Respectfully, does anyone on here have more up to date information then someone who went to an alumni slide show 15 years ago?

Eastbayglider said:

---

Respectfully, does anyone on here have more up to date information then someone who went to an alumni slide show 15 years ago?

---

You're a funny guy!

Perhaps you should start by looking at the Cal Athletic Dept Budget from 2002 - 2021 here:

Cal Athletics Statements of Revenues and Expenses - California Golden Bears Athletics (calbears.com)

And of course, if you want specific financial data for a particular sport like Track & Field, you can always contact Liane Ko, the UC Berkeley Public Records Coordinator and make a FOIA request.

pra@berkeley.edu

Youre welcome.

PS. Let me know where in the budget there is an additional $35,000 for an NCAA approved Pole Vault Pit, or $50,000 for a new Throwing Cage for our World Class throwers, let alone another $600,000 - $800,000 to resurface the track.

I believe that it's Cal's turn to host the Pac-12 Conference Meet.
But nothing has been confirmed by the conference office and the date in May says "TBA".
Gee, I wonder why?

If you could find a big donor ASAP that would be great.
Sounds like you've got plenty of connections.

Thanks!

FWIW you may recall that Cal was strongly considering TEARING DOWN Edwards Stadium and I wrote this proposal to Chancellor Christ and AD Knowlton to save it in Feb. of 2018.

Save Edwards Stadium

OVERVIEW

In the summer of 2017, a serious directive loomed as the University of California floated a plan to raze its iconic Colonel George C. Edwards Track & Field Stadium, a designated National Historic Landmark and the first track & field-only venue in the United States. In November, this proposal reached a more critical threshold when university Chancellor Carol Christ formally declared "in principle" to remove Edwards Stadium in order to create for-profit student housing to help mitigate its "impossible" $450 million deficit incurred by the extensive retrofit and upgrade of Cal's Memorial Stadium, home of its football team.

The proposition is discussed in greater detail here: http://www.dailycal.org/2017/11/02/uc-berkeley-chancellor-proposes-assuming-portion-cal-athletics-debt-exchange-developing-edwards-stadium/

The social, historical, collegiate and greater East Bay community cost resulting from the pending proposal to destroy Cal's Edwards Track stadium and Goldman Field appreciably outweighs the partial offset the site's destruction would contribute to Cal's deep deficit. Conversely, we offer an alternative approach that strikes a reasonable balance: preservation of the irreplaceable and far-reaching value of the stadium while thinking creatively about for-profit development capable of easing Cal's fiscal woes.

For countless individuals entering the university's campus, Edwards Stadium represents Cal's western gateway, engaging numerous visitors, comparable in volume to the internationally renowned Lawrence Hall of Science; for many inner city Berkeley residents this track facility represents their only contact with the university. When you also factor in the number of all-comers meets, high school and CIF section championship meets, educational clinics and college meets, plus graduation ceremonies, the university welcomes a steady flow of visitors from all walks of life solely because of its track & field venue.

One of the most significant concerns associated with the proposed demolition of Edwards stadium is it represents the only designated gathering place for the University of California's student body in the event of a major earthquake or disaster. This alone will legally nullify any attempt to tear it down.

In addition, the historical venue's demolition needlessly retrogrades several critical elements of the university. The caliber and competitive level of the University of California's NCAA and club-level sports teams would fall off, and the fitness activities and campus experience of its greater student body (including its graduate students as well as campus faculty and staff), would suffer a precipitous decline in quality. The broader communities of Berkeley and Oakland, plus many inner city youth groups which rely on safe off-hours track oval access as a healthy outlet, would also be unfairly targeted by this plan.

HISTORIC SIGNIFICANCE

This Art Deco-styled stadium was designed by architects Warren C. Perry and George W. Kelham, and was named after World War I military hero Colonel George C. Edwards
Cal Men's track and field is the oldest athletic program at the university which began intercollegiate competition at the University of California in 1872
In 1895 the ubiquitous "Golden Bears" was coined by the Cal track team on a road trip to a meet
Cal track & field has produced one team, 26 individual and three relay national championships
Edwards stadium is the first track-only facility developed in the United States; it opened in 1932 and is protected by the City of Berkeley as a National Historic Landmark
Site of 12 World records, 26 National records and 24 NCAA Collegiate records
Has hosted eight NCAA Track & Field Championships
Has hosted several historically significant US-USSR dual track meets during the Cold War
A total demolition would clash with the Landmark and Environmental Impact Report (EIR) aspects of CEQA within the state's Office of Planning and Research: http://www.ceqanet.ca.gov/
A recent Historic Structure report indicates the facility is widely used and in good condition (link):

https://capitalstrategies.berkeley.edu/sites/default/files/hsr_edwardsstadium_final_oct2013.pdf

UNIVERSITY SPORTS AND STUDENT ORGANIZATIONS AFFECTED

1. Cal Men's and Women's Track & Field teams: Combined these men's and women's teams are the most culturally and gender-diverse athletic teams on campus (as well as one of the most diverse NCAA teams in the country); many high-achieving Cal student-athletes rely on some form of athletic scholarship to affordably attend the University of California; in more recent years its women's roster has also been consistently larger than the men's roster in a conscious effort to bolster the university's compliance with Title IX. In addition the track teams commit to hundreds of hours of annual community volunteer work. Cal roster raw diversity data (2009-2018) MEN: Total (474 athletes); White (262); Black (152), Hispanic (44), Asian-Pacific Islander (11), East Indian (3), Middle Eastern (2); (2009-2018) WOMEN: Total (428 athletes); White (209); Black (158); Hispanic (39); Asian-Pacific Islander (7); Middle Eastern (3); East Indian (2).
2. Cal Men's and Women's Cross Country teams: These exemplary student-athletes are ideal representatives of the university, with teams that consistently produce the highest aggregate GPA of any sports team on campus on an annual basis.
3. Cal Women's Soccer team: Has been in existence for 38 years and as of 2015 has produced 311 student athletes, including 122 Pac-12 All-Academic honors; it is also crucial to Title IX compliance.
4. Cal Triathlon Club: This high-performance club sports team is the largest group student-athlete sports organization on campus, supporting over 170 members; the Cal Triathlon Club is a consistent NCAA podium contender that has combined for three team and relay national championships since 2008, despite competing against teams with NCAA designations.
5. Cal Boxing Club: This is a club that has been a part of the university since the 1980s. Currently it features 75-80 active members and it is approximately 70% minorities and 40% female, and the Cal Boxing Club uses the track on a regular basis for part of its conditioning program.
6. Cal Rec Sports Total Athletic Conditioning: This Cal Recreational course staple has reliably served the greater campus community as a widely beloved, accredited physical fitness class which is successfully utilized by scores of Cal students and staff throughout the academic year for healthy recreational activity purposes.
7. Cal ROTC: Cal's ROTC servicemen utilize Edwards stadium's facility to test and train their officers
8. Cal Recreational Sports Facility: Cal students, staff, faculty, alumni, and greater community pay monthly membership dues to RSF and with an expectation to have scheduled track access during morning and mid-day hours as a key component of their financial agreement with Cal Rec Sports.

LACK OF ALTERNATIVE VENUE OPTIONS

Other than Edwards track stadium, there is a dearth of viable local options for a suitable training facility for Cal's track & field teams as well as many of its other intercollegiate sports teams. Berkeley high school does have a nearby track, but it is largely inaccessible to the public for universal reasons: the BHS student body consists of minors, the facility is in use for much of the day with its student teams, and the Cal athletic department should not anticipate it would be welcomed there.

Clark-Kerr's dirt track is a non-starter. This site features an imprecisely measured, dirt-surfaced track at the top of Dwight Way situated directly on top of a fault line. According to former Cal lead architect Jim Horner, who recently retired from the university's staff, the Clark-Kerr track straddles the Hayward fault and its location is untenable for the construction of a new and modern track for several reasons.

Any track placed at the Clark-Kerr track site would fail to meet the rigid specifications established by the NCAA for regulation track dimensions, and this site is ill-suited for field events. Cal's men's and women's soccer teams would no longer have a remaining practice field if track hosted its field event practices there. To complicate matters, the vocal Panorama hill community and locals would ardently resist any alteration of the beautiful natural setting, plus the prospect of adding more Cal sporting events.

A Clark-Kerr track site would also fall well short as a competitive alternative, especially for a university in the PAC-12 conference. Other in-conference schools such as the University of Colorado, the University of Oregon, Stanford University, UCLA and so forth, are expanding their facilities, as are major universities on a national basis such as the University of Michigan; Cal track & field would quickly fade into irrelevance, while other sports, clubs, students and community members would suffer a tremendous loss.

In sum, there is no viable campus venue or available open space on which to build another legitimate track oval. Yet in spite of this grim prognosis, it is still possible to preserve Edwards track stadium's vital facilities, and allow for a reasonable compromise which includes critical student housing construction.

PROPOSAL AND SOLUTION

This proposal recommends development of only one side of Edwards track stadium, either the West stands or East stands. Though both aspects have pros and cons, either option is more pragmatic and less costly than leveling the entire facility and attempting to construct a new track and sports team practice venue elsewhere on campus.

Construction of for-profit student and/or community housing on just one side of the Edwards Stadium facility could afford much-needed financial relief to the University of California, while still providing a sufficient compromise that preserves its historic athletic venues, Edwards Track and Goldman Field (the women's soccer field).

For example, Georgetown University in Washington, D.C., has seamlessly combined its student housing with its football field. This would also work for Edwards Stadium.

Image: http://www.guhoyas.com/facilities/gu-harbin-field.html

The upshot is this would ultimately reduce the seating capacity at Edwards Stadium from 22,000 to 11,000, a worthwhile concession to the university's bottom line. The general facility would remain intact and not have to be rebuilt somewhere else. However this proposal also provides some meaningful land space to help the university ameliorate a portion of its debt by constructing housing on the Oxford St. (West) side or Evans Baseball Diamond (East) side of Edwards Track stadium. If one wanted to take this concept a step further, it may also be possible to wrap a small portion of the prospective housing construction around the Bancroft Way (South) side of the track. The North side of Edwards track features Cal's NCAA tennis courts, and therefore would not be a suitable alternative.

After evaluating the pros and cons of prospective housing construction on either the West or East side of Edwards stadium, an informal analysis indicates it would be slightly preferable but more difficult to build on the East side of Edwards Track stadium, which abuts the Evans Diamond baseball field complex. The East side construction would preserve the following aspects of Edwards Stadium, as well as help offset some of the breezy weather conditions that tend to affect the facility on a regular basis:

Pros:

Preserves traditional finish line configuration of Edwards Track
Preserves Goldman Field (Cal's women's soccer team playing field and venue)
Preserves existing press boxes plus overhead light structures for nighttime illumination
Preserves redwood trees at SW corner of campus at Oxford St. adjacent to Bancroft Way
Retains visible architectural configuration on the west border of campus
It would not obscure late afternoon sunlight
Helps protect the venue from swirling breezes
Available land space is equal on both sides
The East stands are in a greater state of disrepair than the more commonly used West stands; it would make more sense to replace them with student and community housing units

Cons:

Construction on the East side might affect the baseball stadium with temporary closures

Two professional colleagues have provided several sketch renderings of the recommended construction:

https://www.facebook.com/photo.php?fbid=10155210258917737&set=p.10155210258917737&type=3&theater

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1fgLKvPJhig-eoM24No2AV7UbqjPX0Xko/view

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1xT_GEEUWJUtVAtmjBC2sf1iu_p0tlr4X/view

https://drive.google.com/file/d/1_VPMkWcIYu4cCbOcEPzJh2ZOerplXbrC/view

file:///C:/Users/crose/Downloads/edwards.pdf

https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox/160e22a69b2ade6b?projector=1&messagePartId=0.1

CLOSING ANALYSIS

The wholesale forfeiture of Edwards Stadium for student housing units will do widespread harm and little good, displacing thousands of high-achieving student-athletes and greater East Bay community members at large, all of whom are reliant on this track venue to achieve their fitness and recreational goals. It will also generate substantial upheaval on several fronts within the university and in the local community. Last but not least, it would be wasteful to tear down a major facility only to have to reconstruct some of its aspects elsewhere on campus when there is little to no available space and virtually no other options exist.

In conclusion, we recommend the fair and balanced approach of constructing housing structures in place of the West or East stands of Edwards. This would allow both Goldman Field and Edwards track to remain intact, yet still provides ample latitude for the university to utilize a significant portion of its available resources to help resolve its financial burden.

Looking at the 2018 roster, last one in which the former staff recruited and was in charge of, I calculated about 1 men's scholarship based off my sources. Well over half received zero scholarship. Of the women's roster, about half received zero scholarship with about 4-5 in the longer distances. I'm not going to divulge which names I know were receiving nothing/would be considered "walk-ons" to respect their privacy…but there were definitely some sub 9:10/10:40'ers among those. And that was before super shoes. I'm sure many of them could have received big money at Stanislaus State.

I don't know what I'm blaming the current state affairs on as I don't have any former athletes on the squad anymore/not as plugged in. But I do know you don't have to be getting beat by Cal State East Bay even with zero scholarship money 4 years later.

Looks like they're recruiting at least this year…hopefully those are better than what Chico is getting. Not being the last UC out of all of them would be going the right direction next year!

So I get that funding is important here, as it is in every sport. But even given Cal's lack of funding, the school has too many natural advantages for the team to be performing at this level. As has been said on this thread already, there are plenty of successful mid-major and even D3 programs out there that have less funding but are way ahead of Cal on both the men's and women's sides.

So, if Cal is somewhat on par with many schools funding-wise, why the poor level of performance? And when I say poor, not in comparison to Stanford/Colorado/Oregon, but Santa Clara/CS East Bay/Cal Poly/USF etc.? The school seems to recruit well, so you'd have to point to the coaching for the answer.

Cal hired a new distance staff pre-pandemic so they were pretty closed off from being able to roll up their sleeves and go to work. This wasn't Texas or Florida which played fast and loose with COVID restrictions. That had to put a damper on things. Laura Schmitt (former Redwood High top shelf coach and Cal alum) is now volunteering at Cal, and I imagine they are picking her brain too. So, capable people are already in place and I think things should turn around.

Our women took a solid 15th team overall at Club Nationals without our top runner. Double-ear infection and I would not run her with an infection that close to her brain, not that she was champing at the bit to run. If she had been able to run, top 9 was in reach and we would have knocked off the Bowerman Track Club.

See I want too blame it on Covid, the UC system and the Bay Area too. But UC Santa Cruz had similar restrictions and they're still beating us. UC Irvine (new distance coach during the pandemic) had similar restrictions and they're still beating us. UCSB (Coach Shayla's new school she arrived at during the pandemic) and they're still smashing us. And the Bay Area schools like USF(new staff during the pandemic), SMC, SCU & Cal St. East Bay (new staff during the pandemic - and I don't think they have a distance coach yet?)…you get the idea. I think at the end of the day, the current distance staff has either given up or just wants out because of the lack of support. Hopefully Coach Schmitt (I didn't realize that - good news!) can help with that morale and culture!

BTW, good job dealing with trying circumstances at USATF Club's Coach! An unenviable position! And your program was still the bomb despite the obstacles!

Thank you for the kind words. I was disappointed with 15th, but without our top gun that was about where I would expect to land. Top ten would have been.a slam dunk for the women.

The circumstances at nationals were bonkers, I picked a fine year to be a co-director. The closest analogy I can come up with is it felt like a few of us had very little time to figure out how to land a failing 747 in a war zone and managing to do so without major catastrophes.

That tree that fell was a few hundred meters behind me in our race, I could hear it and thought it was a good-sized branch about 40 meters off, not an entire, giant eucalyptus tree nearly a quarter-mile off! It missed Club Northwest's tent by 20 feet and there were close to a dozen runners in their tent!! One guy had to fish his jacket out of the tree. I fell really hard and was a little dazed, but was able to finish my race and went straight over to the officials tent. Everyone probably would have understood a wholesale cancellation but I fought against that. The Park reluctantly gave us the Polo field to run on, and so we were left to sort out a completely improvised, new race course in 30 minutes which netted a one-hour race postponement.

I cleaned up the course until 5 p.m., went home and took a scalding hot shower. No after party or meet-and-greet at the awards ceremony for me.