Nov 16, 2022·edited Nov 16, 2022Liked by John Canzano
Let me see if I have this correct …..UCLA sneaks out the back door in the middle of the night without consulting anybody other than a few fellow disingenuous USC cohorts, then, after the fact, they send out a press release saying what a wonderful thing this is for their student athletes and that it has nothing to do with money…then they send out a bullsh*t survey asking said student athletes what they think? That is laughable, ridiculous and moronic.. What the hell is the kid supposed to say?…and I wonder how many recipients were asked to hit the transfer portal after criticizing them? The arrogance of these people never ceases to amaze me. Hey UCLA…. Next time you switch conferences….try sending your survey out BEFORE you bolt…
So one third of a small sample of UCLA athletes favor this. The other two thirds are neutral or worse. UCLA won't cooperate with a journalist asking questions of the public university. The local press won't write anything critical, or publish the highly revealing open letter Bill Walton sent to you after your inquiry of him. No one other than the Pac 12 commissioner is even mentioning alumni opposition.
The deal was hatched in secrecy by administrators who won't open this up for public inspection. Heck of a way to reward your fans, UCLA. No wonder home games have abysmal attendance this season.
The UCLA folks mismanaged a department to the tune of tens of millions of dollars in debt. Most of your readers could have done better. The USC athletic department mismanaged one of the top brands in football for a solid decade. All of your readers could have done better with head coach hires than Haden/Swann.
Crazy that these two clowns get the bailout because they are located in a large city.
And absolutely true that the bailout involved selling out their fans and students.
I've been saying this for months. Hundreds of athletes not playing basketball or football have just been turned into online students at UCLA and USC. I've taught at Oklahoma, Colorado, and now at Oregon for 10 years. Olympic sports athletes know they're not going to play professionally. Their payment, is their education. You can't get the same education while flying to Maryland, New Jersey, Minnesota and Michigan every other week for 5 hours each way. You miss wayyyyy too many classes. You become an online student. Why go to UCLA to be an online student when you can be in class at Cal? Or Stanford? Or UW? You wouldn't. Football and basketball already travel a ton or its only 6 road games. This could, and likely will hurt recruiting for all of the other sports. At least with all the students who care about the education they're getting. In my experience, at 3 major universities, athletes want to be in class a lot more than the cliche's would suggest, especially the softball, volleyball, and soccer players, the track and field athletes, and the rest. It was arrogant and stupid to think they don't want to be in class. I said this backlash was coming. It is. Online degree from UCLA or an in person degree from Cal? Most swimmers and tennis players will see you at Cal.
Nov 16, 2022·edited Nov 16, 2022Liked by John Canzano
Quoting from your post John, " Among those who responded, 77 percent included “increased travel times” among their concerns. Another 66 percent noted “missed class times.”
This from Sam Connon who writes on Fan Nation: (Just now editing to say this information along with more details was in a link you provided in your post)
"To mitigate the travel impact alone, the school would spend an additional $4.62 million to $5.69 million annually to increase the number of charter flights and decrease the number of days away from campus. To enhance nutrition for all student athletes, the school would spend an additional $2.927 million annually.
Addressing the concerns around academic support and mental health services would cost just shy of $1.6 million a year, according to the report, bringing the total annual cost to between $9.15 and $10.32 million."
NOTE: these estimates come from UCLA so you could probably double them. In any case, this seems like a lot of money to spend on a few hundred athletes. Meanwhile, over 40,000 UC system graduate and academic workers are striking for better pay.
By the way, if you want to read about the kind of corruption that has permeated USC for decades, read "Bad City" by the Pulitzer Prize winning investigative reporter, Paul Pringle, for the Times. The history of USC is filled with racism, cheating, corruption in sports and other areas. Look where the whole phony athlete scandal originated. The book shows how they threw their weight around with Pasadena government and police, the Times and everyone else in the medical school scandal. So, is it any surprise they are leaving for the money, why no....many of us say, "do not let the door hit your backside." UCLA is different and always will be...
Thanks for posting the survey. What has not been mentioned is that is USC leaves and UCLA stays then UCLA could reap a recruiting advantage in the LA market. Now I am not privy to whether parents in football and basketball attend their kid's games, but if I was sitting in a prospects living room and recruiting against USC I might suggest that to see your child play would you rather travel to Lincoln, New Jersey or any other frozen remote Big 10 site or head up to Seattle or the Bay Area?
In other sports such as crew I might ask whether a nice trip up to Sacramento by car is preferable to heading out to Indianapolis? If both these schools leave it really might advantage the other schools that parents can see their children by car most of the time versus flying across the country to these god forsaken Midwest sites with nothing to offer a visitor but corn, cheese and beer and ugly countryside.
This remains a very bad look for UCLA. Nobody in their right mind could honestly say the move to the B1G is good for the student athletes. There is no metric which says so, aside from some vague homage to playing in The Big House, The Horseshoe, Happy Valley, etc. And if the Bruins think competition in the PAC12 is tough (when did they last make a Rose Bowl or otherwise be relevant?) just wait until the schedule includes regular dates with Michigan, Ohio State, Penn St and probably soon Notre Dame. Regents: Punish the ingrates and send them packing. Pac12: Get busy adding schools who WANT to be here and help us fulfill our destiny to remain and build better a nationally competitive, media-worthy, value-add conference which succeeds in athletics, in the classroom and the laboratory.
UCLA stating a survey of 600 student athletes was done (without disclosing any details) to help justify the move to the Big10, is exactly what our political leaders are doing to the citizens of this once great country. The use of lies and deception to get what they want (the money) is sickening! That’s why I Iove the Ducks new coach, Dan Lanning. He has INTEGRITY, even when it hurts, and why he will be a great coach.
In the end, if UCLA and USC asked for a share of revenue more in line with their market value a decade ago, I am amazed no one told George this. It seems to me the guy is doing his job well right now. He seems to have kept the league together and if Mr. Canzano's reporting on the prospects for media deals pans out, that's a pretty good end result.
Despite all of this, I am still amazed that the UCLA Chancellor and the UC System President thought it was appropriate to approve something of this magnitude without going to the Board and the Governor. If I were either of those people, I would seriously consider starting a search for a new job when this is over with, as it is obvious they have lost the trust of one of the most powerful men in this Country.
Dan Lanning took a head coaching position at a major university without having any experience at the position or ties/history with the university. I can't stress enough what an accomplishment 8+ wins is in that situation. I have tried to find someone to compare him to, been looking since last night. Now I am reaching out to y'all to help.
-=CHALLANGE=-
Can anyone name a first time (not first year) head coach at a major school that was hired outside the program, found their own staff, and had 8+ wins the first year?
I was able to find a list of best first years for head coaches, but every single person on that list had either been a head coach before, promoted from within, or previous ties to the university. Justin Wilcox was a fist time head Coach at Cal. He didn't win 8 games until his third year and he had been a position coach there several years prior. That was the closest example I could find. Mark, Chip, Jimbo, Dabo, Lincoln... the list of first time head coaches being promoted from within the program is endless. Dan deserves all the credit in the world for what he was able to do this year.
The LA Times article by Ben Bloch about the survey sure made it sound like the UCLA student athletes were all in.
Thanks for the perspective John.
I still haven’t talked to one of my many UCLA fan friends who support the move although one said he will be happy they won’t have to play night games. His kids are about enter the phase of youth/club sports so soon he will appreciate night games as happened to me years ago.
My guess is there are many UCLA administrators that feel they acted too fast in making the move to the Big 10 and are hoping the UC Regents shut the move down. This would be good way for UCLA to save face and become the dominate recruiter in LA.
Let me see if I have this correct …..UCLA sneaks out the back door in the middle of the night without consulting anybody other than a few fellow disingenuous USC cohorts, then, after the fact, they send out a press release saying what a wonderful thing this is for their student athletes and that it has nothing to do with money…then they send out a bullsh*t survey asking said student athletes what they think? That is laughable, ridiculous and moronic.. What the hell is the kid supposed to say?…and I wonder how many recipients were asked to hit the transfer portal after criticizing them? The arrogance of these people never ceases to amaze me. Hey UCLA…. Next time you switch conferences….try sending your survey out BEFORE you bolt…
So one third of a small sample of UCLA athletes favor this. The other two thirds are neutral or worse. UCLA won't cooperate with a journalist asking questions of the public university. The local press won't write anything critical, or publish the highly revealing open letter Bill Walton sent to you after your inquiry of him. No one other than the Pac 12 commissioner is even mentioning alumni opposition.
The deal was hatched in secrecy by administrators who won't open this up for public inspection. Heck of a way to reward your fans, UCLA. No wonder home games have abysmal attendance this season.
The UCLA folks mismanaged a department to the tune of tens of millions of dollars in debt. Most of your readers could have done better. The USC athletic department mismanaged one of the top brands in football for a solid decade. All of your readers could have done better with head coach hires than Haden/Swann.
Crazy that these two clowns get the bailout because they are located in a large city.
And absolutely true that the bailout involved selling out their fans and students.
I've been saying this for months. Hundreds of athletes not playing basketball or football have just been turned into online students at UCLA and USC. I've taught at Oklahoma, Colorado, and now at Oregon for 10 years. Olympic sports athletes know they're not going to play professionally. Their payment, is their education. You can't get the same education while flying to Maryland, New Jersey, Minnesota and Michigan every other week for 5 hours each way. You miss wayyyyy too many classes. You become an online student. Why go to UCLA to be an online student when you can be in class at Cal? Or Stanford? Or UW? You wouldn't. Football and basketball already travel a ton or its only 6 road games. This could, and likely will hurt recruiting for all of the other sports. At least with all the students who care about the education they're getting. In my experience, at 3 major universities, athletes want to be in class a lot more than the cliche's would suggest, especially the softball, volleyball, and soccer players, the track and field athletes, and the rest. It was arrogant and stupid to think they don't want to be in class. I said this backlash was coming. It is. Online degree from UCLA or an in person degree from Cal? Most swimmers and tennis players will see you at Cal.
Quoting from your post John, " Among those who responded, 77 percent included “increased travel times” among their concerns. Another 66 percent noted “missed class times.”
This from Sam Connon who writes on Fan Nation: (Just now editing to say this information along with more details was in a link you provided in your post)
"To mitigate the travel impact alone, the school would spend an additional $4.62 million to $5.69 million annually to increase the number of charter flights and decrease the number of days away from campus. To enhance nutrition for all student athletes, the school would spend an additional $2.927 million annually.
Addressing the concerns around academic support and mental health services would cost just shy of $1.6 million a year, according to the report, bringing the total annual cost to between $9.15 and $10.32 million."
NOTE: these estimates come from UCLA so you could probably double them. In any case, this seems like a lot of money to spend on a few hundred athletes. Meanwhile, over 40,000 UC system graduate and academic workers are striking for better pay.
By the way, if you want to read about the kind of corruption that has permeated USC for decades, read "Bad City" by the Pulitzer Prize winning investigative reporter, Paul Pringle, for the Times. The history of USC is filled with racism, cheating, corruption in sports and other areas. Look where the whole phony athlete scandal originated. The book shows how they threw their weight around with Pasadena government and police, the Times and everyone else in the medical school scandal. So, is it any surprise they are leaving for the money, why no....many of us say, "do not let the door hit your backside." UCLA is different and always will be...
Thanks for posting the survey. What has not been mentioned is that is USC leaves and UCLA stays then UCLA could reap a recruiting advantage in the LA market. Now I am not privy to whether parents in football and basketball attend their kid's games, but if I was sitting in a prospects living room and recruiting against USC I might suggest that to see your child play would you rather travel to Lincoln, New Jersey or any other frozen remote Big 10 site or head up to Seattle or the Bay Area?
In other sports such as crew I might ask whether a nice trip up to Sacramento by car is preferable to heading out to Indianapolis? If both these schools leave it really might advantage the other schools that parents can see their children by car most of the time versus flying across the country to these god forsaken Midwest sites with nothing to offer a visitor but corn, cheese and beer and ugly countryside.
When was the last time the athletes' voices were important? Please, remind me
I’ve said it before, and I’ll say it again: If the UC Regents actually care about STUDENTS, they will stop the move to the Big-10.
Excellent piece, John. Please have yourself cloned and send the new one to cover sports in LA.
This remains a very bad look for UCLA. Nobody in their right mind could honestly say the move to the B1G is good for the student athletes. There is no metric which says so, aside from some vague homage to playing in The Big House, The Horseshoe, Happy Valley, etc. And if the Bruins think competition in the PAC12 is tough (when did they last make a Rose Bowl or otherwise be relevant?) just wait until the schedule includes regular dates with Michigan, Ohio State, Penn St and probably soon Notre Dame. Regents: Punish the ingrates and send them packing. Pac12: Get busy adding schools who WANT to be here and help us fulfill our destiny to remain and build better a nationally competitive, media-worthy, value-add conference which succeeds in athletics, in the classroom and the laboratory.
UCLA stating a survey of 600 student athletes was done (without disclosing any details) to help justify the move to the Big10, is exactly what our political leaders are doing to the citizens of this once great country. The use of lies and deception to get what they want (the money) is sickening! That’s why I Iove the Ducks new coach, Dan Lanning. He has INTEGRITY, even when it hurts, and why he will be a great coach.
In the end, if UCLA and USC asked for a share of revenue more in line with their market value a decade ago, I am amazed no one told George this. It seems to me the guy is doing his job well right now. He seems to have kept the league together and if Mr. Canzano's reporting on the prospects for media deals pans out, that's a pretty good end result.
Despite all of this, I am still amazed that the UCLA Chancellor and the UC System President thought it was appropriate to approve something of this magnitude without going to the Board and the Governor. If I were either of those people, I would seriously consider starting a search for a new job when this is over with, as it is obvious they have lost the trust of one of the most powerful men in this Country.
Is that a picture of the Three Stooges at the 2020 basketball tournament?
I want to go back to Lanning today...
Dan Lanning took a head coaching position at a major university without having any experience at the position or ties/history with the university. I can't stress enough what an accomplishment 8+ wins is in that situation. I have tried to find someone to compare him to, been looking since last night. Now I am reaching out to y'all to help.
-=CHALLANGE=-
Can anyone name a first time (not first year) head coach at a major school that was hired outside the program, found their own staff, and had 8+ wins the first year?
I was able to find a list of best first years for head coaches, but every single person on that list had either been a head coach before, promoted from within, or previous ties to the university. Justin Wilcox was a fist time head Coach at Cal. He didn't win 8 games until his third year and he had been a position coach there several years prior. That was the closest example I could find. Mark, Chip, Jimbo, Dabo, Lincoln... the list of first time head coaches being promoted from within the program is endless. Dan deserves all the credit in the world for what he was able to do this year.
The LA Times article by Ben Bloch about the survey sure made it sound like the UCLA student athletes were all in.
Thanks for the perspective John.
I still haven’t talked to one of my many UCLA fan friends who support the move although one said he will be happy they won’t have to play night games. His kids are about enter the phase of youth/club sports so soon he will appreciate night games as happened to me years ago.
My guess is there are many UCLA administrators that feel they acted too fast in making the move to the Big 10 and are hoping the UC Regents shut the move down. This would be good way for UCLA to save face and become the dominate recruiter in LA.