If this is the branding direction, then I fully approve.
1. California as the sports brand.
2. THE University of California. We are the flagship. Funny, but I lectured this month both at The Ohio State University and Ohio University. You know what? People make fun of 'the' but it did its job. There is no confusion.
3. Berkeley is our academic brand. Use it when you're targeting students, not athletics. I'm from SoCal, and live here now. So what if someone can't put two and two together that Cal and Berkeley are the same. It literally doesn't matter. As long as they recognize that California (and Cal) are an athletic team. Not one single person who can get into Berkeley via academic is gonna get confused, or care.
4. This is step ONE. Step two? Control your marketing narrative. We need to ditch the outside narrative that is 60 years old...hippies smoking weed while rioting in People's Park. BUT...we can lean into our 'weird', but from OUR POV as a positive. I told Knowlton this, and hopefully, they'll follow.
If they were serious about merging brands they'd put "California" in one end zone and "Berkeley" in the other.
As for the new field, I like the gold end zones. Did not expect to see Scriptifornia associated with football but, hey, why not? It's not my favorite logo but it's a fun change.
I remember storming the field the season after they switched from natural grass. Thought it would be fun to dive across the goal line. I had significant regrets.
Thank god under armor is gone, everything they did with uniforms was awful! Not a big fan of the california script in the end zones. I like block letters better, I hope Mike will get them on the right track with uniforms
Once some new brand identities are created we will hire a consultant to make the decision. That way no one in the administration can be held responsible for the decision.
Most of the people who made this decision are likely from the Bay Area. They will never understand that the rest of the universe has no idea what “Cal” is.
This university has one globally recognized brand: Berkeley. That will never change and as long as we keep trying to call ourselves “California” to pretend we’re the state’s flagship football school like Texas, Wisconsin, etc. the brand confusion will remain.
We’re the flagship academic university. We haven’t been the best football team for a very long time. The Texas, Wisconsin, Georgia model will not make us the best football school in a state that contains USC no matter how bad we want it to.
The premise that ignorance over the connection between California and UC Berkeley exists is valid. If we are relevant academically and occasionally relevant athletically, I think they’ll catch on. Ignorance doesn’t feel like the most important factor in our branding imho.
Though it’s gotten lost in the asinine pissing match between C98 and
myself, my point is that it is easy to lament a branding problem when your revenue programs range from either well-below average to historically awful, especially when the P12’s incompetent media deal robs the Conference of any chance of meaningful national exposure. Whatever entity you want to call it, the University has plenty of problems…a Mark Fox problem, a Larry Scott problem, a long stretch of underachievement by the Conference as a whole problem, etc.
The California/UC Berkeley/Cal confusion is very real, especially outside of the athletic conversation…I’m not debating that. It has been a mainstay since the ‘70’s, yet task forces weren’t being assembled until this overmatched leadership tandem, especially when Tedford/Braun//Gottlieb/Monty/Cuonzo were winning ballgames, which remains the quickest way to solidify your brand. However, as my buddy in Cal fandom GoldenSD81 said, that’s a lot easier said than done.
I understand that Berkeley is way more famous worldwide. But is that our target? As far as the audience in the US, I feel that being able to call ourselves "California" is our biggest advantage.
It’s been California from day f-ing one. Literally, the first day, in 1868.
The issues began when they tried to start calling it Berkeley because of academia.
You want a branding issue, start calling sports teams Berkeley. That’ll really solve things. Gimme a break. LOL. East Coasters will think the music school now has a football team.
In every corner of the globe, from the Bronx to Beijing, everyone knows exactly what Berkeley is. It’s as recognized/respected as any other academic brand. “Cal” exists only among three specific populations: 1) SF Bay Area residents, 2) people with some direct connection to the university, 3) sports fans who can name all the Pac-12 teams. Outside of those three groups “Cal” does not exist.
This effort to eliminate the brand confusion, these field changes + whatever else they do (hopefully replace the “UC a place” commercial?) won’t move the gauge a single tick. Five years from now the University of California, Berkeley will have the same exact brand confusion problem it has today.
I like it just fine. I liked the prior version fine too. Just variations that in the range of fine to me. I do think it is interesting how this relates to the yet unfinished effort to consolidate the Berkeley/California issue. This may be premature and unrelated to that. I hope the new turf is yet more forgiving. I've been following with interest the NFL players like Bosa coming out for grass fields since it saves their bodies so much. I get the economics of college ball may preclude fancy grass management, but turf can be more or less forgiving.
Now that more money is being invested in athletes themselves in the form of NILs, I wonder if there will be more of a move to invest in protecting those investments in the form of grass fields.
Loads of colleges still use grass. Tennessee, I know, because I read what their groundskeeper had to say when given one week to replace and repair after the Vols torn down the goalposts following their Alabama win.
The problem is that you can't practice and play games on the same field; it tears it up way too much. CAL uses Memorial Stadium for practice. Many other schools will have a complex with several or more practice fields and a game field that only sees action 6 Saturdays a season. A grass field can handle 6 days a year.
Well, that’s a good point: the field Turf is necessary for that reason alone. Plus, wasn’t CMS one of the first schools to install the artificial field Turf surface?
I like that one sideline says "This is Bear Territory"
Nice look. Are card stunts still done?
I was under the impression that we were the first school to do card stunts.
If this is the branding direction, then I fully approve.
1. California as the sports brand.
2. THE University of California. We are the flagship. Funny, but I lectured this month both at The Ohio State University and Ohio University. You know what? People make fun of 'the' but it did its job. There is no confusion.
3. Berkeley is our academic brand. Use it when you're targeting students, not athletics. I'm from SoCal, and live here now. So what if someone can't put two and two together that Cal and Berkeley are the same. It literally doesn't matter. As long as they recognize that California (and Cal) are an athletic team. Not one single person who can get into Berkeley via academic is gonna get confused, or care.
4. This is step ONE. Step two? Control your marketing narrative. We need to ditch the outside narrative that is 60 years old...hippies smoking weed while rioting in People's Park. BUT...we can lean into our 'weird', but from OUR POV as a positive. I told Knowlton this, and hopefully, they'll follow.
I love this look.
Looks good. Best look for the football field in some time.
If they were serious about merging brands they'd put "California" in one end zone and "Berkeley" in the other.
As for the new field, I like the gold end zones. Did not expect to see Scriptifornia associated with football but, hey, why not? It's not my favorite logo but it's a fun change.
what does "New turf has been sod" mean?
I thought for a moment that we'd switched back to natural grass.
I really wish. I miss the real thing.
Now, with improved rug burn!
I remember storming the field the season after they switched from natural grass. Thought it would be fun to dive across the goal line. I had significant regrets.
OUCH! LOL
Playing IM sports on those artificial turf fields, wearing, usually, gym shorts, yeah, every slide or fall was an adventure in pain.
Raspberry City!
The "THE" in front of "University of California" is something new, right? Not sure that I have noticed that in other sign/branding until now.
Time to abbreviate ourselves as tUC now?
Gimme a lower case t!
LOWER CASE T!!!
Thank god under armor is gone, everything they did with uniforms was awful! Not a big fan of the california script in the end zones. I like block letters better, I hope Mike will get them on the right track with uniforms
The end zones can be magenta and say Tasman Sea for all I care, so long as Cal finds it early AND often…
But no “Berkeley” anywhere? Provisional or preemptive or what?
Me Likey!
So … how does this fit in with the ongoing (?) branding study?
Once some new brand identities are created we will hire a consultant to make the decision. That way no one in the administration can be held responsible for the decision.
I want to know where the wraparound porch is going to go? Maybe banished out by the Andy Smith bench? 🤔
After all, using wins and losses is such an arbitrary and silly means of measuring the success of a coach, eh Jim & Carol?
Bwahahahaha
Especially since our own swim coach beat our own swimmers more often than the swim team beat its opponents!
It says " the University of California" on the sidelines. So we are going with the California than the Berkeley direction.
Most of the people who made this decision are likely from the Bay Area. They will never understand that the rest of the universe has no idea what “Cal” is.
This university has one globally recognized brand: Berkeley. That will never change and as long as we keep trying to call ourselves “California” to pretend we’re the state’s flagship football school like Texas, Wisconsin, etc. the brand confusion will remain.
Pretend? We are the flagship university of the state.
We’re the flagship academic university. We haven’t been the best football team for a very long time. The Texas, Wisconsin, Georgia model will not make us the best football school in a state that contains USC no matter how bad we want it to.
The premise that ignorance over the connection between California and UC Berkeley exists is valid. If we are relevant academically and occasionally relevant athletically, I think they’ll catch on. Ignorance doesn’t feel like the most important factor in our branding imho.
Well said.
Though it’s gotten lost in the asinine pissing match between C98 and
myself, my point is that it is easy to lament a branding problem when your revenue programs range from either well-below average to historically awful, especially when the P12’s incompetent media deal robs the Conference of any chance of meaningful national exposure. Whatever entity you want to call it, the University has plenty of problems…a Mark Fox problem, a Larry Scott problem, a long stretch of underachievement by the Conference as a whole problem, etc.
The California/UC Berkeley/Cal confusion is very real, especially outside of the athletic conversation…I’m not debating that. It has been a mainstay since the ‘70’s, yet task forces weren’t being assembled until this overmatched leadership tandem, especially when Tedford/Braun//Gottlieb/Monty/Cuonzo were winning ballgames, which remains the quickest way to solidify your brand. However, as my buddy in Cal fandom GoldenSD81 said, that’s a lot easier said than done.
I understand that Berkeley is way more famous worldwide. But is that our target? As far as the audience in the US, I feel that being able to call ourselves "California" is our biggest advantage.
Ya, not gonna get into this with you again.
It’s been California from day f-ing one. Literally, the first day, in 1868.
The issues began when they tried to start calling it Berkeley because of academia.
You want a branding issue, start calling sports teams Berkeley. That’ll really solve things. Gimme a break. LOL. East Coasters will think the music school now has a football team.
In every corner of the globe, from the Bronx to Beijing, everyone knows exactly what Berkeley is. It’s as recognized/respected as any other academic brand. “Cal” exists only among three specific populations: 1) SF Bay Area residents, 2) people with some direct connection to the university, 3) sports fans who can name all the Pac-12 teams. Outside of those three groups “Cal” does not exist.
This effort to eliminate the brand confusion, these field changes + whatever else they do (hopefully replace the “UC a place” commercial?) won’t move the gauge a single tick. Five years from now the University of California, Berkeley will have the same exact brand confusion problem it has today.
Where did you go to school?
Cal.
Huh?
California.
Yeah, but what school?
Berkeley.
Oh, Berkeley. Wow.
::::::
If we had a 5-star recruit for every time this exact conversation happens we’d be better than Georgia.
Being asked "Cal State what?" got under my skin after a while, ngl. And this is just in LA.
Not a branding issue.
Other people NOT knowing the difference between a State university and a UC school is a different story entirely. UCLA would have the same issue.
Every single SoCal alum feels your pain.
Seems like it. "THE University of California." Take note Aaron.
You know it!
Hopefully.
Never liked the Sather stripe, and am glad we are no longer associated with the pyramid scheme that was ftx.
New look is sharp!
I'm Ok with FTX so long as Cal was able to liquidate the cryptocurrency and get real $$$.
Do need to get a new sponsor though. Maybe other sponsors like Gilead Sciences or Bank of the West (now BOM subsidiary) will step up.
I like it just fine. I liked the prior version fine too. Just variations that in the range of fine to me. I do think it is interesting how this relates to the yet unfinished effort to consolidate the Berkeley/California issue. This may be premature and unrelated to that. I hope the new turf is yet more forgiving. I've been following with interest the NFL players like Bosa coming out for grass fields since it saves their bodies so much. I get the economics of college ball may preclude fancy grass management, but turf can be more or less forgiving.
Now that more money is being invested in athletes themselves in the form of NILs, I wonder if there will be more of a move to invest in protecting those investments in the form of grass fields.
Loads of colleges still use grass. Tennessee, I know, because I read what their groundskeeper had to say when given one week to replace and repair after the Vols torn down the goalposts following their Alabama win.
The problem is that you can't practice and play games on the same field; it tears it up way too much. CAL uses Memorial Stadium for practice. Many other schools will have a complex with several or more practice fields and a game field that only sees action 6 Saturdays a season. A grass field can handle 6 days a year.
How about Strawberry Canyon and/or Kleeberger? If they are still called that.
Strawberry Canyon is the Witter Rugby Field and they already use Kleeberger for a practice field.
Well, that’s a good point: the field Turf is necessary for that reason alone. Plus, wasn’t CMS one of the first schools to install the artificial field Turf surface?