I wonder if the Sofi news dropping this week is in any way related to the B10 moving forward with the $2.4 billion investment deal with the UC Pension fund despite opposition from SC and Michigan.
It looks like you are correct, which is maddening as UCLA will seemingly receive $140M and paying the RB buyout is how that money will likely be spent.
What a waste... Why not invest that money in building a great Football team with a huge NIL pot and top notch coaching?
SoFi in 'lovely' Inglewood with it's one tiny paved parking lot and 'soul-less' stadium as one of the Bruin Fam so eloquently stated is nothing short of a funeral for UCLA Football.
Blockhead 2.0 and Donut Head Jelly 2.0 seem to be enamored by revenue from the luxury seats. No one will go! Most can't afford those tickets, and who wants to sit in a lifeless stadium with no connection to UCLA's tradition or legacy, and with a team that is awful!
SoFi may be closer for some, farther away for many, and a death nail in the hearts of those who bleed 💙 and 💛
I agree, Inglewood is certainly no Pasadena, and if the move is finalized, it'll take some getting used to calling SoFi Stadium "home" when other sports teams are currently using that newer venue. Tailgating aside, I think a lot can be said about respecting and honoring traditions, especially regarding the location where your home team plays and defends against visiting opponents. The Rose Bowl is a historic landmark with a prestigious legacy of hosting many memorable sporting and non-sporting events, so UCLA has been fortunate to have had the privilege of playing there. And I'm fortunate to have attended home games during their inaugural year in Pasadena when they won the Rose Bowl game back in '83 (vs. Michigan). then seeing them win the Rose Bowl game again in '84 (vs. Illinois), and then as an alumnus enjoying another Rose Bowl victory in '86 (vs. Iowa). But since 2000, it's been nothing but toilet bowl appearances for the Bruins, and I would expect the same "tradition" of mediocrity and low expectations to continue under this administration, regardless of where they want the Bruins play their home games. Forget about trying to compete for a national championship, as they're content with achieving 6 to 8 wins max with another Gronk Bowl victory at SoFi next season (with jelly donuts served in the luxury boxes, of course).
Mixed feelings. The season ticket pool I've been in since undergrad owns a Sofi suite so we get VIP parking and all which will likely include UCLA (we have Terry Donahue Pavilion Club seats at RB anyways). Plus it's closer to me to where I can take local roads. But then, SoFi is just bad for tailgating (heck it was better for Rams games when it was at the Coliseum) and the backdrop pales next to the mountains that RB has. Food-wise, they're both awful outside of the suites/clubs.
Sorry, but I disagree. I was a freshman at UCLA when the Rose Bowl became our ‘home’ stadium and it didn’t live up to the hype then and it doesn’t live up to it now. It is a relic of the past and might work once a year for the actual Rose Bowl, but not as a stadium you want to return to multiple times a year. It is difficult to get to, seats are awful, and hot as you know what during the day. The parking is horrible and it’s a commitment to exit it. Sofi is the stadium of today, modern, comfortable and easy to access. You can take surface streets if need be and not to mention public transportation. Uber it if you need to. UCLA is very aware of where it’s students and alumni live, and I’m sorry to tell you most of them live on the west side and not in or near Pasadena.
Change is good and needed and this is a smart and strategic move.
I notice you did not mention tailgating on the golf course, Michael. What are your thoughts on the loss of tailgating which, as mentioned, was often the highlight of the game day experience?
Along with parking prices doubling or tripling - let alone ticket prices likely doing the same... I can't imagine why, if you are willing to spend $80,000,000 to make a bad move and, at best, split the fanbase, that you wouldn't use that money to fund NIL a'la Texas Tech, Vanderbilt and others who have reenergized their programs by getting better football players who will play better football... personally, season ticket holder for 30+ years, live in the OC, travel to at least one or two away games a year - will never go to a game at sofi
Tailgating is the highlight of the game day experience for whom? Have you seen the attendance numbers for the Rose Bowl over the past several years? Clearly the venue is not working for a majority of students, alumni, fans or the university (who signs a 60+ year stadium contract 26 miles EAST of campus?). You can argue that the teams haven't been that great, but that doesn't seem to be an issue at other universities. Times have changed, and college football has changed in the 100 years since the Rose Bowl was built. Fans want a more convenient, comfortable and modern experience. Fortunately someone at UCLA recognized this and is willing to try to fix it.
It tailgating needs to be sacrificed for a more luxurious, accessible, and new experience so be it.
For whom? Me (raising hand high). I daresay, should we ask the community, we would get an overwhelming amount of support for tailgating. A very interesting thread would be to share your most cherished tailgating moment (and there are a lot!) Thank God for tailgating, since so many times the great gameday experience was not dependent upon a win! LOL Further, going to a home UCLA football games means tailgating; I have never gone to the Rose Bowl and not tailgated. The concept is anathema to me.
You guys don't get it. The few of you that tailgate are not filling the 50k or so seats that are not getting sold. UCLA doesn't make any money off of you tailgating. In case you missed it, college sports and specifically college football has change over the past few years. If UCLA wants to compete nationally, they need their home football games to generate a lot more income and that is not possible at a 100 year old relic that is 26 miles from campus for a number of reasons. Not everyone has an entire day to commit to watching a 3 hour football game.
Times have changed....college football has changed. I don't agree with the changes, but they are what they are.
I'm sorry, but I disagree, Michael. Did you even graduate? If so you missed a lot of the Bruin tradition, our contributions to college sports. The RB has been open for 103 years. It sounds like your freshman year was 1982. I started grad school in 1976, graduated in 83 and loved when the Rose Bowl was the season goal. Drake Stadium was an embarrassment for our program, which was pretty good back then. It looks like there's a gang of suits H-bent on blowing up our athletic traditions.
Yes, I did graduate...in four years. The letterman jacket I received after being a student athlete for two years at UCLA has the year I graduated sewn into it.
Oh, and by the way, UCLA never played a football game at Drake stadium. And we student athletes enjoyed training there, as do current students and student athletes.
Thank you for your kind response and you contributions to our sports heritage. I'm sure you student athletes appreciated a field nearby. I got my PhD in physics so was on campus pretty much full time. Go Bruins!
On the record, I said UCLA was going to move no matter what the contract said (because contracts are just words on paper and can be broken for the right price) so it was good to see I was right I guess.
I’ve not yet been to SOFI, so I can’t comment on the stadium. I am a bit old school, so I hate to see UCLA break a contract. I think about Coach Wooden not breaking his word when he agreed to become the UCLA Head Coach. Those values used to matter.
The stadium is pretty nice and clean (obviously since it's new). Funnels noise in well. Seats are more comfy. Food options and outside the stadium are abysmal.
the experience is awesome. you don't bake in the sun. you don't freeze in the winter. great sightlines everywhere. better food options. better restrooms. easier to get to the stadium and easier to leave the stadium.
Reposting my comment from the other post, with a few edits...
It seems to be 💯 BS (I know that's not becoming 🤣) but 💯 BS it is, that UCLA cannot afford to buyout the slimiest Donut Head in the Universe, Jelly 2.0.
I know I am reiterating but the billion dollar question needs emphasis:
How in the hell will UCLA buyout the Rose Bowl lease at $60-$80 million... yes, $60-$80 million, and this deal is close to being done? What a cluster!
Add to that cool $60-$80 million, the financial damages that UCLA will likely be required to pay the Rose Bowl from the law suit, and of course this deal makes perfect sense.
And Inglewood is so much nicer than Pasadena 😠
Exactly what Joe said.. save a few miles, but not any time with traffic snarls, picnic on pavement on ONE parking lot - that will be fun in the heat, and then sit in a sterile corporatized stadium that has NO history, NO legacy, NOTHING connected to UCLA.
And Blockhead 2.0 is backing this??? Is this his idea of making Football profitable? If so, we are doomed.
If true, UCLA, it's Donut Head, Donut Holes, Blockhead and Block Holes will have officially burned our greatness to the ground.
What's next, Basketball moving to Intuit?
And yes again, this deal will not resolve attendence problems, it will make them worse! The problem is not the Rose Bowl, it's whose running Morgan and Murphy!!!
That's true. I sent my email to all 22 listed above.
When I was putting this list together, I tried to limit the recipients just to the ones who *could* have any influence over this decision. There are a heck of a lot of other administrators who help oversee the department who were not included.
What do they do all day... they all join hands in destroying UCLA, piece by piece and they are either pure evil, inherently brainless or both. I am leaning toward both.
Whether it's the personal data leaker, the time clock puncher, the money spender, the do nothing-er, the big bucks latte drinker, the martini clinker, or the checkers player, they all contribute to this Hell we are living through.
We were so lucky, Scot was the voice of our age along with Bill Waterson and Charles Schultz. I was working for Lockhheed in Sunnyvale at the time we were all sure he was working for us. Instead he was a Bof A employee in SF. The grass is brown everywhere!
I said this when Penn Stat fired Franklin…. They’re spending 50M to then replace him with someone similar and be where with that team? Why not keep Franklin and spend that 50M on NIL/players/etc and actually improve the team instead of losing $ and making a lateral move at HC?
The RB lease is similar in my mind… if we have 60-80M to spend then instead of wasting it to break a lease take that money and put it all into the football program. Improve the game day experience by having better programming, lights, sound, music, graphics AND merchandise. All of that will energize the crowd, improve the atmosphere, and appeal to recruits/transfers… add in the $ for players and we can turn the program around.
A venue change isn’t going to improve attendance or anything I mentioned. I wont even touch on the negatives with tailgating, traffic, lack of UCLA branding at the stadium, being the only team in the conference without a dedicated “home”, etc. Playing at Sofi is soulless, like playing at a bowl game…. The visiting team and fans wont see it as our territory. Look at UNLV playing in Allegiant, its generic.
If the decision to move to SoFi Stadium is already a "done deal", then I don't think the letter-writing campaign against this proposed move will have any effect. Instead, thank-you letters should be sent to each of the identified recipients to acknowledge the tremendous job they're doing to showcase UCLA's perennial football mediocrity (and much worse) in a more modern stadium closer to campus. No more tailgating, no problem--the visiting teams don't care, as they'll have the majority of the fans in attendance, anyway. Was wondering if AD Martin Guerrero had called for a "Red Out" at the game last night. Last night's game also seemed like a winnable one, as the Bruins had 2 weeks to prepare for visiting Nebraska and their freshman backup QB. Oh well, no need to expect anything better for the next 3 games. At least HC Skipper remained chipper after the loss, so maybe he can just cheer his players on and forget about game planning going forward.
Anyway, I also agree with you guys that the proposed change in the home venue for football costs money that would be much better spent on creating a team that's actually worth spending more money on to watch. And since UCLA already pays out Calimony, is there another long-term reimbursement plan expected for the City of Pasadena by leaving the Rose Bowl empty during the football season?
Just feeling worn out from the decades of apathy and incompetence from Chancellor Blockhead to Chancellor Frenkenstein, AD Jelly Donut (Chianti Dan) Guerrero to AD Martin (I hire winning HCs) Guerrero, and HC Chip (I don't wanna be a HC) Alford to TBD (the next potentially-hapless HC). It's all Frenkenstein's Unpopular Change Keeping Everything Dysfunctional and Utterly Pathetic!
P.S.--Anybody see the airplane banner flying in the skies or the black van roaming the streets, or did they get tired and give up?
If the Bruins were 10-0, the RB would be darn near full. I'd like to hear arguments against that assertion. But, then again, so would SoFi (I have to be realistic). Hopefully, my point is clear.
Sports are now for the notably wealthy - suites, boxes, etc. Not for the common fan. Tailgating under the sun setting on the San Gabriels be damned.
I don't think it matters how many letters/emails we write - a decision has already been made. Unfortunately.
However, I have a hard time seeing how this will be financially successful unless the team is worth watching. Right now, we are light years from that being the case.
We as fans know that, these administrators apparently don’t.
They weren’t here when we beat SC 8 years in a row, when we beat highly ranked Bama/Texas and others, when we were the 1st team ranked #1 in the BCS, when we had winning seasons, when we packed the Rosebowl to the rim before it had tarps covering most of the endzone bleachers, when we had fans standing the entirety of the game screaming and yelling and creating a hostile environment.
All the other programs evolved and grew and we never did, they invested in their programs and we didnt, their in stadium programming improved and we did nothing for 25 years.
Maybe if they had seen it first hand they would realize moving isn’t going to fix any of it, and know like we do what actually would improve attendance…. Investing in the team/program!
Sofi closer to campus.....Walking distance? Then really doesn't make a difference. Is there a dedicated subway stop? No? How about dedicated freeway off ramps direct to massive parking, like at Disneyland? No? We'll doesn't make any difference.
A few years from now there might be a subway stop at UCLA campus. Save the money for on campus stadium.
The Rose Bowl is literally UCLA's identity and movng to SoFi would be a massive mistake. The history and tradtion at the Rose Bowl cant be replicated in some soulless corporate stadium in Inglewood. Plus the finacial numbers dont even make sense when you factor in the lease buyout costs.
On another note, who is responsible for scheduling Women's Basketball and Men's Basketball games at the same time?
Tonight the men play at 8 pm and the women play at 8:30 pm. Same thing last week.
Nvm, it's the same Donut Head that is leading the SoFi mess with his BFF Blockhead 2.0 cheering him on...
I am sure Jelly 2.0 feels bolstered by Blockhead 2.0 and is pumping his slimey fist right now, ready to take a victory lap with the gangs in Inglewood.
Ehh, that's more set by TV than anything else. The men's team is at home so they're going to have a standard 7:00 PM tip-off, while the women's team is playing a marquee game on FS1, so that network is determining the time and trying to schedule it around Monday Night Football. That's not really on Jarmond.
I was unaware that UCLA had hired a Vice Chancellor last year from UNC. Makes sense that the new guy in charge of the finances with no previous ties to UCLA would come in and push hard for the move. But I was hoping the new Chancellor from Miami would've been just as aggressive in replacing the AD by now.
LA Times reported that the Rose Bowl is filing a temporary restraining order against UCLA to try and force UCLA to stay at the Rose Bowl next year.
My read?
If the Rose Bowl is filing a TRO, that means the move to SoFi is done and dusted and all that's left is figuring out the settlement amount. Rose Bowl also isn't against UCLA leaving - the ROI isn't good enough compared to what they can get doing things like concerts or one-off soccer games - so this is all just posturing.
So much for tradition! Next they should take down the banners in Pauley and sell them on epay.
I love your humor, you are so right 😢 and 🤣. Tragedy of epic proportions.
I wonder if the Sofi news dropping this week is in any way related to the B10 moving forward with the $2.4 billion investment deal with the UC Pension fund despite opposition from SC and Michigan.
https://sports.yahoo.com/college-football/breaking-news/article/sources-big-ten-execs-pressing-to-make-24-billion-investment-deal--without-michigan-and-usc-if-needed-140045573.html
Chen,
It looks like you are correct, which is maddening as UCLA will seemingly receive $140M and paying the RB buyout is how that money will likely be spent.
What a waste... Why not invest that money in building a great Football team with a huge NIL pot and top notch coaching?
SoFi in 'lovely' Inglewood with it's one tiny paved parking lot and 'soul-less' stadium as one of the Bruin Fam so eloquently stated is nothing short of a funeral for UCLA Football.
Blockhead 2.0 and Donut Head Jelly 2.0 seem to be enamored by revenue from the luxury seats. No one will go! Most can't afford those tickets, and who wants to sit in a lifeless stadium with no connection to UCLA's tradition or legacy, and with a team that is awful!
SoFi may be closer for some, farther away for many, and a death nail in the hearts of those who bleed 💙 and 💛
💔😢😡
I agree, Inglewood is certainly no Pasadena, and if the move is finalized, it'll take some getting used to calling SoFi Stadium "home" when other sports teams are currently using that newer venue. Tailgating aside, I think a lot can be said about respecting and honoring traditions, especially regarding the location where your home team plays and defends against visiting opponents. The Rose Bowl is a historic landmark with a prestigious legacy of hosting many memorable sporting and non-sporting events, so UCLA has been fortunate to have had the privilege of playing there. And I'm fortunate to have attended home games during their inaugural year in Pasadena when they won the Rose Bowl game back in '83 (vs. Michigan). then seeing them win the Rose Bowl game again in '84 (vs. Illinois), and then as an alumnus enjoying another Rose Bowl victory in '86 (vs. Iowa). But since 2000, it's been nothing but toilet bowl appearances for the Bruins, and I would expect the same "tradition" of mediocrity and low expectations to continue under this administration, regardless of where they want the Bruins play their home games. Forget about trying to compete for a national championship, as they're content with achieving 6 to 8 wins max with another Gronk Bowl victory at SoFi next season (with jelly donuts served in the luxury boxes, of course).
$C is opposing it to get a bigger cut.
Mixed feelings. The season ticket pool I've been in since undergrad owns a Sofi suite so we get VIP parking and all which will likely include UCLA (we have Terry Donahue Pavilion Club seats at RB anyways). Plus it's closer to me to where I can take local roads. But then, SoFi is just bad for tailgating (heck it was better for Rams games when it was at the Coliseum) and the backdrop pales next to the mountains that RB has. Food-wise, they're both awful outside of the suites/clubs.
Sorry, but I disagree. I was a freshman at UCLA when the Rose Bowl became our ‘home’ stadium and it didn’t live up to the hype then and it doesn’t live up to it now. It is a relic of the past and might work once a year for the actual Rose Bowl, but not as a stadium you want to return to multiple times a year. It is difficult to get to, seats are awful, and hot as you know what during the day. The parking is horrible and it’s a commitment to exit it. Sofi is the stadium of today, modern, comfortable and easy to access. You can take surface streets if need be and not to mention public transportation. Uber it if you need to. UCLA is very aware of where it’s students and alumni live, and I’m sorry to tell you most of them live on the west side and not in or near Pasadena.
Change is good and needed and this is a smart and strategic move.
I notice you did not mention tailgating on the golf course, Michael. What are your thoughts on the loss of tailgating which, as mentioned, was often the highlight of the game day experience?
Along with parking prices doubling or tripling - let alone ticket prices likely doing the same... I can't imagine why, if you are willing to spend $80,000,000 to make a bad move and, at best, split the fanbase, that you wouldn't use that money to fund NIL a'la Texas Tech, Vanderbilt and others who have reenergized their programs by getting better football players who will play better football... personally, season ticket holder for 30+ years, live in the OC, travel to at least one or two away games a year - will never go to a game at sofi
I covered that well in the email I sent this morning and have published here:
https://www.themightybruin.com/p/an-open-letter-to-ucla-administrators-on-move-to-sofi-stadium
Tailgating is the highlight of the game day experience for whom? Have you seen the attendance numbers for the Rose Bowl over the past several years? Clearly the venue is not working for a majority of students, alumni, fans or the university (who signs a 60+ year stadium contract 26 miles EAST of campus?). You can argue that the teams haven't been that great, but that doesn't seem to be an issue at other universities. Times have changed, and college football has changed in the 100 years since the Rose Bowl was built. Fans want a more convenient, comfortable and modern experience. Fortunately someone at UCLA recognized this and is willing to try to fix it.
It tailgating needs to be sacrificed for a more luxurious, accessible, and new experience so be it.
For whom? Me (raising hand high). I daresay, should we ask the community, we would get an overwhelming amount of support for tailgating. A very interesting thread would be to share your most cherished tailgating moment (and there are a lot!) Thank God for tailgating, since so many times the great gameday experience was not dependent upon a win! LOL Further, going to a home UCLA football games means tailgating; I have never gone to the Rose Bowl and not tailgated. The concept is anathema to me.
You guys don't get it. The few of you that tailgate are not filling the 50k or so seats that are not getting sold. UCLA doesn't make any money off of you tailgating. In case you missed it, college sports and specifically college football has change over the past few years. If UCLA wants to compete nationally, they need their home football games to generate a lot more income and that is not possible at a 100 year old relic that is 26 miles from campus for a number of reasons. Not everyone has an entire day to commit to watching a 3 hour football game.
Times have changed....college football has changed. I don't agree with the changes, but they are what they are.
I'm sorry, but I disagree, Michael. Did you even graduate? If so you missed a lot of the Bruin tradition, our contributions to college sports. The RB has been open for 103 years. It sounds like your freshman year was 1982. I started grad school in 1976, graduated in 83 and loved when the Rose Bowl was the season goal. Drake Stadium was an embarrassment for our program, which was pretty good back then. It looks like there's a gang of suits H-bent on blowing up our athletic traditions.
Yes, I did graduate...in four years. The letterman jacket I received after being a student athlete for two years at UCLA has the year I graduated sewn into it.
Oh, and by the way, UCLA never played a football game at Drake stadium. And we student athletes enjoyed training there, as do current students and student athletes.
Thank you for your kind response and you contributions to our sports heritage. I'm sure you student athletes appreciated a field nearby. I got my PhD in physics so was on campus pretty much full time. Go Bruins!
On the record, I said UCLA was going to move no matter what the contract said (because contracts are just words on paper and can be broken for the right price) so it was good to see I was right I guess.
And I still say the Rose Bowl will win the inevitable lawsuit. LOL
I’ve not yet been to SOFI, so I can’t comment on the stadium. I am a bit old school, so I hate to see UCLA break a contract. I think about Coach Wooden not breaking his word when he agreed to become the UCLA Head Coach. Those values used to matter.
The stadium is pretty nice and clean (obviously since it's new). Funnels noise in well. Seats are more comfy. Food options and outside the stadium are abysmal.
the experience is awesome. you don't bake in the sun. you don't freeze in the winter. great sightlines everywhere. better food options. better restrooms. easier to get to the stadium and easier to leave the stadium.
Reposting my comment from the other post, with a few edits...
It seems to be 💯 BS (I know that's not becoming 🤣) but 💯 BS it is, that UCLA cannot afford to buyout the slimiest Donut Head in the Universe, Jelly 2.0.
I know I am reiterating but the billion dollar question needs emphasis:
How in the hell will UCLA buyout the Rose Bowl lease at $60-$80 million... yes, $60-$80 million, and this deal is close to being done? What a cluster!
Add to that cool $60-$80 million, the financial damages that UCLA will likely be required to pay the Rose Bowl from the law suit, and of course this deal makes perfect sense.
And Inglewood is so much nicer than Pasadena 😠
Exactly what Joe said.. save a few miles, but not any time with traffic snarls, picnic on pavement on ONE parking lot - that will be fun in the heat, and then sit in a sterile corporatized stadium that has NO history, NO legacy, NOTHING connected to UCLA.
And Blockhead 2.0 is backing this??? Is this his idea of making Football profitable? If so, we are doomed.
If true, UCLA, it's Donut Head, Donut Holes, Blockhead and Block Holes will have officially burned our greatness to the ground.
What's next, Basketball moving to Intuit?
And yes again, this deal will not resolve attendence problems, it will make them worse! The problem is not the Rose Bowl, it's whose running Morgan and Murphy!!!
I am beyond SMDH 😡
What is truly depressing are the layers of administrators that oversee the athletic department. What do they do all day?
That's true. I sent my email to all 22 listed above.
When I was putting this list together, I tried to limit the recipients just to the ones who *could* have any influence over this decision. There are a heck of a lot of other administrators who help oversee the department who were not included.
What do they do all day... they all join hands in destroying UCLA, piece by piece and they are either pure evil, inherently brainless or both. I am leaning toward both.
Whether it's the personal data leaker, the time clock puncher, the money spender, the do nothing-er, the big bucks latte drinker, the martini clinker, or the checkers player, they all contribute to this Hell we are living through.
Make big bucks for doing nothing useful for the Bruin community.
https://media.licdn.com/dms/image/D4E22AQEC24gx-rkN_A/feedshare-shrink_2048_1536/0/1704307607703?e=2147483647&v=beta&t=W_WXOnfxrsGp2ipzfWGXuHGqiDdse8esaUEVONimTlk
I love Dilbert. I was sad to hear that Scott Adams is very sick with prostate cancer.
We were so lucky, Scot was the voice of our age along with Bill Waterson and Charles Schultz. I was working for Lockhheed in Sunnyvale at the time we were all sure he was working for us. Instead he was a Bof A employee in SF. The grass is brown everywhere!
I said this when Penn Stat fired Franklin…. They’re spending 50M to then replace him with someone similar and be where with that team? Why not keep Franklin and spend that 50M on NIL/players/etc and actually improve the team instead of losing $ and making a lateral move at HC?
The RB lease is similar in my mind… if we have 60-80M to spend then instead of wasting it to break a lease take that money and put it all into the football program. Improve the game day experience by having better programming, lights, sound, music, graphics AND merchandise. All of that will energize the crowd, improve the atmosphere, and appeal to recruits/transfers… add in the $ for players and we can turn the program around.
A venue change isn’t going to improve attendance or anything I mentioned. I wont even touch on the negatives with tailgating, traffic, lack of UCLA branding at the stadium, being the only team in the conference without a dedicated “home”, etc. Playing at Sofi is soulless, like playing at a bowl game…. The visiting team and fans wont see it as our territory. Look at UNLV playing in Allegiant, its generic.
Soulless is the perfect description
If the decision to move to SoFi Stadium is already a "done deal", then I don't think the letter-writing campaign against this proposed move will have any effect. Instead, thank-you letters should be sent to each of the identified recipients to acknowledge the tremendous job they're doing to showcase UCLA's perennial football mediocrity (and much worse) in a more modern stadium closer to campus. No more tailgating, no problem--the visiting teams don't care, as they'll have the majority of the fans in attendance, anyway. Was wondering if AD Martin Guerrero had called for a "Red Out" at the game last night. Last night's game also seemed like a winnable one, as the Bruins had 2 weeks to prepare for visiting Nebraska and their freshman backup QB. Oh well, no need to expect anything better for the next 3 games. At least HC Skipper remained chipper after the loss, so maybe he can just cheer his players on and forget about game planning going forward.
Anyway, I also agree with you guys that the proposed change in the home venue for football costs money that would be much better spent on creating a team that's actually worth spending more money on to watch. And since UCLA already pays out Calimony, is there another long-term reimbursement plan expected for the City of Pasadena by leaving the Rose Bowl empty during the football season?
Just feeling worn out from the decades of apathy and incompetence from Chancellor Blockhead to Chancellor Frenkenstein, AD Jelly Donut (Chianti Dan) Guerrero to AD Martin (I hire winning HCs) Guerrero, and HC Chip (I don't wanna be a HC) Alford to TBD (the next potentially-hapless HC). It's all Frenkenstein's Unpopular Change Keeping Everything Dysfunctional and Utterly Pathetic!
P.S.--Anybody see the airplane banner flying in the skies or the black van roaming the streets, or did they get tired and give up?
If the Bruins were 10-0, the RB would be darn near full. I'd like to hear arguments against that assertion. But, then again, so would SoFi (I have to be realistic). Hopefully, my point is clear.
Sports are now for the notably wealthy - suites, boxes, etc. Not for the common fan. Tailgating under the sun setting on the San Gabriels be damned.
I don't think it matters how many letters/emails we write - a decision has already been made. Unfortunately.
However, I have a hard time seeing how this will be financially successful unless the team is worth watching. Right now, we are light years from that being the case.
We as fans know that, these administrators apparently don’t.
They weren’t here when we beat SC 8 years in a row, when we beat highly ranked Bama/Texas and others, when we were the 1st team ranked #1 in the BCS, when we had winning seasons, when we packed the Rosebowl to the rim before it had tarps covering most of the endzone bleachers, when we had fans standing the entirety of the game screaming and yelling and creating a hostile environment.
All the other programs evolved and grew and we never did, they invested in their programs and we didnt, their in stadium programming improved and we did nothing for 25 years.
Maybe if they had seen it first hand they would realize moving isn’t going to fix any of it, and know like we do what actually would improve attendance…. Investing in the team/program!
Sofi closer to campus.....Walking distance? Then really doesn't make a difference. Is there a dedicated subway stop? No? How about dedicated freeway off ramps direct to massive parking, like at Disneyland? No? We'll doesn't make any difference.
A few years from now there might be a subway stop at UCLA campus. Save the money for on campus stadium.
The Rose Bowl is literally UCLA's identity and movng to SoFi would be a massive mistake. The history and tradtion at the Rose Bowl cant be replicated in some soulless corporate stadium in Inglewood. Plus the finacial numbers dont even make sense when you factor in the lease buyout costs.
On another note, who is responsible for scheduling Women's Basketball and Men's Basketball games at the same time?
Tonight the men play at 8 pm and the women play at 8:30 pm. Same thing last week.
Nvm, it's the same Donut Head that is leading the SoFi mess with his BFF Blockhead 2.0 cheering him on...
I am sure Jelly 2.0 feels bolstered by Blockhead 2.0 and is pumping his slimey fist right now, ready to take a victory lap with the gangs in Inglewood.
Ehh, that's more set by TV than anything else. The men's team is at home so they're going to have a standard 7:00 PM tip-off, while the women's team is playing a marquee game on FS1, so that network is determining the time and trying to schedule it around Monday Night Football. That's not really on Jarmond.
Ahhhh... Ok, I will let Jelly 2.0 off the hook for this one...
I am hearing that one of th3 biggest proponents of the move to SoFi is CFO/Vice Chancellor Steven Agostini. Please give his office a call today!
I was unaware that UCLA had hired a Vice Chancellor last year from UNC. Makes sense that the new guy in charge of the finances with no previous ties to UCLA would come in and push hard for the move. But I was hoping the new Chancellor from Miami would've been just as aggressive in replacing the AD by now.
LA Times reported that the Rose Bowl is filing a temporary restraining order against UCLA to try and force UCLA to stay at the Rose Bowl next year.
My read?
If the Rose Bowl is filing a TRO, that means the move to SoFi is done and dusted and all that's left is figuring out the settlement amount. Rose Bowl also isn't against UCLA leaving - the ROI isn't good enough compared to what they can get doing things like concerts or one-off soccer games - so this is all just posturing.