A sixth disastrous Cal decision was to not be proactively and actively engaged in conference decision making and negotiation, and direction, supervision and review of the commissioner and other top level executives, instead just relying on the commissioners office to serve there best interests without doing anything to deliver that. That is a disastrous decision shared across the conference.
They had a good basketball coach in Ben Braun, granted they struggled his last few years but the first 7 he was there he did a good job, did anyone at Cal ask why someone who had good success 5 out of his first 7 years started struggling.
I've never been to Memorial Stadium but from the pics it doesn't look like all that special. Yes, I'm sure it has history, but so does Lambeau field and their renovations look way better than what Cal did with their facility.
While the architectural design of the structure is undeniably beautiful, it is not entirely unique; similar stadiums can be found in other locations. During it's renovation in 2013, they preserved the exterior while adding modern concessions. However, judging Memorial Stadium based solely on internet pictures of the building does not do it justice. This is because the stadium is nestled into a hill covered with oak trees, affording it an exceptional vantage point overlooking the Bay Area. On clear sunny days in Berkeley,(basically everyday) you can pan from South to North facing the Pacific Ocean while standing at the rim's peak, which is a breathtaking panorama. You can see the cities of Oakland and San Francisco, the Bay Bridge connecting the two, and the iconic Golden Gate Bridge spanning from S.F to Marin County. It's one of the most spectacular views available anywhere (specially at sunset). It's something that you can only appreciate in person and significantly enhances the overall game day experience.
Welp, it's right on an earthquake fault line, so the renovations had little to do with esthetics or much of anything that might attract more people. Unfortunately.
All that being said, our stadium is the 14th oldest in the USA. Then there's the location, nestled in the edge of a canyon that commands panoramic views of the entire Bay Area, including the Golden Gate Bridge. One might say that California Memorial Stadium is the crown jewel of U.C. Berkeley. And that's saying much, since the entire campus is arguably one of the most beautiful in the world.
Okay. Just curious. Why don't you like attending games at the Memorial Stadium? If you are a recent student then that's understandable. It was amazing atmosphere during the Tedford era.
Cal has a recruiting problem among other things. Look at the race of the players for winning football and basketball teams then look at the student body. a Cal degree doesn't mean as much to them. It's given an asterisk as they are looked at with the notion they were only at Cal because they were athletes and not qualified so who cares if they went to Cal. Cal had one of the worst graduation rates for Black athletes in the country. I've been on campus in Oxford Mississippi and in Berkeley and it's more welcoming for a Black student at Ole Miss than at Cal. Cal doesn't take care of people. It's a bargain basement program. Other schools give you the "trinkets" e.g. shoes, sweats, shirts etc. you want. Cal makes you sign away your life for a pair of socks. Nobel prizes are more important at Cal and justifiably so. Maybe Cal isn't a major player in football and basketball and should realise that reality.
The reality is that Cal has a recruiting problem when they bring recruits to campus. It lacks diversity. Look, football and basketball players want to get to the NFL and NBA. What do those players look like? They want to see women who look like them. When they visit campus, they do clearly not. Also, Cal is a bargain basement program. I had a basketball player tell me how he had to turn in his worn-out shoes to get a new pair. Many schools just give you what you want. It's a shame that being in Pullman Washington or Oxford, Mississippi is better than Berkeley. Also, Cal has always had the impression that its Nobel prize winners and academic reputation ae more important than football and basketball. Face it, Cal has a recruiting problem. NIL helps but only so much. The better players want to play where they will be groomed for the pros. The Pac12 fell behind. Cal and Stanford for good or bad have great reputations but please, for Black students their Cal or Stanford degree will be look with an asterisk that they were at those schools because they were not "qualified" and a special admit and not worthy of the degree and they are not treated well.
I am convinced that Cal and Stanford are marketing themselves as a pair, but if the ACC only offers Stanford and say, SMU (who agreed to waive TV rights for xx years), they both will take it.
Here's an interesting spin on the non-linear popularity.
"According to Nielsen’s monthly The Gauge study, broadcast (20.0 percent of total TV viewership) and cable (29.6 percent) combined for 49.6 percent of all television viewing last month."
I, for one, am a Boomer and a subscriber to non-linear entertainment.
FYI, since 2011 (and not counting the 2010-11 school year), Cal Athletics have claimed 23 of the current 103 team national championships. Of course, the Director's Cup nor Capital One Cups for the Men and Women consider the performances in the non-NCAA sports. That means the 7 rugby (5 in 7s and just 2 in 15s, the latter is consider an atypical championship drought) and 3 men's rowing titles do not matter at all (neither did the one women's tennis indoor team title that some may argue that Cal should not even count in the 103).
In reality, the Cal administration tightened the budgets across the board on both the revenue and non-revenue sports. Some of the better run and funded sports (aquatics, rowing, rugby) have thrived while some of the smaller programs run by great coaches (women's gymnastics, beach volleyball, throwing events in track and field) have drastically improved, but the rest had struggled. There is this clear dichotomy within Cal Athletics of the dominating and struggling programs in the recent decade. I would agree that this is not ideal. Yet at the same time, I would gladly probably trade several postseason appearances (and like 20 points in the Directors' cup where they rewards 100 for the national champions) for a national championship. I would just love the championships to be more spread out across different programs (of course, a lot of people love sports dynasties).
I see places like Michigan and Texas who seem to have a good balance of quality academics and great athletic programs. Can we become that successful, in part or in full?
What do people view as the solution(s) to getting Cal back on track in athletics? Is it as simple as hiring a new AD? An increase in the budget to athletics? Identify anyone in the administration who is opposed to athletics and show them the door?
We have a passionate and smart fan base. Wondering if we can identify solutions and then start pushing those solutions forward in order to improve Cal athletics?
Liberalism helped kill the cal athletic program, Too! Ever heard the slogan “go woke, go broke!” Cal doesn’t operate the way other athletic programs operate. They reward people for being nice people (knowlton) and not results. This liberalism has been going on years. At usc, and ucla it is a strict working environment in their athletic departments. If you aren’t getting the job done your are let go. Cal doesn’t do that. They say “he is such a nice guy, and we want him to work here forever.” Businesses succeed by being fiscal and conservative. If cal would have adopted that attitude, they wouldn’t be in this financial mess!
You’re right but this brand of liberalism that borders on insanity also exists at UCLA and USC to an extent. A big part of the PAC-12’s demise was the conference’s handling of COVID. They didn’t take financial responsibility into consideration. A full year worth of lost revenue can be devastating for any business. In the case of sports, it created new fan habits on top of operating in the red. Many current PAC-12 schools are financially strapped. It’s a perfect case study of how liberalism and woke ideology can destroy a century plus old institution.
In this case, "woke" is an accurate assessment. The chancellor is more focused on "world-class participatory and educational opportunities" than actual winning on the field
If you think that is a misplaced organizational decision, then say that and make your argument, rather than resorting to an increasingly meaningless pejorative that illuminates nothing.
Agree. Not valuing sports has nothing to do with wokeness. Many non-woke taxpayers and faculty would prefer Cal become a public University of Chicago, and eliminate all athletic admissions. Their position is that if we must have sports, make them all D3.
Like, there is NOTHING woke about giving Jim Knowlton millions of dollars for being at best a mediocrity. To the extent that I understand what “woke” is anymore, the woke solution would’ve been to fire him into the Sun a year ago
I think I would add the constant blackballing of institutions we thought weren’t an academic or cultural fit in the face of potential expansion. That wasn’t entirely in our control, but together with Stanford we played a huge role.
A sixth disastrous Cal decision was to not be proactively and actively engaged in conference decision making and negotiation, and direction, supervision and review of the commissioner and other top level executives, instead just relying on the commissioners office to serve there best interests without doing anything to deliver that. That is a disastrous decision shared across the conference.
I knew they were the evil side.
https://www.si.com/college/stanford/football/condoleezza-rice-george-w-bush-making-push-for-acc-to-add-stanford-and-smu
https://sports.yahoo.com/could-george-w-bush-and-condi-rice-help-push-acc-to-expansion-heres-why-some-member-schools-are-unhappy-224245252.html
others are reporting that Cal is still part of the deal, though without a specific advocate, which sounds about as expected.
https://twitter.com/wilnerhotline/status/1692210823853482371
“Diversity, Equity, Inclusion and Belonging” is code for we care about wokeness and virtue signaling, not actually getting anything meaningful done.
Yeah, but it's everywhere, now.
There are "true believers" in some of these things, at UCLA, too.
Great article.
They had a good basketball coach in Ben Braun, granted they struggled his last few years but the first 7 he was there he did a good job, did anyone at Cal ask why someone who had good success 5 out of his first 7 years started struggling.
I've never been to Memorial Stadium but from the pics it doesn't look like all that special. Yes, I'm sure it has history, but so does Lambeau field and their renovations look way better than what Cal did with their facility.
While the architectural design of the structure is undeniably beautiful, it is not entirely unique; similar stadiums can be found in other locations. During it's renovation in 2013, they preserved the exterior while adding modern concessions. However, judging Memorial Stadium based solely on internet pictures of the building does not do it justice. This is because the stadium is nestled into a hill covered with oak trees, affording it an exceptional vantage point overlooking the Bay Area. On clear sunny days in Berkeley,(basically everyday) you can pan from South to North facing the Pacific Ocean while standing at the rim's peak, which is a breathtaking panorama. You can see the cities of Oakland and San Francisco, the Bay Bridge connecting the two, and the iconic Golden Gate Bridge spanning from S.F to Marin County. It's one of the most spectacular views available anywhere (specially at sunset). It's something that you can only appreciate in person and significantly enhances the overall game day experience.
https://foursquare.com/v/tightwad-hill/4ac8044af964a52036bb20e3?openPhotoId=527594fb498e8e2367499332
Also you should go to the Memorial Stadium. Where do you live?
Welp, it's right on an earthquake fault line, so the renovations had little to do with esthetics or much of anything that might attract more people. Unfortunately.
All that being said, our stadium is the 14th oldest in the USA. Then there's the location, nestled in the edge of a canyon that commands panoramic views of the entire Bay Area, including the Golden Gate Bridge. One might say that California Memorial Stadium is the crown jewel of U.C. Berkeley. And that's saying much, since the entire campus is arguably one of the most beautiful in the world.
Why are you comparing historic NFL stadium to a college stadium?
Well Memorial Stadium bears a striking resemblance to the original Lambeau Field configuration that's why.
Okay. Just curious. Why don't you like attending games at the Memorial Stadium? If you are a recent student then that's understandable. It was amazing atmosphere during the Tedford era.
Cal has a recruiting problem among other things. Look at the race of the players for winning football and basketball teams then look at the student body. a Cal degree doesn't mean as much to them. It's given an asterisk as they are looked at with the notion they were only at Cal because they were athletes and not qualified so who cares if they went to Cal. Cal had one of the worst graduation rates for Black athletes in the country. I've been on campus in Oxford Mississippi and in Berkeley and it's more welcoming for a Black student at Ole Miss than at Cal. Cal doesn't take care of people. It's a bargain basement program. Other schools give you the "trinkets" e.g. shoes, sweats, shirts etc. you want. Cal makes you sign away your life for a pair of socks. Nobel prizes are more important at Cal and justifiably so. Maybe Cal isn't a major player in football and basketball and should realise that reality.
The reality is that Cal has a recruiting problem when they bring recruits to campus. It lacks diversity. Look, football and basketball players want to get to the NFL and NBA. What do those players look like? They want to see women who look like them. When they visit campus, they do clearly not. Also, Cal is a bargain basement program. I had a basketball player tell me how he had to turn in his worn-out shoes to get a new pair. Many schools just give you what you want. It's a shame that being in Pullman Washington or Oxford, Mississippi is better than Berkeley. Also, Cal has always had the impression that its Nobel prize winners and academic reputation ae more important than football and basketball. Face it, Cal has a recruiting problem. NIL helps but only so much. The better players want to play where they will be groomed for the pros. The Pac12 fell behind. Cal and Stanford for good or bad have great reputations but please, for Black students their Cal or Stanford degree will be look with an asterisk that they were at those schools because they were not "qualified" and a special admit and not worthy of the degree and they are not treated well.
How about instead of what you're proposing, lets make the football and basketball teams look more like the rest of the students on campus
This is a hard pill for many to swallow!
I don't know if this is good or bad
https://www.si.com/college/stanford/football/stanford-is-optimistic-they-can-get-the-votes-to-join-the-acc-as-soon-as-this-week
Are they going to ACC without Cal? We have to beg Troy Taylor to not leave us behind.
I am convinced that Cal and Stanford are marketing themselves as a pair, but if the ACC only offers Stanford and say, SMU (who agreed to waive TV rights for xx years), they both will take it.
I agree with this. But I would be VERY surprised if we didn't join a conference as a package deal.
Or if we didn't join a P5 or P4 conference at all
lots of rumors now: optimistic about ACC, B10 still in play, Pac-18 merger with AAC + Boise/SDSU/Colorado State.
I'm guessing it's nego tactics, but which option is the one thats really in play?
Here's an interesting spin on the non-linear popularity.
"According to Nielsen’s monthly The Gauge study, broadcast (20.0 percent of total TV viewership) and cable (29.6 percent) combined for 49.6 percent of all television viewing last month."
I, for one, am a Boomer and a subscriber to non-linear entertainment.
https://www.indiewire.com/news/breaking-news/linear-tv-dead-broadcast-cable-streaming-share-1234895989/
"[in] 12-month period, streaming usage has grown 25.3 percent."
What's going to be left on linear in the coming years, The Dukes of Hazzard reruns?
This fucking sucks. I’m normally so pumped for the season, but this is really making it hard.
FYI, since 2011 (and not counting the 2010-11 school year), Cal Athletics have claimed 23 of the current 103 team national championships. Of course, the Director's Cup nor Capital One Cups for the Men and Women consider the performances in the non-NCAA sports. That means the 7 rugby (5 in 7s and just 2 in 15s, the latter is consider an atypical championship drought) and 3 men's rowing titles do not matter at all (neither did the one women's tennis indoor team title that some may argue that Cal should not even count in the 103).
In reality, the Cal administration tightened the budgets across the board on both the revenue and non-revenue sports. Some of the better run and funded sports (aquatics, rowing, rugby) have thrived while some of the smaller programs run by great coaches (women's gymnastics, beach volleyball, throwing events in track and field) have drastically improved, but the rest had struggled. There is this clear dichotomy within Cal Athletics of the dominating and struggling programs in the recent decade. I would agree that this is not ideal. Yet at the same time, I would gladly probably trade several postseason appearances (and like 20 points in the Directors' cup where they rewards 100 for the national champions) for a national championship. I would just love the championships to be more spread out across different programs (of course, a lot of people love sports dynasties).
I see places like Michigan and Texas who seem to have a good balance of quality academics and great athletic programs. Can we become that successful, in part or in full?
What do people view as the solution(s) to getting Cal back on track in athletics? Is it as simple as hiring a new AD? An increase in the budget to athletics? Identify anyone in the administration who is opposed to athletics and show them the door?
We have a passionate and smart fan base. Wondering if we can identify solutions and then start pushing those solutions forward in order to improve Cal athletics?
Liberalism helped kill the cal athletic program, Too! Ever heard the slogan “go woke, go broke!” Cal doesn’t operate the way other athletic programs operate. They reward people for being nice people (knowlton) and not results. This liberalism has been going on years. At usc, and ucla it is a strict working environment in their athletic departments. If you aren’t getting the job done your are let go. Cal doesn’t do that. They say “he is such a nice guy, and we want him to work here forever.” Businesses succeed by being fiscal and conservative. If cal would have adopted that attitude, they wouldn’t be in this financial mess!
You’re right but this brand of liberalism that borders on insanity also exists at UCLA and USC to an extent. A big part of the PAC-12’s demise was the conference’s handling of COVID. They didn’t take financial responsibility into consideration. A full year worth of lost revenue can be devastating for any business. In the case of sports, it created new fan habits on top of operating in the red. Many current PAC-12 schools are financially strapped. It’s a perfect case study of how liberalism and woke ideology can destroy a century plus old institution.
https://media.licdn.com/dms/image/D4E22AQGaP5VSt1EDSg/feedshare-shrink_800/0/1681807032435?e=1695254400&v=beta&t=VocX4Rfl3LdQfVtRGY6lgc-yGe_SmS-Ja-v7-xT_mdY
In this case, "woke" is an accurate assessment. The chancellor is more focused on "world-class participatory and educational opportunities" than actual winning on the field
If you think that is a misplaced organizational decision, then say that and make your argument, rather than resorting to an increasingly meaningless pejorative that illuminates nothing.
Agree. Not valuing sports has nothing to do with wokeness. Many non-woke taxpayers and faculty would prefer Cal become a public University of Chicago, and eliminate all athletic admissions. Their position is that if we must have sports, make them all D3.
Like, there is NOTHING woke about giving Jim Knowlton millions of dollars for being at best a mediocrity. To the extent that I understand what “woke” is anymore, the woke solution would’ve been to fire him into the Sun a year ago
As we should have done.
Dykes was, is, always will be a 2-faced tool, good riddance.
F that guy.
I think I would add the constant blackballing of institutions we thought weren’t an academic or cultural fit in the face of potential expansion. That wasn’t entirely in our control, but together with Stanford we played a huge role.