The California Golden Bears could net over $60 million from their UC brethren, a huge financial windfall that will greatly assist the athletic department.
Cal deserves every bit of the UCLA $10 million a year. Why? What is not reported (and needs to) is that the UCLA Chancellor lied to the Cal Chancellor. UCLA totally and deliberately blindsided Cal. Cal was not stupid, it had a deal with UCLA to stick together and yet UCLA lied. The only fault is Cal trusted a fellow Chancellor. Drake knows this as does the Regents. Unfortunately, this Calimony is only for 6 years and not enough to recover the actual damages. BTW, UNC Trustees watched what happened to Cal and now has polices in place where Chapel Hill will have to ask first if they can move, vs. UCLA which asked after the fact (and too late to unwind the deal). Although I look forward to watching and going to ACC games, the real solution is to be in the Big 10 (as UNC and UVA are now considering). Its too much money to pass up.
Everyone can quibble over numbers and the impact of this, but ultimately they screwed us and I’m just happy they have $10 million less per year than they otherwise would have.
I'm glad some grown ups are involved in making some effort this way. I wish there was some body that could have done the same thing for the West Coast Pac10 or Pac12 teams. I've hated this dissolving of our conference since it happened, and will keep hating it until it is restored in some fashion. I'm 55 so they have something around 30 years to fix this hot mess of a shitpile.
I agree, I hope the band gets back together again. While I hated most of our band mates, I can’t deny that we made some sweet music together over the decades.
In 1958, Ucla sought to leave the PCC, due to conference restrictions on recruiting. Then UC president Robert Gordon Sproul refused to let them go. Since that Era, UC campuses gained significant independence from the system. But Ucla's decision to join the Big-10 with USC was made without consideration of its impact on the conference or on Cal. The payments they will make are a statement more than actual compensation for their conduct.
They won’t have to. All payments to each and all if UC schools run through the Regents and then get distributed accordingly. So the B1G money runs through central processing first. Remember cutting those tuition checks? Still the same.
Can we use this money for our NIL collective? Meanwhile, FUCLA is going to be a dumpster fire in the BIG10. Great move they made. It's what they get for following the university of spoiled children...
I wonder what remedy UCLA has to dispute the decision of the regents, which for now is just a recommendation. Wasn't UCLA running an $80 million deficit in athletics?
I don't think the Regents would defy the President recommendation on an issue like this one. Much like they didn't intervene in letting UCLA leave the conference and the flagship once he gave his consent. They are looking at the interests of the whole system.
Well, they could decide to leave the UC system if they don't want to be under their jurisdiction. But that would be much harder than just paying the $10 million.
Honestly, I think Drake could maybe have forced the B1G's hand a little by leaking that he would be seeking more from them (even if privately his intention was just $10m). That might force B1G to take another look at Cal or maybe underwrite some of the UCLA travel. It's not a good look for the conference if UCLA is already having misgivings and wondering how they can be competitive.
Never had a doubt. But it just makes ucla’s feeble money grab and the regents’ allowing them to do so look so ridiculous and counterproductive. Did they think the conference would hold? Did they think Cal would get a B1G invite? It really wasn’t thought out well. Drake’s doing us a solid, but he could have done us a better one a year ago.
Not sure how it’s counterproductive. UCLA would have maybe made $30-40million per year under a Pac12 deal (if one could be made)
UCLA is gonna get about $65millon per year. Even with Calimony, UCLA is still going to get $10-15million more. A big difference from $55million (UCLA) to $17-20million (Cal). That’s a world of difference to an athletic program.
Is Cal’s best hope that the current ACC legal saga forces a restructuring that will entitle Cal & Furd to a bigger share? I think so.
And I’m not even taking into account the moral damage this move has on student athletes, overall fan experience and the collateral damage of ruining college athletics for programs like OSU and WSU. But, hey, an extra $5-10m. Go Bruins. Yay!
Except UCLA and USC will both spend $20m more, each, in annual travel expenses for their sports programs...that takes a big bite out of the increased revenue they get for jumping to the BIG10. As well think about the academic impact on the student athletes that are required to deal with a coast to coast travel schedule. It's not like womens tennis will fly to UW for a day or two for a match. They'll go back east and play three schools on one road trip and be away for a week or two at a time. The senior officials from USC and UCLA should be forced to accompany their teams on trips so they can experience firsthand the schedule they just condemned their student athletes to live.
Now they are down $10m in Calimony and an additional estimated $10m per in travel. Had UCLA stayed in the P12 conference members would have received $35m-$40. When you add on the fact that both programs are now at a greater resource disadvantage than other schools in their respective conferences and that UCLA’s killed a perfectly conceived 100 year old conference and it’s rivalries, yes, I would describe that as counterproductive. A tragic mistake even.
Who knows how long the Big 10 will last in its current form? Next contract might be better (or it might be worse..). Same for the ACC. It will be interesting to see which program is better off in 2031.
Who knows? But, yeah, it can cut both ways. You may be looking at a scenario where conference programs are compensated based on performance and eyeballs (not necessarily market dma). UCLA probably is not well set for that scenario if they are already playing from behind. I just don't think UCLA really considered the collateral effect the move would have on Cal and how that might boomerang back to them. And the Regents probably had more leverage than they realized with UCLA and the BIG to perhaps angle for more funds to offset travel or to advocate for Cal. UCLA was the skeleton key to the B1G's project.
We will be $10M short in 2030-2031. In 2031 our ACC share jumps to 70%. Who knows what the landscape will look like in 2030 (when the B1G deal expires) but maybe we can get a $10M loan against our 2031 share (conferences sometimes do this)?
But, the most important thing is UCLOL x60 million LOLs. (Unless the Regents throw a curve when they officially vote next week).
Cal deserves every bit of the UCLA $10 million a year. Why? What is not reported (and needs to) is that the UCLA Chancellor lied to the Cal Chancellor. UCLA totally and deliberately blindsided Cal. Cal was not stupid, it had a deal with UCLA to stick together and yet UCLA lied. The only fault is Cal trusted a fellow Chancellor. Drake knows this as does the Regents. Unfortunately, this Calimony is only for 6 years and not enough to recover the actual damages. BTW, UNC Trustees watched what happened to Cal and now has polices in place where Chapel Hill will have to ask first if they can move, vs. UCLA which asked after the fact (and too late to unwind the deal). Although I look forward to watching and going to ACC games, the real solution is to be in the Big 10 (as UNC and UVA are now considering). Its too much money to pass up.
What was the deal that Cal offered UCLA to stick together?
Everyone can quibble over numbers and the impact of this, but ultimately they screwed us and I’m just happy they have $10 million less per year than they otherwise would have.
I'm glad some grown ups are involved in making some effort this way. I wish there was some body that could have done the same thing for the West Coast Pac10 or Pac12 teams. I've hated this dissolving of our conference since it happened, and will keep hating it until it is restored in some fashion. I'm 55 so they have something around 30 years to fix this hot mess of a shitpile.
I agree, I hope the band gets back together again. While I hated most of our band mates, I can’t deny that we made some sweet music together over the decades.
In 1958, Ucla sought to leave the PCC, due to conference restrictions on recruiting. Then UC president Robert Gordon Sproul refused to let them go. Since that Era, UC campuses gained significant independence from the system. But Ucla's decision to join the Big-10 with USC was made without consideration of its impact on the conference or on Cal. The payments they will make are a statement more than actual compensation for their conduct.
Let me know when they actually cut a check, otherwise this is still fantasy.
They won’t have to. All payments to each and all if UC schools run through the Regents and then get distributed accordingly. So the B1G money runs through central processing first. Remember cutting those tuition checks? Still the same.
Can we use this money for our NIL collective? Meanwhile, FUCLA is going to be a dumpster fire in the BIG10. Great move they made. It's what they get for following the university of spoiled children...
That money is more than likely going to stadium debt.
Three months past due interest? lol
I wonder what remedy UCLA has to dispute the decision of the regents, which for now is just a recommendation. Wasn't UCLA running an $80 million deficit in athletics?
I don't think the Regents would defy the President recommendation on an issue like this one. Much like they didn't intervene in letting UCLA leave the conference and the flagship once he gave his consent. They are looking at the interests of the whole system.
It's a recommendation by the president to the regents, not by the regents to UCLA. They have no choice but to pay
Well, they could decide to leave the UC system if they don't want to be under their jurisdiction. But that would be much harder than just paying the $10 million.
Payback is a bitch, Bruins.........
Man, it must hurt when little brother
1) paid more than you
2) has a hotter girlfriend
3) went to pretty much the same quality school
😘
But seriously, it sounds like a fair arrangement that, when combined with Cal fiscal probity, will hopefully save Cal athletics.
That’s great but it should have been more. I feel like it should have been in the $15-$20 million range but they compromised on $10 million.
Honestly, I think Drake could maybe have forced the B1G's hand a little by leaking that he would be seeking more from them (even if privately his intention was just $10m). That might force B1G to take another look at Cal or maybe underwrite some of the UCLA travel. It's not a good look for the conference if UCLA is already having misgivings and wondering how they can be competitive.
I came here to comment the same, that they should pay us $20 million a year.
One hundred billions dollars! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LCZMhs_xpjc
How many dollars?
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HZmafy_v8g8
Brilliant!
Never had a doubt. But it just makes ucla’s feeble money grab and the regents’ allowing them to do so look so ridiculous and counterproductive. Did they think the conference would hold? Did they think Cal would get a B1G invite? It really wasn’t thought out well. Drake’s doing us a solid, but he could have done us a better one a year ago.
Not sure how it’s counterproductive. UCLA would have maybe made $30-40million per year under a Pac12 deal (if one could be made)
UCLA is gonna get about $65millon per year. Even with Calimony, UCLA is still going to get $10-15million more. A big difference from $55million (UCLA) to $17-20million (Cal). That’s a world of difference to an athletic program.
Is Cal’s best hope that the current ACC legal saga forces a restructuring that will entitle Cal & Furd to a bigger share? I think so.
And I’m not even taking into account the moral damage this move has on student athletes, overall fan experience and the collateral damage of ruining college athletics for programs like OSU and WSU. But, hey, an extra $5-10m. Go Bruins. Yay!
Except UCLA and USC will both spend $20m more, each, in annual travel expenses for their sports programs...that takes a big bite out of the increased revenue they get for jumping to the BIG10. As well think about the academic impact on the student athletes that are required to deal with a coast to coast travel schedule. It's not like womens tennis will fly to UW for a day or two for a match. They'll go back east and play three schools on one road trip and be away for a week or two at a time. The senior officials from USC and UCLA should be forced to accompany their teams on trips so they can experience firsthand the schedule they just condemned their student athletes to live.
Now they are down $10m in Calimony and an additional estimated $10m per in travel. Had UCLA stayed in the P12 conference members would have received $35m-$40. When you add on the fact that both programs are now at a greater resource disadvantage than other schools in their respective conferences and that UCLA’s killed a perfectly conceived 100 year old conference and it’s rivalries, yes, I would describe that as counterproductive. A tragic mistake even.
Calimony isn’t gonna last forever.
Who knows how long the Big 10 will last in its current form? Next contract might be better (or it might be worse..). Same for the ACC. It will be interesting to see which program is better off in 2031.
Who knows? But, yeah, it can cut both ways. You may be looking at a scenario where conference programs are compensated based on performance and eyeballs (not necessarily market dma). UCLA probably is not well set for that scenario if they are already playing from behind. I just don't think UCLA really considered the collateral effect the move would have on Cal and how that might boomerang back to them. And the Regents probably had more leverage than they realized with UCLA and the BIG to perhaps angle for more funds to offset travel or to advocate for Cal. UCLA was the skeleton key to the B1G's project.
I suspect UCLA got surprised by the B1G and USC with the offer and had to decide very quickly. Not much time to consider the ramifications.
How about just plain 'fucked up'? Let's not candy coat it...
We will be $10M short in 2030-2031. In 2031 our ACC share jumps to 70%. Who knows what the landscape will look like in 2030 (when the B1G deal expires) but maybe we can get a $10M loan against our 2031 share (conferences sometimes do this)?
But, the most important thing is UCLOL x60 million LOLs. (Unless the Regents throw a curve when they officially vote next week).
Who knows if 2031 will ever rcome.
I hope we’re alive still.
Smokin on that Bruin pack tonight
UCLOL!!!