A lot of bitter, butthurt people crying because they got dumped for a better conference. UCLA doesn’t owe Cal anything. Absolutely nothing. Cal’s athletic department is subsidized by taxpayers while UCLA’s is not. If these political hacks want to seriously go down this path then they open the door to legitimate attacks on their own policies that placed UCLA in the position to have to leave the conference. It was Newsom’s lockdowns and other misguided policies that forced UCLA into a full year without revenue worth $70 million. As a privately funded athletic department like UCLA that is economically not possible without drastic measures like changing conferences. Newsom and the Democrat hacks who control Sacramento should have thought about this stuff when they placed these restrictions. What they fail to understand however is that Southern California controls nearly enough of the state to pass constitutional amendments that would divest the UC regents authority over UCLA. The Bruins will secede from the UC regents if the regents continue to violate the UC charter. Being bitter and butthurt is not the solution to whatever problems your school faces.
Can't wait to hear the spin when UCLA has to cut 10 sports teams, half of them women's, because they couldn't go to the Big 10 and collect the extra cash to pay off the Athletic Department debt. . Stanford was going cut ELEVEN teams but got a reprieve. UCLA won't be so fortunate. Meanwhile, the Big 10 takes Stanford as a replacement and both the Victory Bell and The Big Game disappear from the schedule and the Pac 12 still crumbles. Well played, geniuses.
People forget that the University of California is a single entity with 10 separate campuses governed by the Board of Regents which is picked by the governor and the current governor, Newsom, being the Chair. The Chancellors have some independence, but at the end of the day are under the governance of the Board of Regents. And the president of the Regents is only a 2 year office picked by the Regents. I think since the Regents manage all property of the campuses, they should charge the Big 10 100 million a year to use UCLA property.
There's nothing here for Newsom beyond just getting his name on the sports page. There's no "winning" and the regents have much bigger problems to tackle than sports at UCLA. His people need to be smarter than this.
LA has an Olympics coming in just over five years. Better for Newsom to spend political capital at that.
Sure it will bring back some of the LA market, but it leads to two questions:
1. Would USC go it alone? (I assume yes)
2. Does that make B1G poach another PAC12 school? Oregon?
I would assume losing Oregon would be worse for Pac12 than UCLA. Sure revenue with UCLA is better, but credibility of strength of program would be devastating.
As a native Californian and an Oregon Alum, it sickens me to watch the demise of a conference I grew up watching and then being a part of. All for what? Greed, media networks, and billionaires. It’s so gross. ZERO thought was given to the fans and the people who have supported the PAC-12. No, it’s all about getting bigger, but not better. The chase for the almighty buck by institutions that largely don’t even need the dollars because most of the schools in the Big 10 and the PAC-12 have HUGE endowments. College football has now been ruined forever in my mind. So sad. Ted B., New York, NY
The best move for the UC Regents would be to require the Big Ten to take in Berkeley as well as UCLA, so the Bears could get their own share of B1G athletic revenues. If Stanford is seen as a cinch to switch leagues (in the event Notre Dame joins), why shouldn't its Big Game rival do likewise? And Big Ten presidents would certainly like to share in Berkeley's substantial research $$$$.
As reported in the LA Time today (July 21) and as expected Newsom has no way to block UCLA's move to the Big Ten....
"As governor, Newsom has no authority to squelch the deal because the UC system is constitutionally autonomous. As a regent, he could ask his board colleagues to consider directives to UCLA about the deal — to explain it in a public meeting, for instance, or to propose ways to mitigate the financial fallout on UC Berkeley. The UC Office of the President delegated authority in 1991 [Policy DA 1058] to campus chancellors to execute their own contracts, including intercollegiate athletic agreements.
...UC President Michael V. Drake knew about UCLA’s conversations with Big Ten officials. But regents were not consulted then and only a “handful” were notified just before the decision was announced and told to keep it confidential, said Board of Regents Chair Richard Leib. UCLA made the decision “under broad-based delegated authority which didn’t necessarily anticipate this type of action,” Leib said.
While any discussions would necessarily need to be closely guarded, given the sensitivity of negotiations, Newsom would like to have seen a process that included a meeting with regents, potentially in closed session, where UCLA could have outlined the proposed deal, explained the direct benefit to student-athletes, and solicited ideas on how to mitigate the harm to UC Berkeley and other conference members, [Newson aid] Chida said.
Ideas raised have included requiring UCLA to pay UC Berkeley a Pac-12 “exit fee” or share the TV revenue with its sister campus — conditions that the regents could potentially impose.
...Student Regent Marlenee Blas Pedral, a UC Berkeley law student, said the board wanted more transparency and communication from UCLA. She said she found out about the Pac-12 exit in the media.
...“I think UCLA should definitely do something to help mitigate some of the potential harm that’s going to come out of this,” she said, adding that she was not yet “100% sure” what that should be."
They might (and should) punish them, but I can't see them forcing ucla to stay. I think they should make it a law that UCLA and Cal have to be in the same conference where possible. Guess that would be strange since no one wants the other uc schools teams in the pac.
Seriously, guys, Newsome only cares about how much money and/or power he can gain. Given the steady implosion of California with entrepreneurs snd giant corporations alike heading for liberty in Texas, Newsome isn't going to bitch about UCLA picking up an incrementsl $50 to $80 million by joining yhe BIG.
You will be Surprise what UCLA can do.I don't think the Big10 are that tough with the exception of OSU and Pen State and occasionally MSU.I think everyone are miss judging how hard is to win in the PAC12 and give a lot of credit to the BIG12 ,I know they are known for being tough but,who have made it to the College Playoff other than OSU? PAC12 have two team that made it and one made it to the final..help me out if I am wrong .
The most likely resolution will be both sides agree that UCLA will vouch for UC Berkeley’s eventual admission into the Big Ten as soon as the conference decides to expand. Once Notre Dame makes a decision to join the Big Ten, they will also expand to Stanford, Berkeley, and Washington. This should happen within a few years, no more than two. If I was Oregon I would position myself for the SEC because unless the Big Ten goes to 24 teams (which they might with North Carolina, Virginia, and Duke) Oregon will be on the outside looking in.
Poli Sci professors fail to comprehend reality. They exist in a nether world
reality. In the world of getting your ass kicked repeatedly, they simply read lesson plans then act like know-it-alls' prance. Perhaps some profs sojourn to actual games in the winters in Southern California, where it is in the eighties, while there are families in Minnesota together when its -10? The sole reason in favor of this head injury is that my mind defends in ice'-an-snow. The fact is fact, UCLA is running scared to the Pack 12. I do not foresee great stats when they battle Wisconsin or Michigan in December. drjpmxlaw64@gmail.com
A lot of bitter, butthurt people crying because they got dumped for a better conference. UCLA doesn’t owe Cal anything. Absolutely nothing. Cal’s athletic department is subsidized by taxpayers while UCLA’s is not. If these political hacks want to seriously go down this path then they open the door to legitimate attacks on their own policies that placed UCLA in the position to have to leave the conference. It was Newsom’s lockdowns and other misguided policies that forced UCLA into a full year without revenue worth $70 million. As a privately funded athletic department like UCLA that is economically not possible without drastic measures like changing conferences. Newsom and the Democrat hacks who control Sacramento should have thought about this stuff when they placed these restrictions. What they fail to understand however is that Southern California controls nearly enough of the state to pass constitutional amendments that would divest the UC regents authority over UCLA. The Bruins will secede from the UC regents if the regents continue to violate the UC charter. Being bitter and butthurt is not the solution to whatever problems your school faces.
UCLA's first 3 games this year: Bowling Green, Alabama State and South Alabama. What a gauntlet, lol. Dave M
Can't wait to hear the spin when UCLA has to cut 10 sports teams, half of them women's, because they couldn't go to the Big 10 and collect the extra cash to pay off the Athletic Department debt. . Stanford was going cut ELEVEN teams but got a reprieve. UCLA won't be so fortunate. Meanwhile, the Big 10 takes Stanford as a replacement and both the Victory Bell and The Big Game disappear from the schedule and the Pac 12 still crumbles. Well played, geniuses.
People forget that the University of California is a single entity with 10 separate campuses governed by the Board of Regents which is picked by the governor and the current governor, Newsom, being the Chair. The Chancellors have some independence, but at the end of the day are under the governance of the Board of Regents. And the president of the Regents is only a 2 year office picked by the Regents. I think since the Regents manage all property of the campuses, they should charge the Big 10 100 million a year to use UCLA property.
John, you write a hell of a column! I am proud to be a subscriber.
There's nothing here for Newsom beyond just getting his name on the sports page. There's no "winning" and the regents have much bigger problems to tackle than sports at UCLA. His people need to be smarter than this.
LA has an Olympics coming in just over five years. Better for Newsom to spend political capital at that.
If UCLA doesn;t go, does this save PAC12?
Sure it will bring back some of the LA market, but it leads to two questions:
1. Would USC go it alone? (I assume yes)
2. Does that make B1G poach another PAC12 school? Oregon?
I would assume losing Oregon would be worse for Pac12 than UCLA. Sure revenue with UCLA is better, but credibility of strength of program would be devastating.
As a native Californian and an Oregon Alum, it sickens me to watch the demise of a conference I grew up watching and then being a part of. All for what? Greed, media networks, and billionaires. It’s so gross. ZERO thought was given to the fans and the people who have supported the PAC-12. No, it’s all about getting bigger, but not better. The chase for the almighty buck by institutions that largely don’t even need the dollars because most of the schools in the Big 10 and the PAC-12 have HUGE endowments. College football has now been ruined forever in my mind. So sad. Ted B., New York, NY
Go Bruins! I am not sure you should!?!
The best move for the UC Regents would be to require the Big Ten to take in Berkeley as well as UCLA, so the Bears could get their own share of B1G athletic revenues. If Stanford is seen as a cinch to switch leagues (in the event Notre Dame joins), why shouldn't its Big Game rival do likewise? And Big Ten presidents would certainly like to share in Berkeley's substantial research $$$$.
As reported in the LA Time today (July 21) and as expected Newsom has no way to block UCLA's move to the Big Ten....
"As governor, Newsom has no authority to squelch the deal because the UC system is constitutionally autonomous. As a regent, he could ask his board colleagues to consider directives to UCLA about the deal — to explain it in a public meeting, for instance, or to propose ways to mitigate the financial fallout on UC Berkeley. The UC Office of the President delegated authority in 1991 [Policy DA 1058] to campus chancellors to execute their own contracts, including intercollegiate athletic agreements.
...UC President Michael V. Drake knew about UCLA’s conversations with Big Ten officials. But regents were not consulted then and only a “handful” were notified just before the decision was announced and told to keep it confidential, said Board of Regents Chair Richard Leib. UCLA made the decision “under broad-based delegated authority which didn’t necessarily anticipate this type of action,” Leib said.
While any discussions would necessarily need to be closely guarded, given the sensitivity of negotiations, Newsom would like to have seen a process that included a meeting with regents, potentially in closed session, where UCLA could have outlined the proposed deal, explained the direct benefit to student-athletes, and solicited ideas on how to mitigate the harm to UC Berkeley and other conference members, [Newson aid] Chida said.
Ideas raised have included requiring UCLA to pay UC Berkeley a Pac-12 “exit fee” or share the TV revenue with its sister campus — conditions that the regents could potentially impose.
...Student Regent Marlenee Blas Pedral, a UC Berkeley law student, said the board wanted more transparency and communication from UCLA. She said she found out about the Pac-12 exit in the media.
...“I think UCLA should definitely do something to help mitigate some of the potential harm that’s going to come out of this,” she said, adding that she was not yet “100% sure” what that should be."
They might (and should) punish them, but I can't see them forcing ucla to stay. I think they should make it a law that UCLA and Cal have to be in the same conference where possible. Guess that would be strange since no one wants the other uc schools teams in the pac.
Seriously, guys, Newsome only cares about how much money and/or power he can gain. Given the steady implosion of California with entrepreneurs snd giant corporations alike heading for liberty in Texas, Newsome isn't going to bitch about UCLA picking up an incrementsl $50 to $80 million by joining yhe BIG.
You will be Surprise what UCLA can do.I don't think the Big10 are that tough with the exception of OSU and Pen State and occasionally MSU.I think everyone are miss judging how hard is to win in the PAC12 and give a lot of credit to the BIG12 ,I know they are known for being tough but,who have made it to the College Playoff other than OSU? PAC12 have two team that made it and one made it to the final..help me out if I am wrong .
The most likely resolution will be both sides agree that UCLA will vouch for UC Berkeley’s eventual admission into the Big Ten as soon as the conference decides to expand. Once Notre Dame makes a decision to join the Big Ten, they will also expand to Stanford, Berkeley, and Washington. This should happen within a few years, no more than two. If I was Oregon I would position myself for the SEC because unless the Big Ten goes to 24 teams (which they might with North Carolina, Virginia, and Duke) Oregon will be on the outside looking in.
John, July 18, 2022
Poli Sci professors fail to comprehend reality. They exist in a nether world
reality. In the world of getting your ass kicked repeatedly, they simply read lesson plans then act like know-it-alls' prance. Perhaps some profs sojourn to actual games in the winters in Southern California, where it is in the eighties, while there are families in Minnesota together when its -10? The sole reason in favor of this head injury is that my mind defends in ice'-an-snow. The fact is fact, UCLA is running scared to the Pack 12. I do not foresee great stats when they battle Wisconsin or Michigan in December. drjpmxlaw64@gmail.com