
Now the number accepted is something like 17%.
More selective means smarter kids so they should have it EASIER, right?
Well, no, because a lot of classes at Berkeley grade on a curve which means stiffer competition to get good grades. That means more studying for a lot of students.
It also means that kids who developed strong study habits in high school (in order to get in) often continue those habits in college.
Along the Stu model, I had a higher GPA at Cal than I did in high school (majored in EECS and Applied Math). And I attended almost every Basketball, Football and a few other games and played intramural sports and drank lots of beer and had fun.
Featured Stories
See All
Cal Football Weekly Tuesday Presser
by Jim McGill
Mendoza Named ACC Quarterback Of The Week
by Cal Athletics
Bears Slip By Sac State, 83-77
by Jim McGill