4thGenCal said:
Chabbear said:
The article mentions a practice facility which was a thread last week. Is the Practice facility real or a Chimera: (a thing that is hoped or wished for but in fact is illusory or impossible to achieve.)
Its a real topic and the AD is leading the push - several factors in discussion now from scope (location/size/serving just basketball or additional sports via weightroom/training facilities etc) and thus the variance in amount of needed funds to raise. Desperately needed for both basketball teams to have any lasting ability to be conference/nationally competitive. Only conference program without one and just one of four nationally as well for D1.
4th Gen Cal and Others,
I'm curious if you can answer this question.
Why is there virtually zero information on key Cal sports issues communicated from the Athletic Department to die-hard fans? I get the sense that heavy donors get some information if they pry, but why can't all Cal fans have access to quality information? Why hide things?
Why not have a monthly "State of the Athletic Department" interview / newsletter / podcast, where issues are discussed, alternatives are considered, and fan question are addressed and answered if possible? I can think of 6 questions right off the top of my head that I've NEVER heard the Cal athletic department discuss with Cal fans:
1) Status of a practice facility for the basketball team, and an open discussion of cost estimates for everything from a bare bones facility to a spare-no-expense facility.
2) An open discussion of Learfield's benefits and costs. Is the AD even aware that there is a perception among Cal fans that the game day experience has deteriorated and the band doesn't play as much? If surveys indicate piped-in music is preferred by fans, can we get some insight into those surveys?
3) Is it true that we have stricter admissions standards for football and basketball than our peers, for no reason other than as a self-imposed limitation due to poor student athlete academic performance more than five years ago? If the higher standards are self-imposed, what goals could be achieved for those standards return to being in-line with our peers?
4) A full update on the band. How can we set a 10-year goal to increase the size of the band by 50%, including much more brass? What academic rules could be tweaked to make it more reasonable and attractive for students to devote so much time to being in the band?
5) When a new coach needs to be chosen, has the school considered the route, often proposed on this message board, of a "council of elders" who would recommend a group of finalists, rather than relying on a search firm that doesn't appreciate Cal's values and traditions?
6) What would it take for Memorial Stadium to return to natural grass? And for the rugby field to return to natural grass? What are the cost differences between natural grass and the fake stuff? Has the number of injuries suffered on grass vs. fake stuff been truly analyzed? Have the players been interviewed for their preferences? I do not believe ANY claims of artificial turf companies, having personally experienced what it's like to play on the crap (softball) to hearing just recently the best soccer players in the world complain about its effects on their bodies and on the sport (in the Champions League).
I don't feel like I am in an effective two-way communication with the Cal athletic department. I feel like poor decisions are being made, and at the very least, the fan base should be allowed to understand the rationale for decisions. That way, the logic behind those decisions can be seen, no matter how the decisions turn out. It is not healthy for die-hard Cal fans to be in the dark. Over a 5-year period I personally have gone from donating low five-figures per year to donating nothing. Doesn't Cal believe and understand that if they more effectively engaged their fan base, the result almost certainly would be positive? Why all the secrets?
