ADVERTISEMENT

Maybe Sandy wasn't the problem at Cal

hlstone

Well-Known Member
Oct 5, 2006
2,953
4,081
1
LOL. The problems confronting Cal's Dept. of Intercollegiate Athletics, both then and now, go WELL beyond Sandy Barbour. AS Cal Athletic Director, she was more of a placemarker than anything else.

And BTW, women's field hockey should be thankful they even have a program. Title IX is the ONLY reason that program exists. Cal has more varsity intercollegiate sports than any other Pac 12 team except for perhaps Standord, and funding issues (together with a Cal Faculty Senate that is generally hostile to sports) will likely prompt the elimination of some non-revenue sports. All women's sports are non-revenue sports, as are most of the mens' sports..
 
  • Like
Reactions: hlstone
LOL. The problems confronting Cal's Dept. of Intercollegiate Athletics, both then and now, go WELL beyond Sandy Barbour. AS Cal Athletic Director, she was more of a placemarker than anything else.

And BTW, women's field hockey should be thankful they even have a program. Title IX is the ONLY reason that program exists. Cal has more varsity intercollegiate sports than any other Pac 12 team except for perhaps Standord, and funding issues (together with a Cal Faculty Senate that is generally hostile to sports) will likely prompt the elimination of some non-revenue sports. All women's sports are non-revenue sports, as are most of the mens' sports..


Bear, My kid is interested in studying at Cal and playing field hockey. Are you saying she should cross Call off her list?
 
LOL. The problems confronting Cal's Dept. of Intercollegiate Athletics, both then and now, go WELL beyond Sandy Barbour. AS Cal Athletic Director, she was more of a placemarker than anything else.

And BTW, women's field hockey should be thankful they even have a program. Title IX is the ONLY reason that program exists. Cal has more varsity intercollegiate sports than any other Pac 12 team except for perhaps Standord, and funding issues (together with a Cal Faculty Senate that is generally hostile to sports) will likely prompt the elimination of some non-revenue sports. All women's sports are non-revenue sports, as are most of the mens' sports..

You're not helping the anti-sandy narrative here with such logic.
 
Uh, yeah. No kidding.

The only thing relevant to Ms Barbour in that report was confirmation that by the time period in question she had been, indeed, relegated to being the "go count the number of paper clips in the supply closet" clerk. And was the most highly paid paper-clip-counter in the nation for a year prior to her being hired by Penn State.
Something that anyone who followed the situation there already knew. (Officially, she was still in charge of "Intramural Sports" LOL)

One might wonder :) WHY the Athletic Director - the supposed HMFIC of the entire Athletic Department, pulling in 1/2 a million $ per year - was relegated to being the supply room accountant.
Maybe?

(Of course, anyone with even a rudimentary awareness of the situation that played out at Cal ICA already knows that answer)


BTW - Who else actually read that "University of California Ethics Department" report? Go ahead, raise your hand.
Yeah, that's what I thought.

FWIW - the relevant stuff regarding Ms Barbour (and there was next to nothing in that report that was relevant to Ms Barbour) was in the middle of the report (somewhere in the page 20-25 area) - where it confirmed that the Athletic Director was no longer even included in the meetings of Intercollegiate Athletics Leadership.
Again, why was that?


LMAO.

SMFH.
edcom2012-barry-a3-print-page-001.jpg
 
Bear, My kid is interested in studying at Cal and playing field hockey. Are you saying she should cross Call off her list?
If her primary interest in Cal is attributable to playing field hockey, as opposed to academics, then I would say she should opt for Cal only if she does so realizing the sport could get cut. The most likely sports to get cut are the sports which run up the biggest net expenses, and which are incapable of raising the money necessary to operate on an endowment basis. I don't think Cal field hockey generates a ton of expenses, in which event it may well not be a target.

Cal Mens' Golf is fully endowed. So, I believe, is Cal Men's Crew, Or nearly so. Cal Mens' Baseball was nearly cut a few years ago, but some well heeled baseball alums raised a bunch of money and staved off elimination. But baseball is still not fully endowed, and generates a TON of expense, so it is still a target. Probably more than you ever wanted to know about Cal sports.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hlstone
If her primary interest in Cal is attributable to playing field hockey, as opposed to academics, then I would say she should opt for Cal only if she does so realizing the sport could get cut. The most likely sports to get cut are the sports which run up the biggest net expenses, and which are incapable of raising the money necessary to operate on an endowment basis. I don't think Cal field hockey generates a ton of expenses, in which event it may well not be a target.

Cal Mens' Golf is fully endowed. So, I believe, is Cal Men's Crew, Or nearly so. Cal Mens' Baseball was nearly cut a few years ago, but some well heeled baseball alums raised a bunch of money and staved off elimination. But baseball is still not fully endowed, and generates a TON of expense, so it is still a target. Probably more than you ever wanted to know about Cal sports.


That is great to know. She is interested in the Marine Science dept. at Cal, but she also wants to play the sport she loves. I am just hoping to learn the rules before she gets to college.:)
 
She must be putting up some decent high school grades. Good for her. And you. If she has some questions about attending Cal, let me know and I will get you my contact info.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hlstone
I have no reason to think Sandy isn’t doing a great job at PSU. She has a big decision in 1 or 2 years with both PSU basketball programs potentially.
 
  • Like
Reactions: NittanyLion15
No doubt.

And you likely never will - if, like 99% of college sports fans, you think that the only important tasks of an AD are the hiring/firing of the football coach (and, in some cases, the basketball coach).
Of course, common sense says that if that were the case, most ADs would "work" an average of about one month every five years or so :) - - and many would never take on a meaningful responsibility from the day they tok the job until the day they clean out their office :)

Truth be told, those (the hire/fire) aren't even decisions that are - in most cases - even largely dictated by the AD.

Anyway, the overwhelming majority of college sports fans - if they even know who "their" team's AD is - have no idea what they do or don't do. Certainly have no idea if they do it competently or incompetently.
And the effects of incompetence in their role - before they become visibly to the average fan - are years and years down the road (well after the AD responsible is usually gone).
Even the situation at Cal - likely the single worst "effort" on the part of a major college AD anywhere, since the advent of big-time college athletics - is rearing its ugly head into the view of the "average fan" just now. YEARS after the events that are responsible for the situation had already transpired.

Cal, despite being one of the most well-endowed Universities in the WORLD, now finds that it is unreasonable to continue the unfettered financial bailout required to maintain their full athletic program.
Bailouts required by the actions of their 21st century Intercollegiate Athletics administration - and is now in the mode of looking to cut sports, etc. (and make no mistake, they are well aware that just to maintain the high profile sports programs, they will be continuing to subsidize the athletic department - in huge $$$ - for generations to come).

By the time the same effects are revealed to the "average fan" here at Penn State, the damage will have long since been done - and the fate written.
Hell, even here at Pen State, 99% of fans do not even realize that the Administration has ALREADY changed the Athletics funding model (to now authorize University General Funds to be used to make up for Balance Sheet deficits).

That's a good thing for people like Ms Barbour and her cohorts.
Allowing them to accumulate many, many millions of dollars (from both Cal and Penn State - and, who knows, maybe the next University that will find themselves with the need to "check off some boxes" in their administrative hires) - despite the fact that she has yet to broach a single task of being an AD, that she has not utterly failed at.

But, that's OK - so long as the football team is winning :)
Now, if the football team stops winning? That will be a horse of another color.

Culture Problem?

C'est La Vie


Fortunately - or perhaps, for better or worse - there are much larger "Culture Problems" to be concerned about at Penn State. Since the "sports" one isn't likely to be changed (or even addressed)
Well, Barry, perhaps you should take a knee in protest. Get yourself on TV. ;)
 
No doubt.

And you likely never will - if, like 99% of college sports fans, you think that the only important tasks of an AD are the hiring/firing of the football coach (and, in some cases, the basketball coach).
Of course, common sense says that if that were the case, most ADs would "work" an average of about one month every five years or so :) - - and many would never take on a meaningful responsibility from the day they tok the job until the day they clean out their office :)

Truth be told, those (the hire/fire) aren't even decisions that are - in most cases - even largely dictated by the AD.

Anyway, the overwhelming majority of college sports fans - if they even know who "their" team's AD is - have no idea what they do or don't do. Certainly have no idea if they do it competently or incompetently.
And the effects of incompetence in their role - before they become visibly to the average fan - are years and years down the road (well after the AD responsible is usually gone).
Even the situation at Cal - likely the single worst "effort" on the part of a major college AD anywhere, since the advent of big-time college athletics - is rearing its ugly head into the view of the "average fan" just now. YEARS after the events that are responsible for the situation had already transpired.

Cal, despite being one of the most well-endowed Universities in the WORLD, now finds that it is unreasonable to continue the unfettered financial bailout required to maintain their full athletic program.
Bailouts required by the actions of their 21st century Intercollegiate Athletics administration - and is now in the mode of looking to cut sports, etc. (and make no mistake, they are well aware that just to maintain the high profile sports programs, they will be continuing to subsidize the athletic department - in huge $$$ - for generations to come).

By the time the same effects are revealed to the "average fan" here at Penn State, the damage will have long since been done - and the fate written.
Hell, even here at Pen State, 99% of fans do not even realize that the Administration has ALREADY changed the Athletics funding model (to now authorize University General Funds to be used to make up for Balance Sheet deficits).

That's a good thing for people like Ms Barbour and her cohorts.
Allowing them to accumulate many, many millions of dollars (from both Cal and Penn State - and, who knows, maybe the next University that will find themselves with the need to "check off some boxes" in their administrative hires) - despite the fact that she has yet to broach a single task of being an AD, that she has not utterly failed at.

But, that's OK - so long as the football team is winning :)
Now, if the football team stops winning? That will be a horse of another color.

Culture Problem?

C'est La Vie


Fortunately - or perhaps, for better or worse - there are much larger "Culture Problems" to be concerned about at Penn State. Since the "sports" one isn't likely to be changed (or even addressed)
"Truth be told, those (the hire/fire) aren't even decisions that are - in most cases - even largely dictated by the AD."
Truth be told, neither are most of the other decisions that affect athletics.
 
So you don’t want to put money into our sports programs or facilities? How silly! We are in the B1G. Why don’t you just piss off and root for Temple or Rutgers. Dumb.
 
.... (and make no mistake, they [i.e., Cal] are well aware that just to maintain the high profile sports programs, they will be continuing to subsidize the athletic department - in huge $$$ - for generations to come).

OK, that might be overstating the problem by a tad. LOL...
 
No doubt.

And you likely never will - if, like 99% of college sports fans, you think that the only important tasks of an AD are the hiring/firing of the football coach (and, in some cases, the basketball coach).
Of course, common sense says that if that were the case, most ADs would "work" an average of about one month every five years or so :) - - and many would never take on a meaningful responsibility from the day they tok the job until the day they clean out their office :)

Truth be told, those (the hire/fire) aren't even decisions that are - in most cases - even largely dictated by the AD.

Anyway, the overwhelming majority of college sports fans - if they even know who "their" team's AD is - have no idea what they do or don't do. Certainly have no idea if they do it competently or incompetently.
And the effects of incompetence in their role - before they become visibly to the average fan - are years and years down the road (well after the AD responsible is usually gone).
Even the situation at Cal - likely the single worst "effort" on the part of a major college AD anywhere, since the advent of big-time college athletics - is rearing its ugly head into the view of the "average fan" just now. YEARS after the events that are responsible for the situation had already transpired.

Cal, despite being one of the most well-endowed Universities in the WORLD, now finds that it is unreasonable to continue the unfettered financial bailout required to maintain their full athletic program.
Bailouts required by the actions of their 21st century Intercollegiate Athletics administration - and is now in the mode of looking to cut sports, etc. (and make no mistake, they are well aware that just to maintain the high profile sports programs, they will be continuing to subsidize the athletic department - in huge $$$ - for generations to come).

By the time the same effects are revealed to the "average fan" here at Penn State, the damage will have long since been done - and the fate written.
Hell, even here at Pen State, 99% of fans do not even realize that the Administration has ALREADY changed the Athletics funding model (to now authorize University General Funds to be used to make up for Balance Sheet deficits).

That's a good thing for people like Ms Barbour and her cohorts.
Allowing them to accumulate many, many millions of dollars (from both Cal and Penn State - and, who knows, maybe the next University that will find themselves with the need to "check off some boxes" in their administrative hires) - despite the fact that she has yet to broach a single task of being an AD, that she has not utterly failed at.

But, that's OK - so long as the football team is winning :)
Now, if the football team stops winning? That will be a horse of another color.

Culture Problem?

C'est La Vie


Fortunately - or perhaps, for better or worse - there are much larger "Culture Problems" to be concerned about at Penn State. Since the "sports" one isn't likely to be changed (or even addressed)

WRONG. METRICS. :eek:
 
ADVERTISEMENT
ADVERTISEMENT