[OutsiderFan]

Kathy,

You are making my point.  Graduating its players is suppose to be one of the things California aims to do.  The fact they allow this terrible graduation rate to happen is proof positive how little the institution prioritizes its football team's performance.

It would be one thing if California football players were taking rigorous majors and not graduating, but the reality is most football players are in very easy majors.  Given all the assistance football players can receive, it's hard not to matriculate if you just go to class. 

Stanford has never fallen on its academic sword for football.  The team performance on the field may falter, but the academic performance is always strong.  That's a function of Stanford having an institutional standard for its football team in terms of how it fits into the university.  California people say UC values the same things Stanford does, but it clearly has not laid down the gauntlet and made sure the football team is held to a similar standard.  That demonstrates institutional indifference to football. So even while Stanford struggled to a 1-10 season, its struggles were limited to the football field.  With California, its struggles are both on the field and in the class room.

Don't confuse low graduation rates with not valuing them.  California just doesn't care enough for its football program to make sure it performs academically.  It's far easier to just replace another failing head coach than actually define a vision for the sport that gives the program the chance for success that very few in the California leadership structure really want anyway.

[OutsiderFan]

Kathy,

You are making my point.  Graduating its players is suppose to be one of the things California aims to do.  The fact they allow this terrible graduation rate to happen is proof positive how little the institution prioritizes its football team's performance.

It would be one thing if California football players were taking rigorous majors and not graduating, but the reality is most football players are in very easy majors.  Given all the assistance football players can receive, it's hard not to matriculate if you just go to class. 

Stanford has never fallen on its academic sword for football.  The team performance on the field may falter, but the academic performance is always strong.  That's a function of Stanford having an institutional standard for its football team in terms of how it fits into the university.  California people say UC values the same things Stanford does, but it clearly has not laid down the gauntlet and made sure the football team is held to a similar standard.  That demonstrates institutional indifference to football. So even while Stanford struggled to a 1-10 season, its struggles were limited to the football field.  With California, its struggles are both on the field and in the class room.

Don't confuse low graduation rates with not valuing them.  California just doesn't care enough for its football program to make sure it performs academically.  It's far easier to just replace another failing head coach than actually define a vision for the sport that gives the program the chance for success that very few in the California leadership structure really want anyway.