More proof that the UCLA AD did NOT get the $300 million. The Regents got it.
"UCLA intends to build a football-only facility at Spaulding Field, which would include a locker room, weight room, meeting rooms and offices for coaches. The university has hired an architect and is trying to raise $50 million for the project. Washington completed renovations on its football facilities, including Husky Stadium, last summer." LA Times
Hey, I don't know if it will work, but I'm betting on "POOL BOY". I thinks he's got his shot lined up.
UCLA has committed $200 million to the Rose Bowl renovation and another $125 million for Pauly I just read. Also, their endowment at $2.8 billion is about $700 million more than UW's. Their AD just signed an extension through 2019
can't discount the possibility Mora has a good gig going at UCLA, owns the town and just used Woody's desparation and Sarks new fortune to enhance his UCLA deal to a market rate contract.
UCLA has alumni that could pony up $4-5 million/year with pocket change and of course, UCLA got the same $300 Million in TV money everybody else in the conference got. What have they spent it on so far?
UCLA is not a separate 501(c)(3), like we are. They're set up like Cal. Everything has to go through the Regents and the Chancellor. The AD can't negotiate independently. Just like when we stole Tosh, Cal couldn't respond quickly. UCLA cannot respond quickly. Woodward has his own money, separate from upper campus. Donors cannot give directly to the AD at UCLA unless the Regents set it up ahead of time. At UW, they can.
Our $300 million went to Woodward. UCLA's money went to the University. If you think State Schools in Washington are strapped, you have no idea how strapped they are in California. The UCLA AD will be lucky to get half that money.
That's why UCLA will always be little brother in LA. USC is private and can do anything they want.
Remember the Tosh bidding, and relax. If Woodward wants this deal, it will work. If he doesn't, it won't.
not exactly.
UW is a state school. the coach gets a state pension. the football stadium was built with the full faith and credit of the State school. The head coaches contract has to be approved by the Board Of Regents which has the overall University to consider and the political implications of excessive coach contracts when they beg the legislature for money.
not exactly.
The contract is approved by the Regents, but he isn't paid with their money. All AD employees are paid with AD funds from revenues generated by the AD. As State employees, they all contribute to, and participate in the State Employee Pension Fund. (A fact that is irrelevant to this discussion.) The buildings used by the AD are financed with UW Muni bonds, because the AD is not the issuing authority; the University is. However, the University is NOT on the hook, because AD projects are Revenue Bonds, not General Obligations of the University. If the stadium does not produce enough revenue, the bonds don't get paid.
At Cal, the AD revenues are owned by the University, not the AD. Because of that, the AD does NOT have the money to pay off the bonds on their stadium, unless the football team packs the place year after year. Year ONE didn't look so good for Sandy. She may have to call her rug muncher friends to chip in. If that doesn't work, the only other choice will be to charge the students VERY BIG fees every year starting in a few years to pay off Sandy's Folly.
UCLA has more problems than Berkeley. Like Berkeley, the Rose Bowl parking is either free, or goes to the city of Pasadena. Woodward keeps his parking receipts. The Rose Bowl isn't owned by UCLA. The concessions are not owned by UCLA. UCLA pays rent. We don't. UCLA can't even raise $50 million for a new football facility. Where are the rich alums? They give money to the Regents, who give it to the Medical Center. The AD has to fight for the crumbs that the Professors don't swallow. I also don't think UCLA has a land grant since it was a campus of the UC System; another bad financial break.
These UCLA financial problems have been debated in the LA Times for decades. Jerry Brown has just made it much worse.
Comments
The contract is approved by the Regents, but he isn't paid with their money. All AD employees are paid with AD funds from revenues generated by the AD. As State employees, they all contribute to, and participate in the State Employee Pension Fund. (A fact that is irrelevant to this discussion.) The buildings used by the AD are financed with UW Muni bonds, because the AD is not the issuing authority; the University is. However, the University is NOT on the hook, because AD projects are Revenue Bonds, not General Obligations of the University. If the stadium does not produce enough revenue, the bonds don't get paid.
At Cal, the AD revenues are owned by the University, not the AD. Because of that, the AD does NOT have the money to pay off the bonds on their stadium, unless the football team packs the place year after year. Year ONE didn't look so good for Sandy. She may have to call her rug muncher friends to chip in. If that doesn't work, the only other choice will be to charge the students VERY BIG fees every year starting in a few years to pay off Sandy's Folly.
UCLA has more problems than Berkeley. Like Berkeley, the Rose Bowl parking is either free, or goes to the city of Pasadena. Woodward keeps his parking receipts. The Rose Bowl isn't owned by UCLA. The concessions are not owned by UCLA. UCLA pays rent. We don't. UCLA can't even raise $50 million for a new football facility. Where are the rich alums? They give money to the Regents, who give it to the Medical Center. The AD has to fight for the crumbs that the Professors don't swallow. I also don't think UCLA has a land grant since it was a campus of the UC System; another bad financial break.
These UCLA financial problems have been debated in the LA Times for decades. Jerry Brown has just made it much worse.