Some good vollies to some tough, good questions, Avi.
Make no mistake, we have been caught a couple of sandwiches short of a picnic and are at the bottom end of an existential crossroads. Shite or get off the pot.
But how do we reverse decades of intellectual disdain for money sports?
I'm sorry, Bruins, but UCLA's "brand" being the draw that got them the B!G invite is laughable. I, for one, am glad you spiked that right back at them, Avi. For UCLA home games, the Rose Bowl presents a lonely, mostly empty canvas and there's the same tell we, Bears, suffer.
I'm not 100% positive that the B!G is our best solution. Honestly, I feel any overtures to UCLA and most especially, $C, debase us.
What UCLA supporters and we should both jointly realize is that we both are facing the same existential crisis, as the UC System, it would seem, attempts to extinguish money sports at all UC schools through faint praise and rigid barriers to success. Notice the lack of football programs at most expansion campuses? Both schools, Cal and UCLA, are arguably the top two public universities, both of which should have comparably excellent athletic "brands," but neither really does. It may help UCLA to be head-to-head with the likes of Michigan, which really does seem to bridge the gap between academic and money sport excellence. But will that convert the stoics in UC academe, who seem to exercise a sort of veto power of what directions UC culture takes?
Don't get me wrong, the academic reputation is important, but as the World marches towards a technocratic dystopia (IMHO), celebrations of the natural world, such as athletics, seem destined to be relegated to a sort of apocryphal status. Such trends make me uneasy for not just UC culture, but the World's future.
I just don’t see UCLA pushing hard to get Cal into the B1G. Cal is locked into the ACC for a while, there didn’t seem to be a lot of desire from the B1G for the NorCal media market (which is weird, because I would have thought they’d want the Bay Area market before PNW). It seems the B1G prioritized athletic success (UCLA basketball, USC/UW/Oregon football) to media market.
The only way Cal & Stanford can help themselves here is to have several knockout seasons in the revenue sports. Calimony isn’t going to be enough of a factor for UCLA to be able to move the needle for an invite for Cal.
Completely agree - we cant separate the networks from the conferences. They were the ultimate puppet masters.
I think it was all payback for the PAC12’s refusal for the initial creation of the Pac12 network & refusing to partner it off the bat to a major network like the other conferences did
There's also some palpable disdain for SF and Berkeley, itself, both being seen as Leftist bastions. I remember Joe Buck's snide, unrestrained comments when the Giants were in the World Series. I am not sure that Joe Buck nor, presumably, Fox were/are completely wrong.
There's also an exception to the rule. I and many other Cal grads are Republican/conservative voters. Many years ago, I learned it best to let political, verbal diarrhea, of any POV, run its course and not deter me, though, every now and then, I do take pause and think about some points being made. Polarized perspectives cannot be argued with, just endured. LOL.
Same here. There are plenty of us, some of whom came to Cal specifically to face the fiercest resistance we could possibly find to our ideas and test the limits of discourse.
Impaulv: It is also possible that the Big-10 is stringing us along so they can give us a low-ball offer that we will be desperate to take, perhaps even less than what Oregon and Washington are getting ($30 million a year). I just don't see them completely abandoning the 6th largest media market in the United States.
The real issue is that Fox is being stingy about paying for new members. I'm sure the B1G presidents would be happy to have Cal and Stanford in the fold (for the academic prestige and to have more West Coast travel partners for their new members), but if Fox won't pay for it then it's not happening. The next TV contract negotiations should be interesting.
But, if Cal takes a lowball offer (say $20-30 million), will that get UCLA off the Calimony hook? I don't think so. So... where's the incentive for UCLA to loudly advocate?
And they've completely abandoned/ignored the Bay Area market right now (or the B1G might possibly be counting on there being enough UCLA/USC/Oregon/UW fans in the Bay Area to attract the eyeballs they want, without the local programs).
It's not clear to me why you would address comments by UCLA acolytes. They have no interest in acknowledging their administration's manner of leaving the UC system without considering the consequences or implications of their conduct. The Regents would not have voted 15-1 to implement the three years of funding. It was about warning UC campuses they are part of a system.
First, let me state for the record that my wife is a Bruin. Second, I had no idea that they WHINED SO MUCH! Admit what you did and accept the punishment. You (and the university of spoiled children) screwed us royally so you could try and enhance your profile as a university and hopefully be the UC that everyone talks about. News flash, it won't work. Yes, FUCLA has the edge over us in terms of athletic accomplishments (Rest in Peace, Bill Walton), but when it comes to people and inventions that have changed the world (Earl Warren, Steve Wozniak, Jerry Mathers, plutonium, Oppenheimer, 61 actual or affiliated Nobel Laureates, etc.), FUCLA isn't even CLOSE (15 actual or affiliated Nobel Laureates)! So Bruin fans, stop whining about paying us a paltry $10 million a year and do everything in your power to get us into the Big 10 and re-establish the old west coast rivalries that everyone wants to see.
And Bill Walton may have passed due to cancer but he was probably heartbroken over the break up of the “conference of champions” as he used to remind us all the time. He will be missed. Go Bears!!
I'm sure a post is forthcoming, but a Cal-UCLA post seems like the proper place to acknowledge the passing of Bill Walton. Even though he was a UCLA alum, he deeply loved Berkeley. Truly an original.
He did. Even when we played the Bruins, he always talked about how much he loved Berkeley. From a sports career standpoint, he made the right choice to go to UCLA and become a legend. But something tells me that, deep down inside, he would have fit right in at Cal and on Telegraph Avenue. RIP, Bill Walton.
The comments quoted in the article should drop UCLA's academic ranking at least 3 spots.
I'm a little surprised B1G didn't try sticking UCLA with a reduced share given UCLA's budgetary woes. I guess securing the LA monopoly was worth the full share. The Regents would have tried blocking the move if they didn't think Calimony was an option. But a big chunk of revenue would solve both UCLA's budgetary mess and also shore up Cal's finances. The Regents' actions all make perfect sense with the dual flagship model.
Ketamine: Quick point of clarification. There is only ONE flagship in the UC system and it is US! THE University of California at Berkeley! FUCLA would love nothing better than for people around the country to think that they are the most important UC but it won't work (see my previous thread).
Of course, we are the true UC flagship! The system just needs something to act as a southern "flagship" because there are so many people living in SoCal. There's one thing UCLA can never be and that's the first UC!
Ketamine: You are absolutely correct but don't fool yourself either. FUCLA is constantly battling us for money and prestige. A good friend of mine teaches there and when I last visited, #1 public university banners were plastered all over campus, even if it isn't true or is subject to debate. They would love nothing more than to be thought of as the flagship of the UC, even if it isn't true.
Possibly, and it would have generated a mess. It's possible that the Regents trying to block it would cause B1G to rescind the offer, or even threaten to lower it. It would have been interesting to see how much UCLA was really valued by each party.
But they made the right choice to just take the cash and attach conditions instead of creating a mess. And UCLA was smart to say "yes, sir, whatever you want."
Theoretically they could have, but not sure it would make sense for the UC system to refuse the incoming B1G windfall. They just had to balance the scales a bit so as to not screw over the other UC school playing major college football.
From a UC systemwide budget perspective, it seems like Regents are paying Cal from one budget source and will (in some way) repay UCLA back from another budget source.
And the #1 reason: UCLA is a public university. It exists by and for the benefit of Californians under the domain of the Regents. The Regents had legal standing to prevent UCLA s move to the B 10. The Regents allowed the move with the condition of Calinony. The $10 million per year is just part and parcel of the move
Randy—totally agree. If this was the business world and a “subsidiary”, ie UCLA, unilaterally made a decision to move to a different “company” (Big 10) lawsuits would be flying and management of the “sub” would surely be fired. UCLA went rogue on its bosses (Regents) and were lucky to get this result. Cal has no reason to thank UCLA for these payments as the senior management ordered it. I’m surprised that no one at UCLA was not fired by the Regents for insubordination. We will see how UCLA fans enjoy being in that conference.
Some good vollies to some tough, good questions, Avi.
Make no mistake, we have been caught a couple of sandwiches short of a picnic and are at the bottom end of an existential crossroads. Shite or get off the pot.
But how do we reverse decades of intellectual disdain for money sports?
I'm sorry, Bruins, but UCLA's "brand" being the draw that got them the B!G invite is laughable. I, for one, am glad you spiked that right back at them, Avi. For UCLA home games, the Rose Bowl presents a lonely, mostly empty canvas and there's the same tell we, Bears, suffer.
I'm not 100% positive that the B!G is our best solution. Honestly, I feel any overtures to UCLA and most especially, $C, debase us.
What UCLA supporters and we should both jointly realize is that we both are facing the same existential crisis, as the UC System, it would seem, attempts to extinguish money sports at all UC schools through faint praise and rigid barriers to success. Notice the lack of football programs at most expansion campuses? Both schools, Cal and UCLA, are arguably the top two public universities, both of which should have comparably excellent athletic "brands," but neither really does. It may help UCLA to be head-to-head with the likes of Michigan, which really does seem to bridge the gap between academic and money sport excellence. But will that convert the stoics in UC academe, who seem to exercise a sort of veto power of what directions UC culture takes?
Don't get me wrong, the academic reputation is important, but as the World marches towards a technocratic dystopia (IMHO), celebrations of the natural world, such as athletics, seem destined to be relegated to a sort of apocryphal status. Such trends make me uneasy for not just UC culture, but the World's future.
Those who hate PE should be helped to love it.
I just don’t see UCLA pushing hard to get Cal into the B1G. Cal is locked into the ACC for a while, there didn’t seem to be a lot of desire from the B1G for the NorCal media market (which is weird, because I would have thought they’d want the Bay Area market before PNW). It seems the B1G prioritized athletic success (UCLA basketball, USC/UW/Oregon football) to media market.
The only way Cal & Stanford can help themselves here is to have several knockout seasons in the revenue sports. Calimony isn’t going to be enough of a factor for UCLA to be able to move the needle for an invite for Cal.
With all due respect,
"It seems the Fox prioritized athletic success (UCLA basketball, USC/UW/Oregon football) to media market."
There I fixed it for ya.'
And, yes, $C, if I heard rightly, adamantly opposed our invite. So, there's that.
Completely agree - we cant separate the networks from the conferences. They were the ultimate puppet masters.
I think it was all payback for the PAC12’s refusal for the initial creation of the Pac12 network & refusing to partner it off the bat to a major network like the other conferences did
There's also some palpable disdain for SF and Berkeley, itself, both being seen as Leftist bastions. I remember Joe Buck's snide, unrestrained comments when the Giants were in the World Series. I am not sure that Joe Buck nor, presumably, Fox were/are completely wrong.
There's also an exception to the rule. I and many other Cal grads are Republican/conservative voters. Many years ago, I learned it best to let political, verbal diarrhea, of any POV, run its course and not deter me, though, every now and then, I do take pause and think about some points being made. Polarized perspectives cannot be argued with, just endured. LOL.
Same here. There are plenty of us, some of whom came to Cal specifically to face the fiercest resistance we could possibly find to our ideas and test the limits of discourse.
Impaulv: It is also possible that the Big-10 is stringing us along so they can give us a low-ball offer that we will be desperate to take, perhaps even less than what Oregon and Washington are getting ($30 million a year). I just don't see them completely abandoning the 6th largest media market in the United States.
The real issue is that Fox is being stingy about paying for new members. I'm sure the B1G presidents would be happy to have Cal and Stanford in the fold (for the academic prestige and to have more West Coast travel partners for their new members), but if Fox won't pay for it then it's not happening. The next TV contract negotiations should be interesting.
But, if Cal takes a lowball offer (say $20-30 million), will that get UCLA off the Calimony hook? I don't think so. So... where's the incentive for UCLA to loudly advocate?
And they've completely abandoned/ignored the Bay Area market right now (or the B1G might possibly be counting on there being enough UCLA/USC/Oregon/UW fans in the Bay Area to attract the eyeballs they want, without the local programs).
It's not clear to me why you would address comments by UCLA acolytes. They have no interest in acknowledging their administration's manner of leaving the UC system without considering the consequences or implications of their conduct. The Regents would not have voted 15-1 to implement the three years of funding. It was about warning UC campuses they are part of a system.
First, let me state for the record that my wife is a Bruin. Second, I had no idea that they WHINED SO MUCH! Admit what you did and accept the punishment. You (and the university of spoiled children) screwed us royally so you could try and enhance your profile as a university and hopefully be the UC that everyone talks about. News flash, it won't work. Yes, FUCLA has the edge over us in terms of athletic accomplishments (Rest in Peace, Bill Walton), but when it comes to people and inventions that have changed the world (Earl Warren, Steve Wozniak, Jerry Mathers, plutonium, Oppenheimer, 61 actual or affiliated Nobel Laureates, etc.), FUCLA isn't even CLOSE (15 actual or affiliated Nobel Laureates)! So Bruin fans, stop whining about paying us a paltry $10 million a year and do everything in your power to get us into the Big 10 and re-establish the old west coast rivalries that everyone wants to see.
I love that you include The Beav. 🦫
I, for one, would rather see us die than to go begging...again.
Bowlesman: I'm glad that you picked up on that one. I wasn't sure if anyone would.
And Bill Walton may have passed due to cancer but he was probably heartbroken over the break up of the “conference of champions” as he used to remind us all the time. He will be missed. Go Bears!!
When will I personally be receiving my calimony ? First of the month would be great
I'm sure a post is forthcoming, but a Cal-UCLA post seems like the proper place to acknowledge the passing of Bill Walton. Even though he was a UCLA alum, he deeply loved Berkeley. Truly an original.
There is a feature up now! https://writeforcalifornia.com/p/bill-walton-remembering-berkeley
He did. Even when we played the Bruins, he always talked about how much he loved Berkeley. From a sports career standpoint, he made the right choice to go to UCLA and become a legend. But something tells me that, deep down inside, he would have fit right in at Cal and on Telegraph Avenue. RIP, Bill Walton.
And how can one ever forget this one…
https://youtu.be/y5C52Dq5pu8?feature=shared
Legend
https://youtu.be/qY8UG2tzPeg?si=52qr1kIJ-z0POQwP
Love the look on the blond woman's face as he stripped.
Dude was always just visiting our plane of existence. Which completely explains how he called games.
Sad indeed. Rip Bill. Rip conference of champions.
He will be missed. He loved the Conference of the Champions
Avi's commitment to consistent trolling of UCLA fans on Twitter is quite impressive.
It really is.
Way above my pay grade. Play ball!
Oh gosh, no one tell our academics that there is a chance we could be in the Ivy League (I think there actually is no chance, but still).
The comments quoted in the article should drop UCLA's academic ranking at least 3 spots.
I'm a little surprised B1G didn't try sticking UCLA with a reduced share given UCLA's budgetary woes. I guess securing the LA monopoly was worth the full share. The Regents would have tried blocking the move if they didn't think Calimony was an option. But a big chunk of revenue would solve both UCLA's budgetary mess and also shore up Cal's finances. The Regents' actions all make perfect sense with the dual flagship model.
Ketamine: Quick point of clarification. There is only ONE flagship in the UC system and it is US! THE University of California at Berkeley! FUCLA would love nothing better than for people around the country to think that they are the most important UC but it won't work (see my previous thread).
Of course, we are the true UC flagship! The system just needs something to act as a southern "flagship" because there are so many people living in SoCal. There's one thing UCLA can never be and that's the first UC!
Ketamine: You are absolutely correct but don't fool yourself either. FUCLA is constantly battling us for money and prestige. A good friend of mine teaches there and when I last visited, #1 public university banners were plastered all over campus, even if it isn't true or is subject to debate. They would love nothing more than to be thought of as the flagship of the UC, even if it isn't true.
Oh it's so nice you're advertising Cal Berkeley at your campus...
Did the Regents have any option to block it? I thought UCLA went ahead without consulting the Regents for approval.
Possibly, and it would have generated a mess. It's possible that the Regents trying to block it would cause B1G to rescind the offer, or even threaten to lower it. It would have been interesting to see how much UCLA was really valued by each party.
But they made the right choice to just take the cash and attach conditions instead of creating a mess. And UCLA was smart to say "yes, sir, whatever you want."
Theoretically they could have, but not sure it would make sense for the UC system to refuse the incoming B1G windfall. They just had to balance the scales a bit so as to not screw over the other UC school playing major college football.
From a UC systemwide budget perspective, it seems like Regents are paying Cal from one budget source and will (in some way) repay UCLA back from another budget source.
Sounds like the UC. Patronizing and playing both school's athletic supporters for fools.
And the #1 reason: UCLA is a public university. It exists by and for the benefit of Californians under the domain of the Regents. The Regents had legal standing to prevent UCLA s move to the B 10. The Regents allowed the move with the condition of Calinony. The $10 million per year is just part and parcel of the move
Randy—totally agree. If this was the business world and a “subsidiary”, ie UCLA, unilaterally made a decision to move to a different “company” (Big 10) lawsuits would be flying and management of the “sub” would surely be fired. UCLA went rogue on its bosses (Regents) and were lucky to get this result. Cal has no reason to thank UCLA for these payments as the senior management ordered it. I’m surprised that no one at UCLA was not fired by the Regents for insubordination. We will see how UCLA fans enjoy being in that conference.
Probably a little more than being the Atlantic Conference, but time will tell! ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Why are people so angry about money that is not coming out of their own pockets?
It’s truly baffling.