Jump to content

All Hail

Members
  • Posts

    10,737
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by All Hail

  1. For UCLA to claim that they were unable to admit Marshawn is nonsense. They could admit him as an exception, just as Cal did and just as UCLA did with other athletes at a more frequent rate than Cal I might add. UCLA chose not to make academic exceptions for Lynch, likely because they were never serious contenders for him in the first place. It takes approximately one Lynch interview to be convinced that he was never serious about leaving the East Bay. Anyhow, that is all in the past. Moving forward, Cal will get to legitimately use the excuse UCLA's fans erroneously co-opted. Cal could have saved themselves this trouble by doing what UCLA does and just invest more money into academic support for the players on campus but it wouldn't be Cal if the policy wasn't penny wise and pound foolish.
  2. It's not free, you gotta earn it.
  3. Ted Cruz is going to be President. Oregon State gets better recruits than Michigan. And Arizona State has the loudest student section in the West. He's forming quite the list.
  4. According to your link, CU has Raised $75,781,589 total, which includes the endowment. CU has raised $57,645,266 of "capital," which isn't defined, and an Endowment of $18,136,323, which added to the "capital" equals a total of $75,781,589
  5. He was fired for poor performance but his recruiting was always solid even in his dying days. You still can't answer why Tedford recruited better with poor facilities than he or Dykes did with good ones. Cal has been far worse this decade with the facilities upgrade than they were last decade before the facilities upgrade. It's always interesting when you decide the media is credible and when it is not. There's some sort of correlation going on...
  6. Yes and that was my point. He was recruiting better than Dykes ever did with the worst facilities in the conference and got far better results as well. Facilities don't matter nearly as much as coaches do and until Colorado gets a good coach, their facilities won't mean a damn thing.
  7. Cal finished the regular season ranked #4 in 2004, hauled in top 10 recruiting classes in 2006 and 2010, and was briefly ranked #1 in the nation in 2007 and all of this was done before our facilities upgrades. It was done because of a coach. I'm not sure what you consider down for a very long time but if the aforementioned stats meant that Cal was down then ASU has never been up. Who brings in the talent? That would be the coaches, not the facilities as Tedford repeatedly proved. Recruits commit to coach they can trust, they don't commit to a gym.
  8. Yes, and WSU could be scary good in a couple of years too. Cal recruited better when our facilities ranked dead last in the conference. A team doesn't become a powerhouse in a matter of years due to facilites. It's coaches that make the college football world go round.
  9. Can this be proven? How are the admissions departments different? His point is undermined by the fact that UCLA takes 3x more admits underqualified commits than Cal.
  10. To sum it up: UCLA takes more marginal academic recruits than Cal does. Cal football has a higher standard for entrance than UCLA. You decided to insert a speculative opinion as to why for obvious reasons. IEBruin was full of crap. But underqualified is different from unqualified so you have there's that, although that wasn't the point of discussion.
  11. This post made me laugh out loud. UCLA admits 3x more unqualified students than Cal does. m.sfgate.com/collegesports/article/Why-do-Cal-athletes-not-graduate-5004343.php#page-1 80% of Cal football recruits must have a 3.0 or higher by 2017. UCLA will still play the special admit game and then spend far more money on academic resources for athletes to make sure they pass. Something Cal is finally doing themselves. www.mercurynews.com/sports/ci_26823904/80-percent-cal-recruits-must-have-3-0
  12. Can you find the flaw in this argument?
  13. Correct. The new press box is not open to the public and is technically not a part of the stadium. A 5,000 donation per year (does not include the price you paid for your tickets) nets you access to the stadium level buffet and booze. a 15,000 donation per year gets you access to the university club level, which is where you wanna be. More food, even better booze and service, and the most incredible view of the bay you will ever see.
  14. Cal might have gotten worse since the new stadium but I can't tell you how awesome it is to watch a college football game with all you can drink top shelf booze, and an all you can eat buffet that includes a sushi chef, all kinda of BBQ, and a guy from cold stone ice cream serving 12 different flavors. It really makes losing easier to stomach...
  15. There is no such place that fits your description in the city of Berkeley. Also, I'm losing confidence in the idea that you have any understanding of plate tectonics.
  16. This is not and was not a realistic alternative. There's a reason Cal played their 2012 season at AT&T Park and not a single game was played at the Coliseum. In fact, AT&T park was occupied for Cal's season opener against Fresno State and the game was moved to crumbling Candlestick rather than the dilapidated Oakland Coliseum. The 2012 season suffered huge attendance set-backs and was a net-loss for the program. 2012 taught Cal that they were justified in building a new stadium and that the program cannot survive at an off-campus site.
  17. This could be a warning to other institutions but how many institutions need to worry about: hordes of protesters occupying trees around the construction site, California valuation rules as it pertains to renovating a building on an active fault line, a very powerful NIMBY housing association who delays construction for 3 years with lawsuits. How many institutions will face these events? All 3 of those events buoyed the cost of Cal's stadium "renovation" considerably. Also, Cal's "shiny toy" was a necessary upgrade as the prior structure was deemed to be "seismically unsafe" due to an 100 year old massive building being located on an active fault line. The stadium was at risk of being condemned so something had to give. It was either upgrade or die.
  18. To be fair, that date assumes Cal will be able to both, pay off the stadium debt, AND have an extra 319 million for "other AD uses."
  19. Ah yes, pledged money. History suggests 26 million in pledged money equals out to 13-16 mil in future donated money. As I have witnessed throughout my life, pledged money from the wealthy is only as good as their current finnancial outlook, which can often change faster than you would think.
  20. The name of the Cal's stadium has not and will not change. It will always be memorial stadium and for now its Kabam field. Most of you probably haven't heard of Kabam but they a rapidly growing Bay Area tech company that create games for your phone.
  21. Cal was having a far easier time paying their bills before the fancy weight rooms happened. It was supposed to help our recruiting but apparently winning is worth a lot more and costs far less. Of course the obvious answer for best return on investment is the chancellor of your university aka lead fundraiser.
  22. Only about 99% more to go, you're almost there! Seriously, what a titanic waste of money these football only facilities are. Let's spend 100 million on a building that only the smallest fraction of students can use. And do these facilities really help football players that much or are they mostly used to lure recruits? I'm guessing the latter.
×
×
  • Create New...