https://247sports.com/college/oregon/Art...190359261/

"I read about it (is how I found out)," Newsom said in the interview. "No big deal. I'm the governor of the state of California. But maybe a bigger deal is that I'm the chair of the UC Board of Regents. I read about it. Is it a good idea? Did we have a chance to discuss the merits or demerits (of the decision)? I'm not aware anyone did. So it was done in isolation. It was done without regental oversight or support. It was done without any consideration to my knowledge."

(07-22-2022 09:46 AM)jgkojak Wrote:  https://247sports.com/college/oregon/Art...190359261/

"I read about it (is how I found out)," Newsom said in the interview. "No big deal. I'm the governor of the state of California. But maybe a bigger deal is that I'm the chair of the UC Board of Regents. I read about it. Is it a good idea? Did we have a chance to discuss the merits or demerits (of the decision)? I'm not aware anyone did. So it was done in isolation. It was done without regental oversight or support. It was done without any consideration to my knowledge."

I can't stand Gavin but that's pretty extraordinary, if true. It probably does say a lot about what the powers-that-be at UCLA (and even USC) think of him. But not smart politics. Gavin will be vengeful. Or need a major campaign donation to look the other way.

Always easier to ask for forgiveness than permission.

Ultimately UCLA saved the Regents the headache of having to make the decision to either leave Cal behind or block UCLA from making a move that will more than double even the best case financial predictions of what the Pac 12 was looking at with the LA schools in the fold. This is nothing but 1) ego at not being in the loop and 2) political theatre. Cal people see him talk a good game about holding UCLA accountable, UCLA people won't care because in the end the move will happen and no, money won't be siphoned off to give to Cal.

Gavin wants 1600 Penn in DC.

He's smarter than to screw with late fall junkets from midwestern states to sunny LA for a weekend. He just wants something (and to look like he's in control and doing something).

If he does screw it up, they'll remember on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November 2024.

(07-22-2022 09:57 AM)The Sicatoka Wrote:  Gavin wants 1600 Penn in DC.

He's smarter than to screw with late fall junkets from midwestern states to sunny LA for a weekend. He just wants something (and to look like he's in control and doing something).

If he does screw it up, they'll remember on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November 2024.

It blows my mind that he's even in the conversation to get voted into the highest office in the land. Wait...nevermind.

This is what, the third thread on this topic, and turned to bashing in 5 posts. Great job!

Wondering about the Cal system as a whole. Do they share in Sports revenue together or does each school own it's own income it generates from Sports? If UCLA has to share it's wealth within the Cal system then it's a win for the Cal system with UCLA getting a large payday in the B1G

Wait until the Big West rejects Berkeley; because you know, Cal State - UC balance.

"Good ol' Gavin" will REALLY blow a fuse

(07-22-2022 09:57 AM)The Sicatoka Wrote:  Gavin wants 1600 Penn in DC.

He's smarter than to screw with late fall junkets from midwestern states to sunny LA for a weekend. He just wants something (and to look like he's in control and doing something).

If he does screw it up, they'll remember on the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November 2024.

I can imagine Ken Doll Gavin hanging in Youngstown, the man has ZERO chance of winning the White House. The man is an empty vessel.

I still don't understand what he can do about it.

Is he going to penalize the academic side over an athletic deal?

Does he feel used because he was on the forefront of the NIL bill but kept in the dark about realignment?

(07-22-2022 12:25 PM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  I still don't understand what he can do about it.

Is he going to penalize the academic side over an athletic deal?

Does he feel used because he was on the forefront of the NIL bill but kept in the dark about realignment?

Not sure if there is anything that can be done about it. Maybe it will result in an official change in how the protocol needs to work here for UC schools in terms of notification to and approval by the regents and such...but at this point I don't think they'd be able to retroactively enforce anything.

(07-22-2022 12:25 PM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  Does he feel used because he was on the forefront of the NIL bill but kept in the dark about realignment?

That'd be a fly on the wall conversation ...

GN: What are you doing, doing this behind my back!
UCLA: You forced us to it!
GN: What the < bleep > you talking about?
UCLA: Um, NIL, Ed O'Bannon, ring any bells Gov'na?

(07-22-2022 12:25 PM)ArmoredUpKnight Wrote:  I still don't understand what he can do about it.

Is he going to penalize the academic side over an athletic deal?

Does he feel used because he was on the forefront of the NIL bill but kept in the dark about realignment?

There are two sides to this. First, the UCLA move to the Big Ten is not a popular move. Everyone understands the money, but the move is still unpopular. Secondly, Newsom feels like he has gone to bat for the UC System and UCLA in terms of funding:
Newsom fought to get an increase for UCLA of $500 million in the General Fund over a three-year period ($200 million in 2022-23, with an additional $200 million in 2023-24 and $100 million in 2024-25 planned for this purpose) to establish the Institute for Immunology and Immunotherapy at UCLA. The project is intended to bring together academics and researchers for collaborative research to maintain California’s leading edge in biotechnology.

Newsom does have some leverage but at the end of the day, unless the state is willing to spend more money on college athletics, he cannot tell a public university which conference they should be a member of. If San Diego State got an invitation to join the Big 12 and accepted it, would Newsom stop them? I doubt it. The California travel ban would probably stop the move, since every member of the Big 12 is in a state that has benn banned for travel using public funds. San Diego State would need to use private funding for road trips to Big 12 schools.

I do think UCLA is going to have a difficult time explaining to the UC Board of Regents their reason for moving to the Big Ten. They know it is an unpopular move and they know the only reason they are making the move is for the money. California has a budget surplus of nearly $100 billion this year, so they could just wipe out the athletic debt of UCLA and Cal and commit to more athletic spending for the two schools. Very doubtful, but if they did UCLA might have to re-consider their move.

This is a situation of damned if he does, damned if he doesn’t.

Unlike previous realignment moves where Oklahoma left Oklahoma State behind to just give one example, we are talking about two schools in the same university system. UCLA is leaving the UC flagship school behind and Gov. Newsom is from the Bay Area so it absolutely makes sense he is involved. It’s a Northern California vs Southern California thing which economically, culturally and politically are two states in one. It’s a political move plain and simple since it looks bad the SoCal schools are leaving the NoCal schools behind. Call it an ego thing if you like. At the end, he can say to the wealthy donors in the Bay Area “I did what I could do” and look good in the end.

FWIW, I do like that Newsom is making a public "stink" about this, despite the likely obvious motivations and even more probable absence of bite in any meaningful action. I do believe it's a nasty topic with bad optics no matter the side. I suspect those of one political persuasion will disregard any action as politically motivated and hollow, but if he decides to put the kybosh on UCLA's move, he's a villain for not allowing the school to pursue its "best interests," and what value sports can have (but really doesn't) for any institution. UCLA will be viewed like a business (gag), and Newsom the roadblock to prosperity. The other side of the aisle will vilify the guy for not supporting higher education in a move to potentially alleviate some of the funding challenges with new and significant revenue intake. He'll be skewered for hindering his own state's highly regarded public institutions. That the Big Ten will somehow become this panacea or Ivy alternative (that it isn't) that Newsom is denying one of CA's best public schools. I worry for everyone who may roll their eyes so much and so hard, they could go blind or have them jammed over the nauseating irony.

Or, nothing happens. No big deal.

Personally, and I think I put this more at the feet of the federal level: can we walk back how the Big Ten has conducted its affairs with these publicly-funded schools? I mean, put everything on the table over the last decade or so, from how it handled the expansion to twelve and a list of applicants magically leaked to the public, the gag order on Maryland's Board, and now this move with UCLA. I'm not exactly comfortable with how the conference runs their shop with respect to these moves and the impact it has had. And I know it's not just the Big Ten, but, they've probably pulled off some of the more egregious things with respect to expansion.

(07-22-2022 06:29 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  FWIW, I do like that Newsom is making a public "stink" about this, despite the likely obvious motivations and even more probable absence of bite in any meaningful action. I do believe it's a nasty topic with bad optics no matter the side. I suspect those of one political persuasion will disregard any action as politically motivated and hollow, but if he decides to put the kybosh on UCLA's move, he's a villain for not allowing the school to pursue its "best interests," and what value sports can have (but really doesn't) for any institution. UCLA will be viewed like a business (gag), and Newsom the roadblock to prosperity. The other side of the aisle will vilify the guy for not supporting higher education in a move to potentially alleviate some of the funding challenges with new and significant revenue intake. He'll be skewered for hindering his own state's highly regarded public institutions. That the Big Ten will somehow become this panacea or Ivy alternative (that it isn't) that Newsom is denying one of CA's best public schools. I worry for everyone who may roll their eyes so much and so hard, they could go blind or have them jammed over the nauseating irony.

Or, nothing happens. No big deal.

Personally, and I think I put this more at the feet of the federal level: can we walk back how the Big Ten has conducted its affairs with these publicly-funded schools? I mean, put everything on the table over the last decade or so, from how it handled the expansion to twelve and a list of applicants magically leaked to the public, the gag order on Maryland's Board, and now this move with UCLA. I'm not exactly comfortable with how the conference runs their shop with respect to these moves and the impact it has had. And I know it's not just the Big Ten, but, they've probably pulled off some of the more egregious things with respect to expansion.

I do not know all of the circumstances behind Rutgers financial issues in their athletic department, but the state recently allocated $100 million for the athletic department:
https://www.northjersey.com/story/news/s...364934007/
Rutgers University is getting a windfall from taxpayers, with $100 million earmarked in the new state budget for renovations to its basketball arena and a new football operations center even as the athletics division has been racking up debt and tens of millions of dollars in annual operating deficits.

Rutgers athletics has been mired in more than $250 million in debt related to the construction of new athletics buildings and loans taken to subsidize its growing operating losses — they hit record deficits of $73 million in each of the last two fiscal years. The division has had to rely on the largest cash subsidies of any major-conference public university from taxpayer money as well as student tuition and fees over the last several years.

Even being in the Big Ten Conference cannot save your school from budget deficits in athletics.

(07-22-2022 01:20 PM)UTEPDallas Wrote:  This is a situation of damned if he does, damned if he doesn’t.

Unlike previous realignment moves where Oklahoma left Oklahoma State behind to just give one example, we are talking about two schools in the same university system. UCLA is leaving the UC flagship school behind and Gov. Newsom is from the Bay Area so it absolutely makes sense he is involved. It’s a Northern California vs Southern California thing which economically, culturally and politically are two states in one. It’s a political move plain and simple since it looks bad the SoCal schools are leaving the NoCal schools behind. Call it an ego thing if you like. At the end, he can say to the wealthy donors in the Bay Area “I did what I could do” and look good in the end.

He should have an open session so that all the citizens of California can weigh in.

In California both sides of the aisle are Democrats.

It's all about money for Newsom's campaign and the perception that he is in charge. UCLA's mistake was not letting him be part of the announcing parade. The result will be a shakedown and payment of some tribute to the king. (California doesn't have a functioning legislature, term limits pretty much killed any independence of that body.) So they will pay the king. The AG was appointed by this king, and he will file whatever motion Newsom wants; Bonta does not have an independent base unlike who held the job back in '16, Harris.

This ends when Newsom's bag man collects the desired donations, and a "settlement" is ready for Newsom to announce, giving the impression he is in charge. I can guess the content:

1) pledge to reimburse the UC system some amount annually to help pay bonds of other schools in FBS (that would be Cal ... only); think $2M/year
2) announce support for a program of inclusion and athlete experience (already part of UCLA and the Pac-12 PR, but lets Newsom claim it)
3) agree to play Cal annually for the next say fifteen years, or until they join the same conference

Not part of the public agreement will be a side deal by donors to support Newsom and not Harris, Buttigieg or Warren in '24.

(07-22-2022 07:11 PM)SoCalBobcat78 Wrote:  Even being in the Big Ten Conference cannot save your school from budget deficits in athletics.

Yeah, you may get more money...but it's expected that you have to spend a lot more, too. And with Rutgers, as that article reflects, it's not just new facilities that the school lacks that it's pledging people it will build, but upkeeping current infrastructure, too.

Maryland at least has better fan and booster support, but they were coming from the same place with respect to funding issues and budget deficits. Back in 2011, ahead of the move, the Washington Post dived into UMD's budget woes at the time, and the significant debt it had then (something like $83 million). Fast forward to recovering from the pandemic, that there was a $20.9 million deficit at UMD for 2020-21 fiscal due to the impact. But, hey, surpluses in fiscal years 2018-20...to a combined total of $540K.

It's all so fragile for any program in a metropolitan area. And while UCLA is different than Maryland, and far off from the likes of Rutgers, it's the same old story, just different city and coast. It costs a lot more to run operations in places like these than other areas of the country. Big Ten money is just a bigger band-aid at best, or a progressive health-boosting treatment. Yet, it's a safety net to validate continued risky and irresponsible behaviors.