[81alum]

Until UCB really focuses on generating a strong donor base for athletics, they will continue to run a large deficit.  It's amazing to me that weenie alums don't step up and back their school financially.  They outnumber us here in the Bay area by a large margin, but their giving history is pathetic.  There were actually Stanford alums who donated to keep UCB's baseball program alive. 

It's past time to start cutting programs.  That's the sad truth, but until the entitled bunch of weenies actually start reaching into their pockets to support their own program, they get what they deserve. 

Improving the academics of the UC system needs to be the priority.

Does Stanford publish its athletics finances anywhere?  It would be nice if we voluntarily complied with the disclosure that all public universities are required to provide (see the USA Today athletics database) so we could directly compare a few things.

C.al raised $22.6 million last year, which is more than double what they raised a decade earlier.  Their downfall is the exorbitant debt-service on their stadium, which contributes mightily to their extreme overhead of $23.7 million.  In other words, every dollar they raise has to be used just to pay the interest on their stadium debt. 

By comparison, UCLA raised $16.9 million, significantly less than C.al!  But their overhead was only $10.4 million.

C.al's problem is that stadium hanging around their neck like a one hundred yard wide millstone.  But this was known from the very beginning.  I think, cynically, that many knew that the half billion dollars they borrowed to make their stadium safe couldn't really be paid back using athletic funds, and so they simply made a false promise to do so, knowing that in time it would blow up and someone would bail them out.

[81alum]

Until UCB really focuses on generating a strong donor base for athletics, they will continue to run a large deficit.  It's amazing to me that weenie alums don't step up and back their school financially.  They outnumber us here in the Bay area by a large margin, but their giving history is pathetic.  There were actually Stanford alums who donated to keep UCB's baseball program alive. 

It's past time to start cutting programs.  That's the sad truth, but until the entitled bunch of weenies actually start reaching into their pockets to support their own program, they get what they deserve. 

Improving the academics of the UC system needs to be the priority.

Does Stanford publish its athletics finances anywhere?  It would be nice if we voluntarily complied with the disclosure that all public universities are required to provide (see the USA Today athletics database) so we could directly compare a few things.

C.al raised $22.6 million last year, which is more than double what they raised a decade earlier.  Their downfall is the exorbitant debt-service on their stadium, which contributes mightily to their extreme overhead of $23.7 million.  In other words, every dollar they raise has to be used just to pay the interest on their stadium debt. 

By comparison, UCLA raised $16.9 million, significantly less than C.al!  But their overhead was only $10.4 million.

C.al's problem is that stadium hanging around their neck like a one hundred yard wide millstone.  But this was known from the very beginning.  I think, cynically, that many knew that the half billion dollars they borrowed to make their stadium safe couldn't really be paid back using athletic funds, and so they simply made a false promise to do so, knowing that in time it would blow up and someone would bail them out.