Former UCLA Chancellor Young has some thoughts on expansion
by Paragon SC on Aug 23, 2010 8:00 AM PDT
in General Pac-12
Email
PrintI am not going to drill down too far into this but I found this story interesting...
As we have seen elsewhere not everyone seems to be thrilled with expansion. Some are worried about preserving traditional rivalries or "weekenders" as they are called, while others want to hang onto the past with no change at all.
These are the Hansen hold overs.
Chancellor Young appears to be in both camps as we see in this story in the San Francisco Examiner. He also appears to not be up on some recent developments.
Hmmm....Part of it is based on academic grounds. Among major conferences, the Pac-10 is the best academically, largely because of Stanford, Cal and UCLA. "Colorado is on a par with Oregon," he said. "Utah isn’t even in the picture."
I guess he hasn't heard the news that USC recently passed UCLA in academics.
Young loses credibility right out of the gate with this comment. If it was all about academics then why not cull some of those schools currently in the Pac-10 who don't meet up to his standards? I mean its not like every school in the Pac-10 is an academic powerhouse.
His agenda is further revealed in this next statement... (emphasis added)
"You have two schools in Washington, two in Oregon, two in northern California, two in southern California, two in Arizona, so you can have a complete round robin in football. I don’t see any way the other schools can be brought in without affecting the rivalries between the southern and northern California schools, for instance."
That’s especially critical for Cal and UCLA because there’s more than a football game involved. When the Bears and Bruins play, it’s All-U weekend on whichever campus is hosting the game, with numerous events for alumni and students from all the schools in the UC system. UCLA-Colorado or Cal-Utah wouldn’t have the same significance.
And there it is...
Sounds like a conspiracy is taking place when I read this, I chuckled when someone else wrote a piece that basically made the same claim a while back.
That fits...conspiracy theorists know no bounds. There is always someone behind a bush or under a rock out to get them.
Simply stated, stop bitching and moaning about the need for change and then complain when someone actually tries to change things. It isn't always perfect and you don't always get your way. Change is difficult and some have a hard time dealing with change when it doesn't fit their agenda.
We shouldn't be surprised that some affiliated with UCLA football are doing the most complaining...it comes from being irrelevant. That is not to say that there aren't any USC fans against expansion. They are out there, they just aren't part of the conspiracy theory crowd.
I'm curious what chancellor Young thought about Arizona and Arizona St. being added to the Pac 8 during his tenure? He must have protested that those "lesser" academic institutions don't belong in the same conference with his pretentious Bruins. Utah and Colorado fit in the middle when you compare their academics to other Pac-10 schools. Colorado is behind UW but ahead of Oregon. Utah is behind Arizona but ahead of Oregon St. and ASU. The Denver TV market (#18) and Salt Lake City TV Market (#35) are a nice get as well, adding the conference championship game increases revenue and exposure as well.
This guy sounds so out of touch its comical.
Like I have said before I don't know if this will work but I like that Larry Scott is attempting to do something. I would agree that change just for the sake of change doesn't always work. Sometimes you have to take the deal you know you can get...its called progress.
Others simply want to live in the past...
This was always about two things...money and exposure. Chancellor Young may have a point about any monies earned not necessarily going to non-revenue sports but in order to prove that point right you need to get the exposure in order to earn that money. Renegotiating the conferences Media contracts is priority #1. That gets you the exposure the conference desperately needs. I can see where expansion could be a little more of a challenge with regards to who fits the Pac-10 model, but change is proportional...you can't change one thing without changing another.
Funny how in the article he doesn't offer any other proposal other than NOT to change.
So much for having vision.
It's worth the risk...I could care less if peoples delicate sensibilities are damaged.
20 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
He is just a nice old man...
…nothing to see, keep moving people, keep moving. Wow when you say a Hansen holdover, you weren’t kidding. Cal/UCLA? He has to be kidding, that would rank about 15th in largest conference rivalries. Who the hell cares about that one?
I wouldn't put it at 15th...
Roll Tide Roll
Look at that dude going all Dareus on that colt.
by CaliforniaTide on Aug 23, 2010 10:41 AM PDT up reply actions
Rivalries are often subjective, and are measured in emotion and intensity, not necessarily in revenue and TV ratings. For example, you folks wearing the SC glasses likely view your games with ND and Ucla as the pinnacle (or tied with) of all rivalries. Yet for those of us who are either Cal or Furd alumns, the Big Game trumps your annual meeting with Ucla by miles and miles. Similar emotions come into play with U-Dub and Oregon, etc.
For us, the annual matches against Ucla and you folks are a close second to the games against Furd. Ucla holds a special place for us, seeing as how they are our little sister.
I think that Young was discussing the importance of these rivalries to those playing them, rather than to the country-at-large. And while you likely don’t give a rat’s ass about Cal-Ucla, I can say the same about your game against ND. I haven’t watched nor really cared about it for decades.
It’s perspective.
Careful, man. There's a beverage here!
I suppose it does depend on your goal for the conference
USC – UCLA and USC – ND are relevant because they attract national attention to the conference — USC – ND because of Notre Dame’s national profile, and the overall quality of the games. USC – UCLA is attractive because (believe it or not) there was a time when UCLA was a relevant football program and it has the Rose Parade for those elsewhere in the country, while its snowing in Chicago its a sunny afternoon in LA. After those the Rivalries drop off in national profile — “the Big Game” is probably next — in no small part due to that crazy play. USC – ND is not really the concern of Pac 10 expansion, unless the Pac seeks to add ND Preserving in state or city rivals is crucial - USC UCLA, Cal Stanford, The Civil War, The Apple Cup etc, but if USC were to never play Arizona again life would go on. The Pac 10 needs to grow — it needs a championship game and better bowl tie ins, it really is one of the top 2 conferences in the nation — and should be recognized for it.
I think the Cal/UCLA rivalry is a good one between the schools...
Agreed…it is more of a regional rivalry…not a national rivalry.
As for USC/ND you have to admit that the national history of that rivalry has to be in the top 3…
I am just a new boy...A stranger in this town
Where are all the good times...Who's gonna show this stranger around?
"Mention USC to a Bruin and they get angry; mention UCLA to a Trojan and they laugh."
There is no doubt that nationally USC – ND is widely regarded as one of the more storied rivalries around.
But even with that, the interest in the game isn’t nearly as important for those not in some way affiliated with either (fan, alum, etc), nor directly affected by the outcome. Rivalries – even the big ones, are a personal thing. Outsiders simply don’t share the intensity. And after reading Young’s comments, I think he was discussing the California schools’ rivalries in that context. Even if your game against Cal isn’t viewed as being as big as the game against Ucla or ND, there is a very long and rich tradition between the two schools – going back to the earliest history of both schools. And, while others may disagree, in my opinion, expanding the conference at the cost of destroying that history is just a bad idea.
Careful, man. There's a beverage here!
I think it's possible to look at rivalries without actually being a alumni of some
Clearly I think the Cal/Furd is huge, at the same time I think the USC/UCLA one isn’t nearly as important as the USC/ND (or USC/Furd, or USC/Cal for that matter). You don’t have to be an insider to understand. In that regard, the UCLA/Cal one isn’t that big a deal conference wise. As to the last point, sorry I don’t agree. The rivalries will still be there, the expansion is more important.
Little sister......
So Cal Oski you have one tough “little sister”, she beats you in every sport.
by lasportsfan101 on Aug 23, 2010 4:18 PM PDT up reply actions
Little sister has her "talents"
in non-academic areas.
Salve Caesar Augustus Kiffinus!
Ad astra per aspera
"A Man and a Woman"
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_BK2MhvQiBo
"Understanding is a virtue, hard to come by"
J. Airplane
A bitter old man?
Pathetic old Ex-Chancellor Young was the one that yielded to political pressures and set the policies that resulted in Ucla’s decline. If any of our Bruin friends want to point a finger, this is the man. The little swipe at USC makes him pathetic.
With all their natural advantages there’s no excuse for Cal and Ucla not to be in the Nation’s Top 10 and Top 20 respectively. Unfortunately, their leaders have been sorely lacking in cojones, standing back as the demands of grievance constituencies of every stripe eroded the academics at both institutions.
Cal and Ucla will continue to deteriorate unless they are given full autonomy from the UC System. Their alumni should demand this or witness the continued demise of these formerly peerless institutions.
Salve Caesar Augustus Kiffinus!
Ad astra per aspera
Opinion from the Crypt Keeper
Thanks. Now, close the door to your crypt, ex-Chancellor Young. You sound old and out of touch. You ARE old and out of touch.
Rivalries in cfb are like a-holes. Everyone has them. But, here’s a newsflash….old rivalries can be REPLACED WITH NEW rivalries. Imagine that, huh? Wow. Arkansas-Texas? Replaced by Arkansas-LSU. Penn St-Pitt? Replaced by Penn St-Ohio St and Pitt-Cinci.
Death to the NCAA!!!
Great point Tex. Evolve of perish!
Only a deluded old fart would think some kid at UCSB or Davis is going to give a rat’s ass about Cal – Ucla.
Like Oski says above; Cal only cares about the Big Game, and playing little sister is more of a family obligation, sort of like Thanksgiving dinner at crazy aunt Myrtle’s. In the last 10 years our own rivalry with Cal has become a heckuvalot more exciting, and perhaps deserving of it’s own name, maybe we could call it “THE LARGE GAME.”
At the same time (on a national level), people don’t think of our annual slumming with the hapless ruins as a rivalry anymore.
Salve Caesar Augustus Kiffinus!
Ad astra per aspera
THE TOMMYS vs. COMMIES GAME
Btw, good thing for all of us Mario doesn’t have game anymore. We’re in enough trouble as is is!
Salve Caesar Augustus Kiffinus!
Ad astra per aspera
"These are the Hansen hold overs. " " Others simply want to live in the past..."
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EsCyC1dZiN8
"Understanding is a virtue, hard to come by"
J. Airplane
UCLA-Cal is a cool rivalry
And I think that all the intra-California rivalries have value; that’s especially true for SC fans with all of the tradition of the Weekender and the USC-Stanford series that has been played something like 90 times.
But holding onto secondary rivalries at the expense of the deterioration of the conference is selfish. The world has passed you by, Mr. Young…
"I have a commanding voice." - Ed Orgeron
a few comments
I tried to post a few comments about the Chancellor Young debacle on Bruinsnation, but the mod there kept deleting. For whatever reason, UCLA fans really seem to not want Utah joining the PAC. It’s almost freaky. No other school is throwing a fit about it like the Bruins.
Anyway, more on Young, after he left UCLA and became President of the University of Florida in the late ’90s, he oversaw the Ron Zook football era with the Gators. We all know how that turned out — Zook lost more home games in a season or two than Steve Spurrier did his whole time there. Fans hated Zook and the hire was considered a disaster.
Young left Florida after a few years and was replaced by Bernie Machen, who didn’t take long to fire Zook and bring in Urban Meyer to coach the Gators. Meyer would then win two national championships and coached a Heisman winner.
Not too shabby. Machen easily outshined Young taking care of the mess he left at the athletic department and building the Gator football program into a national powerhouse. And guess what Machen and Meyer have in common? They both came directly from the University of Utah. There may be some sour grapes here on Chancellor Young’s part.
He does seem to have it out for Utah without much logic behind it. He says it’s because Utah can’t hang academically: If you look at the rankings, you’ll find Utah is a Tier I school and falls in the middle of the PAC when it comes to most rankings. Young was also an active chancellor when Arizona and Arizona State joined — both of which fall at the bottom when it comes to PAC academic rankings. Why did he start to care about academics all of the sudden when he didn’t before?
Young also says Utah and Colorado are too far away. This is particularly strange considering both schools are closer to LA than most of the northwest schools. In fact, Utah is only about 550 air miles away while Seattle and Pullman are almost 1,000 miles away by air.
Who knows the real reason Chuck Young is on this odd mission to oppose expansion — especially considering it’s a done deal and contracts have been signed. Now that he’s almost 80, I’m not sure why he would want to leave this as his legacy. He’s going to be remembered as the cranky former UCLA chancellor who couldn’t keep his mouth shut when the PAC attempted to come into the 21st Century.
+1 great take!!
I am just a new boy...A stranger in this town
Where are all the good times...Who's gonna show this stranger around?
"Mention USC to a Bruin and they get angry; mention UCLA to a Trojan and they laugh."
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.
