Story Poster
Photo by UC Berkeley
Cal Basketball

The future of Cal Athletics is in question

December 3, 2023
33,753

Cal holds a unique place in the world as an institution of higher learning, a catalyst for societal change, and a magnet for world-class students and teachers.   

There’s no doubt that the ethos of the University of California lies in its intellectual and academic brand.   And while that brand can be amplified and reinforced by success in athletics, such success has to occur in a manner consistent with that brand.

This article is not intended to evolve Cal into something it simply never has been or ever will be.   Instead, it’s a wake-up call that what the University wants and arguably needs from athletics is at existential risk. 

We start with the presumption that Cal, as the flagship of the UC system and the most renowned and respected public institution of learning in the world, sees value in offering students the ability to compete at the very highest levels of athletic competition.   And that through athletics, not only do those students who participate have their experience at Cal enriched but a sense of permanent community and connection is created with the broader student population.   And given that Cal increasingly relies on private donations to fund itself, the athletic teams that represent the University are essential to ongoing alumni and donor engagement.

With that belief in place, one has to admit the reality that all of Cal’s athletic programs exist and are enabled only through the revenue generated by the football program.  Men’s basketball can and usually does contribute a small amount of profit and other sports through endowments are somewhat self-sufficient, yet the Athletic Department as a whole exists because of football. 

Football contributes between $25 and $35M annually to the Athletic Department, after paying 100% of its own expenses.  If that money were to go away or be seriously mitigated, it’s not simply that sports would have to be cut, the infrastructure that supports any remaining programs would be seriously tested.   And far more importantly in the long term, Cal without football that matters would almost certainly lead to the loss of connection students and alumni have with the University, easily costing the school billions of dollars in future donations. 

Despite the above, Cal has never prioritized football much less seen the obvious ROI in investing in the program.  In fact, they have ignored the fiscal realities embraced by virtually every other major university over the last several decades and chosen to do just the opposite.   Starting roughly in 2007, Cal’s then Athletic Director Sandy Barbour made the decision to take all donations made to football above a certain dollar threshold and reallocate those dollars to balance the broader athletic department budget.  Let’s be very plain about this - donors were being intentionally misled and critical dollars needed for football to keep the team competitive, fill Memorial Stadium, and catalyze broader donations and giving to the University were being spent elsewhere.  At another institution, it's not hard to imagine that this kind of financial chicanery would have resulted in multiple people being fired once it came to light.   

That practice continued unabated until an exiting administrator shared these details with a group of donors which led to the creation of the Championship Caliber Fund, which places football donors in a separate auditable fund tracked by donors to ensure it is spent only on football and at the discretion of the head football coach.   A fund whose existence was fought against by the school until it was clear that donors would simply stop giving without it.   Decades of inadequate funding put the football program in a position where not only were its relative revenues declining but it was in the bottom quartile of Pac-12 programs with its operating budget, effectively eliminating it from being consistently competitive.    In addition, fan and donor support had slipped to the point that Cal came within a single vote from North Carolina State of not existing -  at least not in a form that would have any chance of continuing to support the University’s mission of athletic diversity and long-term alumni engagement. 

It’s now the end of 2023, Cal has been given a lifeline via admission into the ACC.   As a result of timely and effective fundraising and organizational administration catalyzed by donors and specifically the Bear Insider community, Cal created an NIL program that has allowed Cal football and men’s basketball to be competitive.   Yet the future of the NIL collective is uncertain as its momentum is stymied by a decade-plus of the school’s willful failure to make the institutional commitment and investment necessary for football.

If Cal truly does want to have a viable athletic program, the way forward is clear.   The leadership of the Chancellor, the Athletic Director, and the head football coach have to be committed to a consistently winning football program and they have to be capable of executing against that goal.   Further, Cal needs to either see a meaningful shift in the approach of its existing large donors to athletics or very quickly catalyze a new generation of athletic philanthropists.   

It starts with the Chancellor.  The search is underway to replace Carol Christ and the Regents have to decide whether they believe in and care to support the value of Cal having a strong athletic program.  If they do, the new Chancellor must have a background and understanding of today's college football landscape and be prepared to be a change agent, evaluating and as necessary evolving every aspect of the Athletic Department:  How it is led and run, and the critical importance of supporting and investing in the football program.   If you care about athletics at Cal, if you believe in the value that it provides the University, then you need to be laser-focused on the search for a new Chancellor.  One cannot overstate the importance of hiring the right person for this role for the future of Cal athletics. 

The history of Cal athletics and football as it has existed for 100 years is no longer relevant to the present or future.  Disappointment, regret, and hand-wringing on both how Cal has handled donor relations in the past as well as how college athletics at large have evolved with the large amounts of money now involved, doesn’t change the reality of where things sit today.   Cal cannot complain its way to success or even survival.  It needs to adapt to the facts on the ground as every other team competing at this level has done and is doing.  Once Cal accepts this reality it must solve the problem of how Cal, with its unique place in the universe of higher learning, finds a way to not only survive but to thrive given the new reality.   Instead of being a victim of the changed circumstance, Cal can be a leader to help resolve the difficult puzzle of reconciling conference realignment, student-athlete well-being, and how to blend the profit motive of the NCAA, TV networks, and the conferences into a more reasoned and practical foundation for the future. 

Once a Chancellor is in place who is awake to the current situation and equipped to tackle the inherent challenges, Cal’s most critical decision is to ensure that Cal has an Athletic Director who embraces and enables the prioritization of football with a near-term goal of ensuring Cal survives the next round of conference musical chairs.   

That Athletic Director has to be a big-picture thinker.  Someone who cares less about being a risk mitigator and more about investing against and solving for the opportunities and challenges that ensure Cal can have a vibrant and successful athletic program a decade from now.  They need to truly understand and create plans for fan and donor engagement, including making former student-athletes continue to feel like part of the Cal family.  They need to hire administrators who realize their job is to support and enable the football program rather than find ways to continuously block every innovation that could lead to success.  It is undeniable that Cal has institutionally empowered a group of mid-level bureaucrats who see their sole job to say “no” to whatever question is put in front of them.  They are continuously rewarded and promoted for doing so.  This cultural failure, as much as anything, lies at the root of many of Cal’s challenges in achieving success in its revenue sports.  And Cal desperately needs strong leaders at both the Chancellor and the Athletic Director level who can help to shift this paradigm.     

Balancing the budget, which has occupied the majority of the current administration’s focus for several years, is an insufficiency and becomes criminal when it requires under-investing in the program which the entirety of the department relies on for revenue.  Cal’s Athletic Director has to see their primary job as removing roadblocks from the Bears having a winning football program and hiring and then holding the head football coach accountable for success. 

Again, let’s be clear.  You can have academic integrity, enjoy the value of high-character student-athletes be part of Cal’s unique culture, and still win football games.   This is not a zero-sum game.   Stanford, Cal’s arch-rival, had a top 10 program nationally for nealry a decade in the very recent past.    

An expertise in football, a background in marketing, and the ability to think holistically about Cal amid a challenging and dynamic landscape are essential skills for the Athletic Director. 

It is not easy to be the head football coach at Cal.  Sonny Dykes success at TCU underscores that success comes not simply from the leader of the football program as much as the institutional support behind them.   That said, the head coach has to be a willing fundraiser, someone who can catalyze donor support.  They have to have an almost misguided level of confidence that they can win at Cal and a near ruthless resolve to make decisions using the simple lens of what will help this team win football games. 

They cannot be afraid of pushing back on the Athletic Director, the Chancellor, and the University.  Upsetting the apple cart and occasionally breaking glass has to be part of the job description.   Cal’s historical problem has often been that it has been too deeply rooted in the acceptance of mediocrity and solving for things other than how best to support football. 

Lastly, the donor base has to educate itself and wake up to the reality of today's college athletics landscape.  The transfer portal, NIL, conference re-alignment, etc.   If they truly want Cal to have a vibrant athletic program into the medium-term future, they need to not only step up with their wallets, they need to hold accountable the Chancellor, the AD, and the head football coach in a way that frankly has not historically felt comfortable for this group.  There has been, and continues to be, far too much focus from our donor community on either the grievances of the past or some idealized conceptualization of what college athletics “should” be.  The reality is that college athletes can now earn money, much as every other college student has always been able to do.  Decrying this phenomenon does not change the reality.  We either need to live with this or we need to abandon the pretense that we are competing at the highest level.  And candidly concerns over the soul of athletics by those who have stood by, and often facilitated, more and more money pouring into coaching staffs and facilities rings hollow. Money is part of athletics.  It always has been.   

The transfer portal opens tomorrow.  There’s a real chance that Cal’s most exciting and dynamic football talent over the past ten years will leave the Bears because another school has shown they care more about football and him than does Cal.   For the Cal Legends Collective to have anything close to the level of sufficient resources for the Bears to have a winning football program in 2024, at least one large cornerstone donor has to immediately be found.. 

The status quo is simply not tenable.  A 6-6 regular season and minor bowl isn’t going to lead to new season ticket sales and increased donations to football.  If resources aren’t found, more good players are going to leave and Cal will be unable to compete in the transfer portal to find competitive replacements.   

TIme is running out.

Discussion from...

The future of Cal Athletics is in question

28,112 Views | 124 Replies | Last: 7 mo ago by juarezbear
Eastern Oregon Bear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Well stated! I hope the powers that be agree.
calbear80
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Well said. I hope our retiring Chancellor, our incoming Chancellor, our current (and hopefully soon to be outgoing) Athletic Director read this very carefully, twice.

Go Bears!
Econ141
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Jesus Christ how depressing. Looks like Ott is gone.
Goobear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Econ you are overreacting for now. I am sure it can happen but expect no one who loves Cal is going to roll over that quick.
MrGPAC
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Econ141 said:

Jesus Christ how depressing. Looks like Ott is gone.


That's my biggest takeaway as well. It has been made abundantly clear this off season that being an NFL running back is not the payout it used to be and it would be really hard to hold anything against ott if he chased a guaranteed payday. I believe if we are able to get in the same ballpark as other offers ott would rather stay but if he gets offered 4-5x by another school how do you hold that against him?
movielover
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Great synopsis. Can the Bears keep Ott?

However, skipped over was a $321 Million Memorial Coliseum renovation and $130 Million plus athletic performance and lockers / administrative staff facilities.
Nofado
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Bring back another Chancellor Tien
Alkiadt
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Nofado said:

Bring back another Chancellor Tien

lol
The chancellor who chased away Bruce Snyder?
The chancellor who felt Cal could attract a better coach for less money? His arrogance and elitism about how he thought Cal was perceived is part of Cal's poor athletic history in D 1 revenue sports.
Econ141
How long do you want to ignore this user?
A hundred years of doing something wrong and expecting we get it just right now is like expecting The Play to happen twice.

I've stated this before but there has been no tangible change shown by the university (either in action or words) that they have leaned from almost getting left out. If anything, they will defend themselves saying that Stanford has had recent success and still got left out. Yet Stanford can weather the financial fall out. We can't.

I mentioned this also before and got obliterated - I don't see how any donor can fund another sport. The biggest bang for their buck is football. Put money in high NPV projects - first thing you learn in Haas business school. Fix football, everything else follows.

But here we are with little time and little resources. Hate to say it but I think it's too little too late. This article is quite alarming in its desperation.
Nofado
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Tien was the only chancellor that led cheers both at football and basketball games. I put the blame on Bockrath for that.
Goobear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Econ141 said:

A hundred years of doing something wrong and expecting we get it just right now is like expecting The Play to happen twice.

I've stated this before but there has been no tangible change shown by the university (either in action or words) that they have leaned from almost getting left out. If anything, they will defend themselves saying that Stanford has had recent success and still got left out. Yet Stanford can weather the financial fall out. We can't.

I mentioned this also before and got obliterated - I don't see how any donor can fund another sport. The biggest bang for their buck is football. Put money in high NPV projects - first thing you learn in Haas business school. Fix football, everything else follows.

But here we are with little time and little resources. Hate to say it but I think it's too little too late. This article is quite alarming in its desperation.
Agree with the big picture. Football or 0. Easy equation. Was talking about Ott.
Alkiadt
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Nofado said:

Tien was the only chancellor that led cheers both at football and basketball games. I put the blame on Bockrath for that.

He led cheers. Big whoop.
He was not going to pay Snyder $350k.
Bockrath took his orders from Tien. Just like Knowlton takes his from Christ.
southseasbear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
We need another chancellor like Glenn T. Seaborg, an internationally renown scholar (and Nobel Laureate) who supported athletics during during a golden era.

From Wikipedia:


Quote:

Seaborg was an enthusiastic supporter of Cal's sports teams. San Francisco columnist Herb Caen was fond of pointing out that Seaborg's surname is an anagram of "Go Bears", a popular cheer at UC Berkeley.[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenn_T._Seaborg#cite_note-31][31][/url] Seaborg was proud of the fact that the Cal Bears won their first and only National Collegiate Athletic Association (NCAA) basketball championship in 1959, while he was chancellor. The football team also won the conference title and played in the Rose Bowl that year.[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenn_T._Seaborg#cite_note-sports-32][32][/url] He served on the Faculty Athletic Committee for several years and was the co-author of a book, Roses from the Ashes: Breakup and Rebirth in Pacific Coast Intercollegiate Athletics (2000), concerning the Pacific Coast Conference recruiting scandal, and the founding of what is now the Pac-12, in which he played a role in restoring confidence in the integrity of collegiate sports.[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenn_T._Seaborg#cite_note-sports-32][32][/url][url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenn_T._Seaborg#cite_note-33][33][/url]
[url=https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Glenn_T._Seaborg#cite_note-33][/url]
Econ141
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Eastern Oregon Bear said:

Well stated! I hope the powers that be agree.


100 years of history say they don't. I think it's clear that UCLA will serve as the-all-UC national athletics program with the unfortunate consequence being that they become the defacto flagship. The regents could care less if it's UCLA or Berkeley - they state will have an easier time with it given the market that LA has and the whimper that Berkeley admin will put out.
Shocky1
How long do you want to ignore this user?
greg, ready your latest opinion & we're in agreement that cal football is in an existential place right now

but disagree with your conclusion that this is upon the next chancellor, that's not even close to reality in my opinion

the real problem is james arthur knowlton who has worked against the revenue sports from day one & unlike chancellor christ might still be around after she's gone on july 1st of 2024

asking fans to donate to an endeavor that wastes money with worthless bureaucrats & 30+ financially unsustainable sports is just wasting good money after bad money in the minds of many

knowlton is cancer for cal football...period
movielover
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Ott Dog
Ott Bud
& a Jeep Cherokee? ... a Lambo at Cal just doesn't seem right.
philly1121
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Ott may be leaving. That was my takeaway as well. But since its speculation, I'll move to a different speculation: the next chancellor. For the insiders - is their a shortlist that you have?

Adela de la Torre at SDSU seems to click alot of boxes. Alumni, experience (9 years as president). She has experience across different systems - CSU, Arizona, UC Davis. I know SDSU charges fees.

Any university president candidates that we would want to try and right the ship?
Goobear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
This is what a good prospect for football does….

https://www.coloradoan.com/story/sports/2023/12/03/coach-primes-1-year-colorado-anniversary-is-evidence-of-change/71762300007/

Econ141
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Shocky1 said:

greg, ready your latest opinion & we're in agreement that cal football is in an existential place right now

but disagree with your conclusion that this is upon the next chancellor, that's not even close to reality in my opinion

the real problem is james arthur knowlton who has worked against the revenue sports from day one & unlike chancellor christ might still be around after she's gone on july 1st of 2024

asking fans to donate to an endeavor that wastes money with worthless bureaucrats & 30+ financially unsustainable sports is just wasting good money after bad money in the minds of many

knowlton is cancer for cal football...period


100% - i've been told to not only donate to the NIL but ask everyone I know to do it to save Cal football. Now I'm being told we need a new chancellor and AD. Double-u-tee-eff. Get rid of that moron and get better quick.
bencgilmore
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Torres is the clear leader. The MWC commish is also a Cal alum and has significant experience, albeit slightly different than a straight AD.

We need Torres though, she appears to be a rockstar
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Very well said. The road we have been driving on has been headed downhill toward this cliff for many years while too many argued against the warnings, attacked the messengers and defended the bus drivers.

While it is great that most get it now that the cliff is in sight and the bus is seconds away from plunging off it, radical action is now needed. A slow turn to try to avoid the cliff will only prolong the inevitable.

What Cal does now and in 2024 is critical. While a new chancellor and especially a new AD that understand the college landscape and have a vision for Cal to compete and succeed in it would be great, the chances are not great that the people who make the hiring decisions based on other factors will give us that. I think this requires Cal, and the Cal fan base to develop a radical new alumni driven model for the revenue sports.

Losing Ott would be tragic.
Big Dog
How long do you want to ignore this user?
"Starting roughly in 2007, Cal's then Athletic Director Sandy Barbour made the decision to take all donations made to football above a certain dollar threshold and reallocate those dollars to balance the broader athletic department budget. "

In the non-profit fundraising world, not adhering to donor's wishes is a big no-no. Surprised that the auditors let them get away with that revenue-shift. (The only proper way to address a possible reallocation is to go back and ask the Donors for permission to shift some/all of their donation from football to say, women's field hockey.)
Econ141
How long do you want to ignore this user?
calumnus said:



Losing Ott would be tragic.


It's program death - he is the saviour for a potentially great first season in the ACC that would give us tremendous momentum.

It's time we stopped playing nice. We should "donate" (aka launder) the 800,000+ we get from Spav to pay Ott. Like through a SPAV SPAC or something. I kid but honestly - someone needs to get creative and bend the rules if necessary to keep him home.
BearSD
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Quote:

I think this requires Cal, and the Cal fan base to develop a radical new alumni driven model for the revenue sports.
It would be a radical new model for Cal, but it would be the same model that Oregon, USC, Ohio State, Alabama, etc. use -- wealthy boosters donate ginormous amounts of money to fund NIL in addition to seven-figure head coaching salaries (and buyouts) and needed facilities for athletics.
philly1121
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Would it be that far fetched though? If this is a "refund" of a salary to a contract that is now void, can this unused salary be used as a donation to Cal Legends?
Goobear
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Schools cannot be involved with NIL. Cal needs to invest in FB.
UrsineMaximus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
So whom does BI recommend/endorse as the next Chancellor? Is BI suggesting that Wilcox is not fully engaged in fundraising? Lastly, is "the talent", in fact, Ott?
UrsineMaximus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Goobear said:

Schools cannot be involved with NIL. Cal needs to invest in FB.
If the $$$ that were spent on Spav's contract from donors, who would get the buy out monies coming back to Cal? The university or the donors?
Econ141
How long do you want to ignore this user?
UrsineMaximus said:

So whom does BI recommend/endorse as the next Chancellor? Is BI suggesting that Wilcox is not fully engaged in fundraising? Lastly, is "the talent", in fact, Ott?


Who else would you classify as the most exciting player in the last 10 years that is still currently with the team?
calumnus
How long do you want to ignore this user?
BearSD said:

Quote:

I think this requires Cal, and the Cal fan base to develop a radical new alumni driven model for the revenue sports.
It would be a radical new model for Cal, but it would be the same model that Oregon, USC, Ohio State, Alabama, etc. use -- wealthy boosters donate ginormous amounts of money to fund NIL in addition to seven-figure head coaching salaries (and buyouts) and needed facilities for athletics.


I just think that at Cal, it would need to be more formalized and that having it be formalized would be a key innovation. The old model has the Regents, most with no Cal ties, pick the Chancellor and the Chancellor pick an AD. The Cal donors are then expected to hand over huge amounts of cash to the AD <hoping> they are allowed some influence in decision making. At Cal, it has failed over and over. Giving Knowlton even MORE money to squander seems foolish to most people. He has a lifetime contract, there is no accountability. He isn't even a California resident.

For our alumni to step up, they need to be given more control, and for them to have more control that needs to done, formally. Even a Chancellor's "Athletics Advisory Group" would just be picked by the chancellor and would probably include equal representation for the Olympic sports.

No, I really think our revenue sports need to be run like a business, by business people with experience in professional sports which is what the revenue sports clearly are. I think the revenue sorts and the Learfield contract should be outsourced to a Cal alum non-profit corporation (profits donated to the Athletic Department whose AD makes a normal university administrator salary. Donations become voting shares. Players become employees of the newco. Managers hired by the elected board can make the budget decision of how much to spend on players vs coaches. Alums, not Learfield, decide who our announcers are and when the Cal Band plays.
Northside91
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Post deleted -- Too truthy. Didn't feel safe to put any of it out there in 2023. Please carry on with your fantasies.
Cal84
How long do you want to ignore this user?
To put some numerical context to the situation: For the 2022 fiscal year, Cal Athletics had expenses of $30 mm over revenues and that hole was plugged by UC Berkeley's general account, i.e. via student fees. As you pointed out, the anticipated fall in football TV revenues in 2024 and the increased travel expenses are likely to add another $30 mm in losses (per annum). This is assuming 2023 looks like 2022, but honestly 2023 is rather unimportant in the fiscal scheme of things as it is a one-off year that will not be repeated. If nothing is done, then 2024 would be estimated to have an athletics department deficit of around $60 mm, i.e. student fees of about $2k per undergrad (assuming the majority of grad students have their fees reimbursed). So... at what point does forcing a new Cal student to bear $8k in additional student loan debt before he/she graduates become so unpopular that athletics loses the support of the student body?

It may not happen in a year. But it would eventually happen. Thus, the only long run solution is to cut expenses at the athletic department by immense amounts. Cutting football will obviously be suggested, but is pointless since it doesn't lose money. The brunt must be borne by non-revenue sports. Historically this was so politically unpopular with alumni & donors that it was not seriously attempted. But when the time comes that students vote to repeal a doubling (or more) of student fees, this battle will come to a head. Ultimately it is not sustainable for alumni to demand higher expenses on students of the magnitude contemplated.

These are the issues that the new chancellor must be aware of. Christ's inability to resolve these issues and her desire to duck responsibility for them when the proverbial sh*t hits the fan in 2024 are indeed the reason for her resignation. Hopefully the new chancellor gets approval (before being hired) to bite the bullet and avoid an ugly student vs. alumni brawl. Or not. These days, anything is possible.
WalterSobchak
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Econ141 said:

Shocky1 said:

greg, ready your latest opinion & we're in agreement that cal football is in an existential place right now

but disagree with your conclusion that this is upon the next chancellor, that's not even close to reality in my opinion

the real problem is james arthur knowlton who has worked against the revenue sports from day one & unlike chancellor christ might still be around after she's gone on july 1st of 2024

asking fans to donate to an endeavor that wastes money with worthless bureaucrats & 30+ financially unsustainable sports is just wasting good money after bad money in the minds of many

knowlton is cancer for cal football...period


100% - i've been told to not only donate to the NIL but ask everyone I know to do it to save Cal football. Now I'm being told we need a new chancellor and AD. Double-u-tee-eff. Get rid of that moron and get better quick.
Cal Legends is a completely separate entity. It's literally our first and only hope to escape what Greg is describing. All he's saying is do both: 1) Give to Cal Legends. 2) Pressure the status quo for improvements, starting with the Regents and the new Chancellor appointment. They're not at all at odds. They're steps in the same plan forward out of the darkness.
Please give to Cal Legends at https://calegends.com/donation/ and encourage everyone you know who loves Cal sports to do it too.

To be in the Top 1% of all NIL collectives we only need around 10% of alumni to give $300 per year. Please help spread the word. "If we don't broaden this base we're dead." - Sebastabear

Thanks for reading my sig! Please consider copying or adapting it and using it on all of your posts too. Go Bears!
movielover
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Unimpressed.
Big Dog
How long do you want to ignore this user?
She;s been at Cal 7 years, which is about average for a Uni leader. She is ~80 years old. She is not resigning, she is retiring.

That said, disappointed that she didn't take the opportunity to clean the Athletic House, so to speak, before the new Chancellor takes over. But then, it will require months of study, planning and negotiations, and after obtaining a lifeline from the ACC, I could make the case that there is not enough time left to prepare a plan for future athletics.
Last Page
Page 1 of 4
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.