@SFBayRecruiter : Our difference of opinion is rather tangential to the thread (which probably has enough tangential posts already), but (a) the rugby team has more than “a national championship” (it has close to 30 since anyone started counting); (b) whether those are included in the wiki list you cite I do not know, but I would bet that the very dated championships in football (when did Cal last make the Rose Bowl?) and basketball (you do know that the court in Harmon is named after Coach Newell, I’m sure) are included; and © I think Cal has its reputation despite its recent athletics rather than because of them. Don’t get me wrong. I’m a big Bears fan, but I can also understand the push from a substantial portion of the faculty to cut back on the drain that athletics impose on the school’s budget. We are not USC and should not aspire to be. I look forward to seeing the approach of the new AD, but I do not think that Berkeley would ever be less desirable to high-achieving students if it dropped out of the Pac-(however-many-it-is). That is not naivete [sorry but I don’t know how to do the accent here]; that is an opinion on what I think is important in a major university.
To add to what menloparkmom said: not only a med school, but UCSF is a perennial top 5 med school. About as “premier” as one can get. The California kid down the street took UCSF med over Yale Med and Vandy with merit money.
Of course, UCSF also has a premier dental school and premier Pharm program, not to mention an excellent nursing school and other grad programs (biomedical, neuroscience).
As @woodlandsmom notes, frustration can be felt in other states as well. Many Virginia residents also complain about their kids not getting into their top public university choices. And OOS kids taking spots, etc.
What’s wrong with aspiring to be a school that both excels in academics and athletics, i.e., Stanford, Michigan, USC, UCLA, Notre Dame?
It doesn’t to my students, and hasn’t ever since I’ve been in the business.
@simba9 : Stanford, USC & Notre Dame are private. I don’t know where Michigan & UCLA get the money. Maybe they have alumni who are more willing to support the athletic department with gifts. There is nothing wrong with “aspiring” to be in that league (although I personally do not view USC in the same league academically as Cal), but I’m not persuaded that is where my tax money should be going – and that topic is where this whole thread started. If you look at where Berkeley has succeeded in recent years, it has been in the “minor” (i.e., seldom on national TV) sports. I’m okay with being a rugby powerhouse.
As a baseball fan, I was rather dismayed a few years back when the Cal program was on the chopping block. A certain second baseman from the Orange and Black prevented that from happening with a donation. Sports costs are one symptom of the overall funding issue at Cal and the UC overall.
I am sure that there are also faculty/staff that will also say that the sports programs are an integral part of the ‘college experience’ and serve a purpose for the current, future and past bear family.
@SFBayRecruiter : Good points. I’m sure you are right.
UMIch and UCLA get their money from football and basketball. The problem with Cal is that it tries to support 30 sports programs with mediocre programs in football and basketball that don’t generate near the money that UCLA and UMich do. They’ll need to be realistic about what they can do and supporting 30 programs like Stanford does is not going to work. Realistically most middle of the road sports schools support 18-20 programs.
Absolutely correct.
Even more problematic for Cal, is that a couple of its highly ranked sports men’s non-ncaa programs (rugby and crew) are essentially self-funding, and even help out to support women’s athletics. However, the existence of those two sports also create an equal number of opportunities for women which must be funded by the athletic department (out of football and basketball ‘profits’.)
Cutting a self-funding sport doesn’t make a whole lotta sense, but it does create ‘savings’ by eliminating the same number of scholarships on the women’s side. (Reducing opportunities for women’s teams doesn’t sell well, either.)
That reality is part of the reason for their new AD who I’m sure is being brought in to cut programs and balance the budget.
^^yeah, I get that, but nonplussed with the choice. (nothing on the resume that shows to me that he is up for the job.)
If he continues with the failed policies of the previous ADs then he won’t last long…
Women have more D1 programs than men in programs like rowing , volleyball. That is not unique to California .
its not the numbers but the money, sevmom. Cal’s crew and rugby are self funded by donors. So they cost the Athletic Department nothing. But, those guys being on a team create a need for an equal number of women, which cost the AD plenty of money in D1 scholarships.
So the conundrum: cut a men’s sport that cost nothing…
@bluebayou I am well aware of all of that. I had all state and all regional volleyball playing sons. And club crew at older son’s college came at my 6’6" former volleyball, basketball, and baseball playing son hard , even though he had never rowed in his life before college! 6’5" son played club volleyball in college. Very competitive process for that to even get on the team.
Does anyone know if financial aid (specifically needs-based grants) are uniform across UCs?
D (CCC transfer) was accepted to UCSC, and we expect to get at least one other UC acceptance. Not sure about her chances for the gold ring (to become a golden Bear).
The reasoning for the question is that if the grants are equal, then the choice of which school to go to is easy. On the other hand, if one school’s aid is significantly lower than her top choice and she gets into both, the decision will be much tougher for her.
Since the financial aid is pretty much Pell Grants and Cal grants as determined by your FAFSA I can’t imagine they would be different. Cost of living might vary.
Based on net price calculators, the UCs all seem to use similar methodologies, but there is some variation in net price (by a few thousand dollars of expected student contribution) for the same finances, probably due to campus-specific funding/endowment issues.
You could try running the net price calculators on the various UC campuses of interest to estimate what the differences may be, but the actual financial aid offers will be the definitive ones, of course.
@SFBayRecruiter I don’t know about need based, but my D (freshman, not transfer) got a little grant from UCI and nothing from UCSB or UCSD.