Hello There, Guest! (LoginRegister)

Post Reply 
Will Cal and UCLA ever let UC Davis move to FBS?
Author Message
MWC Tex Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,850
Joined: Aug 2012
Reputation: 179
I Root For: MW
Location: TX
Post: #1
Will Cal and UCLA ever let UC Davis move to FBS?
Question for anyone in the know.

It seems the UC system has no issue of non-football schools being Division 1 and the CSU system doesn't mind having multiple FBS schools and would even let other CSU schools become FBS. But, would the UC system allow another FBS school? Is Cal and UCLA that protective of their status?
11-29-2017 12:48 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Jjoey52 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,035
Joined: Feb 2017
Reputation: 236
I Root For: ISU
Location:
Post: #2
Will Cal and UCLA ever let UC Davis move to FBS?
Has nothing to do with them, they would not draw enough for FBS, they have a brand new stadium that seats around 10000.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
11-29-2017 12:55 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Stugray2 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,176
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 679
I Root For: tOSU SJSU Stan'
Location: South Bay Area CA
Post: #3
RE: Will Cal and UCLA ever let UC Davis move to FBS?
There is no formal block in either the CSU or the UC systems.

The issues facing the schools is more about resources for development and research. For Davis it is the politics of UCLA and Cal wanting to remain the flagships of the UC system. Both are seriously hemmed in by urban development and so have very limited student enrollment additions possible. UC Davis on the other hand is in a rural area and literally has the land space to double in size, to perhaps be a 45-50,000 student undergraduate program. But their growth is targeted at a much lower pace despite California having a significant shortage in residential seats and a population that is almost 40 million now. Basically population has doubled in the last few decades but residential seats have not come close to keeping pace.

This has nothing to do with athletics, except that finding Chancellors who are not too ambitious is part of the formula. UC Davis' restriction is more self imposed and psychological.

The Cal States face a much harder time, as the budget is always crimped for them, and UC pressure to not allow any of their campuses to truly develop in residential and research Universities. This results in a lower student success rate and lower donations by a few orders of magnitude. The way to think of it is California has a tier 1-A+ system and a tier 3 system, with no tier 2. It's a long standing feature of California politics, which is not really party related. What it means is any overly ambitious CSU President will find their wings clipped fast, and their school unable to take advantage of the opportunities all around them. I marvel at how SDSU has pushed the envelope as far as they have.

All this is a long winded way of saying, the CSUs are charter and funding restricted, and the UCs have more subtle pressures, which really are only to protect UCLA and Cal as flagships. But all UCs have the funding to pretty much do what they want if their leaders have the guts to do it.
11-29-2017 01:26 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
SDHornet Offline
Special Teams
*

Posts: 984
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 28
I Root For: Sac State
Location:
Post: #4
RE: Will Cal and UCLA ever let UC Davis move to FBS?
(11-29-2017 01:26 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  There is no formal block in either the CSU or the UC systems.

The issues facing the schools is more about resources for development and research. For Davis it is the politics of UCLA and Cal wanting to remain the flagships of the UC system. Both are seriously hemmed in by urban development and so have very limited student enrollment additions possible. UC Davis on the other hand is in a rural area and literally has the land space to double in size, to perhaps be a 45-50,000 student undergraduate program. But their growth is targeted at a much lower pace despite California having a significant shortage in residential seats and a population that is almost 40 million now. Basically population has doubled in the last few decades but residential seats have not come close to keeping pace.

This has nothing to do with athletics, except that finding Chancellors who are not too ambitious is part of the formula. UC Davis' restriction is more self imposed and psychological.

The Cal States face a much harder time, as the budget is always crimped for them, and UC pressure to not allow any of their campuses to truly develop in residential and research Universities. This results in a lower student success rate and lower donations by a few orders of magnitude. The way to think of it is California has a tier 1-A+ system and a tier 3 system, with no tier 2. It's a long standing feature of California politics, which is not really party related. What it means is any overly ambitious CSU President will find their wings clipped fast, and their school unable to take advantage of the opportunities all around them. I marvel at how SDSU has pushed the envelope as far as they have.

All this is a long winded way of saying, the CSUs are charter and funding restricted, and the UCs have more subtle pressures, which really are only to protect UCLA and Cal as flagships. But all UCs have the funding to pretty much do what they want if their leaders have the guts to do it.

Excellent post and spot on. Note that davis would need a much larger stadium to ever be able to make the FBS move, and there is zero need to invest in a larger stadium at the FCS level as they can't constantly fill it up now. Kind of a chicken and egg situation.
11-29-2017 01:30 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MWC Tex Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,850
Joined: Aug 2012
Reputation: 179
I Root For: MW
Location: TX
Post: #5
RE: Will Cal and UCLA ever let UC Davis move to FBS?
(11-29-2017 01:30 AM)SDHornet Wrote:  
(11-29-2017 01:26 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  There is no formal block in either the CSU or the UC systems.

The issues facing the schools is more about resources for development and research. For Davis it is the politics of UCLA and Cal wanting to remain the flagships of the UC system. Both are seriously hemmed in by urban development and so have very limited student enrollment additions possible. UC Davis on the other hand is in a rural area and literally has the land space to double in size, to perhaps be a 45-50,000 student undergraduate program. But their growth is targeted at a much lower pace despite California having a significant shortage in residential seats and a population that is almost 40 million now. Basically population has doubled in the last few decades but residential seats have not come close to keeping pace.

This has nothing to do with athletics, except that finding Chancellors who are not too ambitious is part of the formula. UC Davis' restriction is more self imposed and psychological.

The Cal States face a much harder time, as the budget is always crimped for them, and UC pressure to not allow any of their campuses to truly develop in residential and research Universities. This results in a lower student success rate and lower donations by a few orders of magnitude. The way to think of it is California has a tier 1-A+ system and a tier 3 system, with no tier 2. It's a long standing feature of California politics, which is not really party related. What it means is any overly ambitious CSU President will find their wings clipped fast, and their school unable to take advantage of the opportunities all around them. I marvel at how SDSU has pushed the envelope as far as they have.

All this is a long winded way of saying, the CSUs are charter and funding restricted, and the UCs have more subtle pressures, which really are only to protect UCLA and Cal as flagships. But all UCs have the funding to pretty much do what they want if their leaders have the guts to do it.

Excellent post and spot on. Note that davis would need a much larger stadium to ever be able to make the FBS move, and there is zero need to invest in a larger stadium at the FCS level as they can't constantly fill it up now. Kind of a chicken and egg situation.

Kinda what I suspect about Cal and UCLA. Perhaps some things are starting to change with the new AD and hiring Dan Hawkins as head coach. He was given more money for coaches salaries and it seems they are starting on phase 2 of tne stadium where a $5 million gift came in to build the athletic offices at the stadium.
Phase 3 will come soon for stadium expansion.
http://www.aggiesportstalk.com/discussio...onation/p1
11-29-2017 01:39 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
GiveEmTheAxe Offline
2nd String
*

Posts: 376
Joined: May 2011
Reputation: 14
I Root For: Stanford
Location:
Post: #6
RE: Will Cal and UCLA ever let UC Davis move to FBS?
Can we really know how well a school like UC Davis might draw in FBS without them first being FBS?

UC Berkeley and UCLA have long had the advantage of being able to have not only a local presence, but also the ability to draw applicants and mindshare from every corner of the state. As kids apply to more and more schools and the UC campuses have all gotten more selective is it fair to say that other campuses have started to develop state-wide appeal? I'd say UCSD has had that draw for a while and UCSB, UC Davis and UCI arguably have that too.

Maybe occupying the same athletics tier as the big boys would drive that point home. I think they'd find an audience.
11-29-2017 01:42 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 19,862
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 964
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
Post: #7
RE: Will Cal and UCLA ever let UC Davis move to FBS?
(11-29-2017 01:26 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  UC Davis on the other hand is in a rural area and literally has the land space to double in size, to perhaps be a 45-50,000 student undergraduate program. But their growth is targeted at a much lower pace despite California having a significant shortage in residential seats and a population that is almost 40 million now. Basically population has doubled in the last few decades but residential seats have not come close to keeping pace.

The entire UC system is increasing the number of undergrads by 10,000. No single campus would want to add 10,000 or more new students; as far as I can tell each campus is taking its share of the total increase of 10,000 grudgingly because of the strain it puts on existing facilities.

And any of the campus' home cities would raise holy hell if UC doubled the number of undergrads at one campus because it would have a huge adverse impact on the city, especially campuses in smaller cities like Davis or Santa Cruz or Santa Barbara. It's also politically beneficial from politicians' point of view, in either the UC or CSU systems, to deliver political "pork" to different areas of the state by opening a new campus (like UC Merced or Cal State San Marcos) rather than doubling the enrollment of an existing campus (like UC Davis or San Diego State).
11-29-2017 02:29 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
DavidSt Offline
Hall of Famer
*

Posts: 23,011
Joined: Dec 2013
Reputation: 732
I Root For: ATU, P7
Location:
Post: #8
RE: Will Cal and UCLA ever let UC Davis move to FBS?
If UC-Davis have a 100,000 seat stadium? They would be in the PAC 12 long time ago. Same with UC-San Diego.
11-29-2017 02:31 AM
Visit this user's website Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Stugray2 Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,176
Joined: Jan 2017
Reputation: 679
I Root For: tOSU SJSU Stan'
Location: South Bay Area CA
Post: #9
RE: Will Cal and UCLA ever let UC Davis move to FBS?
Wedge,

California is wedded to the "Virginia" model for schools. UC Davis should be expanded to a "Madison, Wisconsin" model over the next decade to take advantage of scale.

As for the UC System, we are short roughly 150,000 residential seats to actually take in all the top 8% who want to go to UC. Impacting in desirable majors and discounts from other schools (talking top 100 here as these are top 5% kids mostly) is what takes some pressure off. If California relaxed it to say 10% you see at places like Michigan and Wisconsin, then we'd be short over 250,000 seats. Even future declines *if they happen* in High School students eligible could see an easing in a decade or two. I am skeptical, as I expect out population to top 50million in less than twenty years.

So yeah 10,000 seats over the next couple years in a State with a population adding 500,000 a year is going make a huge difference there.

California needs to develop a 2nd tier. I have long advocated this. The CSU system as a one size fits all admission doesn't work any more and doesn't recognize the true diversity of the sate and the different missions. Nor does it do anything about the seat shortage. Rather than try to build extremely expensive small UC campuses, where you have to duplicate overhead of Chancellors and Department heads and schools and everything involved, why not let Davis take advantage of scale and blow it up to handle 60,000 students (counting graduates)? For the State's why not form a new system for schools that can be a 2nd tier. Yes some resources would be sent their way, but the aim is R2 schools, not R1 and AAU like the UCs. Those with the greatest resources, either campus expansion room or locale for business resources (e.g., Silicon Valley, somewhere in the LA basin) and with the greatest build up capital make sense. Build six of them up as true residential schools with some real level of research, say at 25% of that of UC Irvine. (I am thinking separate of Cal Poly which really has it's own mission and standards.)

I am not in favor of building very expensive new campuses that do not change the overall dynamic. I'd like to see the pressure reduced, so that like in most other states the top 15% of students can have the residential experience, rather than commuter or have to leave the state. I think this would be a better use of funds. As for the UC top position, there is so much room between them and the CSUs on standards that it makes more sense to grow the CSUs than the UCs (and a lot cheaper).
11-29-2017 04:14 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Captain Bearcat Offline
All-American in Everything
*

Posts: 9,478
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 766
I Root For: UC
Location: IL & Cincinnati, USA
Post: #10
RE: Will Cal and UCLA ever let UC Davis move to FBS?
(11-29-2017 02:29 AM)Wedge Wrote:  
(11-29-2017 01:26 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  UC Davis on the other hand is in a rural area and literally has the land space to double in size, to perhaps be a 45-50,000 student undergraduate program. But their growth is targeted at a much lower pace despite California having a significant shortage in residential seats and a population that is almost 40 million now. Basically population has doubled in the last few decades but residential seats have not come close to keeping pace.

The entire UC system is increasing the number of undergrads by 10,000. No single campus would want to add 10,000 or more new students; as far as I can tell each campus is taking its share of the total increase of 10,000 grudgingly because of the strain it puts on existing facilities.

And any of the campus' home cities would raise holy hell if UC doubled the number of undergrads at one campus because it would have a huge adverse impact on the city, especially campuses in smaller cities like Davis or Santa Cruz or Santa Barbara. It's also politically beneficial from politicians' point of view, in either the UC or CSU systems, to deliver political "pork" to different areas of the state by opening a new campus (like UC Merced or Cal State San Marcos) rather than doubling the enrollment of an existing campus (like UC Davis or San Diego State).

Adverse impact? Yeah, it would be awful to have an extra 5,000 new high paying jobs in town.

Seriously, only in California would university growth be seen as an "adverse impact" (which is even odder when you consider that every big city in the state just offered Amazon huge incentives to bring in 50,000 jobs to a single site).

10,000 extra students is no big deal for a system with 251,000 students. That's 3.9% growth, and if the pace of construction at UCSD is any indication then it's going to take 5 years to hit that goal (which means they're not even keeping up with the USA's 1% average annual population growth).
(This post was last modified: 11-29-2017 06:01 AM by Captain Bearcat.)
11-29-2017 04:50 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Captain Bearcat Offline
All-American in Everything
*

Posts: 9,478
Joined: Jun 2010
Reputation: 766
I Root For: UC
Location: IL & Cincinnati, USA
Post: #11
RE: Will Cal and UCLA ever let UC Davis move to FBS?
(11-29-2017 01:26 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  The way to think of it is California has a tier 1-A+ system and a tier 3 system, with no tier 2. It's a long standing feature of California politics, which is not really party related. What it means is any overly ambitious CSU President will find their wings clipped fast, and their school unable to take advantage of the opportunities all around them. I marvel at how SDSU has pushed the envelope as far as they have.

I would amend this. It is 3 tier.

Tier 1 is Berkeley, UCLA, and UCSD. It's A+ but it's small for the state - it would be the same as if the University of Michigan had 23,000 undergrads, or if Utah had 8,000 undergrads.

Tier 2 are the other 7 campuses of the UC system. It's about the 80% of the size, proportionally, as Michigan State or NC State are in their states, but on average is lower quality (the better ones are as good as MSU or NCSU, but then there's Riverside and Merced).

Tier 3 is the CSU system. It's got 2 high quality masters-level schools that could compete with doctoral schools in other states (Cal Poly and SDSU), a bunch of adequate masters-level schools, and a bunch that are on the level of Wright State or the HBCUs. At 478,000 students, if you put it in Michigan it would be the size and quality of Michigan's 6 public master's universities plus WMU and CMU.

Of course, Michigan also has Wayne State, Oakland, Eastern Michigan, and Michigan Tech (which educate a total of 75,000 students and perform $300 million in research annually).

Michigan is not unique - I could do the same thing for any Midwestern state (and most Southeastern ones) to show that California's system is not even close to adequate.
(This post was last modified: 11-29-2017 06:02 AM by Captain Bearcat.)
11-29-2017 05:51 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


MWC Tex Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,850
Joined: Aug 2012
Reputation: 179
I Root For: MW
Location: TX
Post: #12
RE: Will Cal and UCLA ever let UC Davis move to FBS?
(11-29-2017 01:42 AM)GiveEmTheAxe Wrote:  Can we really know how well a school like UC Davis might draw in FBS without them first being FBS?

UC Berkeley and UCLA have long had the advantage of being able to have not only a local presence, but also the ability to draw applicants and mindshare from every corner of the state. As kids apply to more and more schools and the UC campuses have all gotten more selective is it fair to say that other campuses have started to develop state-wide appeal? I'd say UCSD has had that draw for a while and UCSB, UC Davis and UCI arguably have that too.

Maybe occupying the same athletics tier as the big boys would drive that point home. I think they'd find an audience.
Well, considering how the NCAA counts attendance, it can't be any worse than having Coastal Carolina who didn't even have a stadium that held 8k to be able to be invited to FBS and had to try to make room for expansion.
That being said, UCD planned for an expansion of their stadium to 30k and still is advertising on their athletics website that it will be expanded down the road. In addition, it will cheap to add seats since they setup for an expansion down the road.
The link I provided in regards to the football coach interview gave some info regarding the Stadium expansion in 3 phases. First phase is done, the next phase is currently underway with the athletics office building and training room.
When phase 3 comes, I wonder even if the MW or any other FBS conference did invite UCD to the FBS ranks if they would get too much blow back from Cal and UCLA to even be able to move up. When the WAC still existed for football, didn't UCD jump at the chance? Did they know it wasn't possible to get approval?
11-29-2017 08:25 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Bogg Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,846
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 154
I Root For: UConn
Location:
Post: #13
RE: Will Cal and UCLA ever let UC Davis move to FBS?
It's not up to Cal and UCLA, it's up to the Mountain West, and my guess is those schools don't want my additional programs in their footprint. Short of an actual conference invite that isn't coming, FBS isn't feasible for UC Davis.
11-29-2017 10:21 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
BePcr07 Online
All American
*

Posts: 4,900
Joined: Dec 2015
Reputation: 342
I Root For: Boise St & Zags
Location:
Post: #14
RE: Will Cal and UCLA ever let UC Davis move to FBS?
(11-29-2017 05:51 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  I would amend this. It is 3 tier.

Tier 1 is Berkeley, UCLA, and UCSD.

Tier 2 are the other 7 campuses of the UC system.

Tier 3 is the CSU system.

Interesting. I never really knew much about UCSD academics so it surprises me they haven't already been promoted. Honestly, if San Diego St were UCSD, they might already be in the PAC.
11-29-2017 10:30 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Bogg Offline
All American
*

Posts: 2,846
Joined: Sep 2016
Reputation: 154
I Root For: UConn
Location:
Post: #15
RE: Will Cal and UCLA ever let UC Davis move to FBS?
(11-29-2017 10:30 AM)BePcr07 Wrote:  
(11-29-2017 05:51 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  I would amend this. It is 3 tier.

Tier 1 is Berkeley, UCLA, and UCSD.

Tier 2 are the other 7 campuses of the UC system.

Tier 3 is the CSU system.

Interesting. I never really knew much about UCSD academics so it surprises me they haven't already been promoted. Honestly, if San Diego St were UCSD, they might already be in the PAC.

Eh. Rice is "Tier 1" in Texas academically (there may be other inhabitants of that tier, I don't know, but Rice is definitely in it) and they aren't in the Big 12. Academics and profit-driven sports broadcasting are two different animals.
11-29-2017 10:58 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 19,862
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 964
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
Post: #16
RE: Will Cal and UCLA ever let UC Davis move to FBS?
(11-29-2017 04:50 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  
(11-29-2017 02:29 AM)Wedge Wrote:  
(11-29-2017 01:26 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  UC Davis on the other hand is in a rural area and literally has the land space to double in size, to perhaps be a 45-50,000 student undergraduate program. But their growth is targeted at a much lower pace despite California having a significant shortage in residential seats and a population that is almost 40 million now. Basically population has doubled in the last few decades but residential seats have not come close to keeping pace.

The entire UC system is increasing the number of undergrads by 10,000. No single campus would want to add 10,000 or more new students; as far as I can tell each campus is taking its share of the total increase of 10,000 grudgingly because of the strain it puts on existing facilities.

And any of the campus' home cities would raise holy hell if UC doubled the number of undergrads at one campus because it would have a huge adverse impact on the city, especially campuses in smaller cities like Davis or Santa Cruz or Santa Barbara. It's also politically beneficial from politicians' point of view, in either the UC or CSU systems, to deliver political "pork" to different areas of the state by opening a new campus (like UC Merced or Cal State San Marcos) rather than doubling the enrollment of an existing campus (like UC Davis or San Diego State).

Adverse impact? Yeah, it would be awful to have an extra 5,000 new high paying jobs in town.

Seriously, only in California would university growth be seen as an "adverse impact" (which is even odder when you consider that every big city in the state just offered Amazon huge incentives to bring in 50,000 jobs to a single site).

10,000 extra students is no big deal for a system with 251,000 students. That's 3.9% growth, and if the pace of construction at UCSD is any indication then it's going to take 5 years to hit that goal (which means they're not even keeping up with the USA's 1% average annual population growth).

I agree that residents of college cities see "hordes of students" and not "jobs" when they read about university expansion. Maybe they shouldn't. But I know what residents of Davis or Santa Barbara would say about doubling the number of students on campus. And it's not just California. I bet the reaction of residents would be the same in other smaller cities like Eugene, Oregon or Lawrence, Kansas. Larger urban areas are different.

I'm also pretty sure that few if any administrators at large schools want to double their campus population, either. You went to grad school at SDSU, right? Does SDSU's faculty and administration want to have 70,000 students at the school? I doubt it.
11-29-2017 10:59 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Advertisement


MWC Tex Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,850
Joined: Aug 2012
Reputation: 179
I Root For: MW
Location: TX
Post: #17
RE: Will Cal and UCLA ever let UC Davis move to FBS?
(11-29-2017 10:21 AM)Bogg Wrote:  It's not up to Cal and UCLA, it's up to the Mountain West, and my guess is those schools don't want my additional programs in their footprint. Short of an actual conference invite that isn't coming, FBS isn't feasible for UC Davis.

I'm not so sure it is up to the MW. I'm pretty sure the WAC would have added them awhile ago and even add them before Texas St and UTSA were added.
UCD has excellent facilities all around including a large basketball arena that fits a FBS conference.
Given the academic profile of UCD I believe even the current MW would be open to add them. Even though MW turned down the overtures of UTEP and Rice....Rice was just too far away.
11-29-2017 11:33 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
MWC Tex Offline
Heisman
*

Posts: 7,850
Joined: Aug 2012
Reputation: 179
I Root For: MW
Location: TX
Post: #18
RE: Will Cal and UCLA ever let UC Davis move to FBS?
(11-29-2017 10:59 AM)Wedge Wrote:  
(11-29-2017 04:50 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  
(11-29-2017 02:29 AM)Wedge Wrote:  
(11-29-2017 01:26 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  UC Davis on the other hand is in a rural area and literally has the land space to double in size, to perhaps be a 45-50,000 student undergraduate program. But their growth is targeted at a much lower pace despite California having a significant shortage in residential seats and a population that is almost 40 million now. Basically population has doubled in the last few decades but residential seats have not come close to keeping pace.

The entire UC system is increasing the number of undergrads by 10,000. No single campus would want to add 10,000 or more new students; as far as I can tell each campus is taking its share of the total increase of 10,000 grudgingly because of the strain it puts on existing facilities.

And any of the campus' home cities would raise holy hell if UC doubled the number of undergrads at one campus because it would have a huge adverse impact on the city, especially campuses in smaller cities like Davis or Santa Cruz or Santa Barbara. It's also politically beneficial from politicians' point of view, in either the UC or CSU systems, to deliver political "pork" to different areas of the state by opening a new campus (like UC Merced or Cal State San Marcos) rather than doubling the enrollment of an existing campus (like UC Davis or San Diego State).

Adverse impact? Yeah, it would be awful to have an extra 5,000 new high paying jobs in town.

Seriously, only in California would university growth be seen as an "adverse impact" (which is even odder when you consider that every big city in the state just offered Amazon huge incentives to bring in 50,000 jobs to a single site).

10,000 extra students is no big deal for a system with 251,000 students. That's 3.9% growth, and if the pace of construction at UCSD is any indication then it's going to take 5 years to hit that goal (which means they're not even keeping up with the USA's 1% average annual population growth).

I agree that residents of college cities see "hordes of students" and not "jobs" when they read about university expansion. Maybe they shouldn't. But I know what residents of Davis or Santa Barbara would say about doubling the number of students on campus. And it's not just California. I bet the reaction of residents would be the same in other smaller cities like Eugene, Oregon or Lawrence, Kansas. Larger urban areas are different.

I'm also pretty sure that few if any administrators at large schools want to double their campus population, either. You went to grad school at SDSU, right? Does SDSU's faculty and administration want to have 70,000 students at the school? I doubt it.

Wedge, do you think UCLA and Cal would let UCD become FBS if the MW came with an invite?
I ask this because the UC board seems to be a lot tighter than the CSU board.
(This post was last modified: 11-29-2017 11:39 AM by MWC Tex.)
11-29-2017 11:36 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Wedge Offline
Moderator
*

Posts: 19,862
Joined: May 2010
Reputation: 964
I Root For: California
Location: IV, V, VI, IX
Post: #19
RE: Will Cal and UCLA ever let UC Davis move to FBS?
(11-29-2017 11:36 AM)MWC Tex Wrote:  
(11-29-2017 10:59 AM)Wedge Wrote:  
(11-29-2017 04:50 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  
(11-29-2017 02:29 AM)Wedge Wrote:  
(11-29-2017 01:26 AM)Stugray2 Wrote:  UC Davis on the other hand is in a rural area and literally has the land space to double in size, to perhaps be a 45-50,000 student undergraduate program. But their growth is targeted at a much lower pace despite California having a significant shortage in residential seats and a population that is almost 40 million now. Basically population has doubled in the last few decades but residential seats have not come close to keeping pace.

The entire UC system is increasing the number of undergrads by 10,000. No single campus would want to add 10,000 or more new students; as far as I can tell each campus is taking its share of the total increase of 10,000 grudgingly because of the strain it puts on existing facilities.

And any of the campus' home cities would raise holy hell if UC doubled the number of undergrads at one campus because it would have a huge adverse impact on the city, especially campuses in smaller cities like Davis or Santa Cruz or Santa Barbara. It's also politically beneficial from politicians' point of view, in either the UC or CSU systems, to deliver political "pork" to different areas of the state by opening a new campus (like UC Merced or Cal State San Marcos) rather than doubling the enrollment of an existing campus (like UC Davis or San Diego State).

Adverse impact? Yeah, it would be awful to have an extra 5,000 new high paying jobs in town.

Seriously, only in California would university growth be seen as an "adverse impact" (which is even odder when you consider that every big city in the state just offered Amazon huge incentives to bring in 50,000 jobs to a single site).

10,000 extra students is no big deal for a system with 251,000 students. That's 3.9% growth, and if the pace of construction at UCSD is any indication then it's going to take 5 years to hit that goal (which means they're not even keeping up with the USA's 1% average annual population growth).

I agree that residents of college cities see "hordes of students" and not "jobs" when they read about university expansion. Maybe they shouldn't. But I know what residents of Davis or Santa Barbara would say about doubling the number of students on campus. And it's not just California. I bet the reaction of residents would be the same in other smaller cities like Eugene, Oregon or Lawrence, Kansas. Larger urban areas are different.

I'm also pretty sure that few if any administrators at large schools want to double their campus population, either. You went to grad school at SDSU, right? Does SDSU's faculty and administration want to have 70,000 students at the school? I doubt it.

Wedge, do you think UCLA and Cal would let UCD become FBS if the MW came with an invite?
I ask this because the UC board seems to be a lot tighter than the CSU board.

UC Berkeley and UCLA don't care at all about that. The UC regents would care if Davis wanted to use university money to fund it, but wouldn't care if private donations funded it.
11-29-2017 11:46 AM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Jjoey52 Offline
All American
*

Posts: 4,035
Joined: Feb 2017
Reputation: 236
I Root For: ISU
Location:
Post: #20
Will Cal and UCLA ever let UC Davis move to FBS?
(11-29-2017 10:21 AM)Bogg Wrote:  It's not up to Cal and UCLA, it's up to the Mountain West, and my guess is those schools don't want my additional programs in their footprint. Short of an actual conference invite that isn't coming, FBS isn't feasible for UC Davis.


UCD is not even close to the MW, the tiny football stadium, cracker box gym, and being in a semi-rural area do not make it viable. Sac State will be FBS before Davis. The Big Sky is perfect for them for the immediate future. Remember they have only been out of D2 for a few. Those who think the are FBS material now are very delusional.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
11-29-2017 12:24 PM
Find all posts by this user Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply 




User(s) browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)


Copyright © 2002-2024 Collegiate Sports Nation Bulletin Board System (CSNbbs), All Rights Reserved.
CSNbbs is an independent fan site and is in no way affiliated to the NCAA or any of the schools and conferences it represents.
This site monetizes links. FTC Disclosure.
We allow third-party companies to serve ads and/or collect certain anonymous information when you visit our web site. These companies may use non-personally identifiable information (e.g., click stream information, browser type, time and date, subject of advertisements clicked or scrolled over) during your visits to this and other Web sites in order to provide advertisements about goods and services likely to be of greater interest to you. These companies typically use a cookie or third party web beacon to collect this information. To learn more about this behavioral advertising practice or to opt-out of this type of advertising, you can visit http://www.networkadvertising.org.
Powered By MyBB, © 2002-2024 MyBB Group.