Cal baseball..gone??

It is official and very sad.
Cal has fielded a college baseball program since 1892.
That will end next Spring.
In the interim and ongoing is the continuing allocation of well over $100,000,000 to renovate the football facility and build a state of the art athletic facility.

Yes, they cut Baseball, Men's and Women's Lacrosse and Gymnastics, They also removed funding from the college Rugby team ( which has more national championships they any other sport) and changed it to a club sport. Don't know about the new football stadium I guess it's still going to be funded.

I figured Cal baseball was in big trouble when that recent report came out and only about 1/2 dozen sports were considered safe (only those sports to remain eligble in the PAC 10) and unfortunately, baseball was not one of them. I'll bet schools that recruit against Cal have already used that information against them.

If people recall, Duquesne lost their D1 program last year. University of Northern Iowa was before them and I am sure others have folded recently like Vermont, for example.

This may not be just an isolated issue for baseball and limited to Cal.
The Committee which authored the report which led to Cal dropping baseball included the following recommendation to the Administration:

"The panel said Birgeneau should consider cutting five to seven teams, but only as a last resort. It also proposed that Birgeneau lead a national push to reform big-time college sports by urging schools to back away from high costs that have made the endeavor particularly difficult for some universities."

Let's hope the discussions on this board will continue to focus on the impact of changing equipment and not the further elimination of the sport in favor of the revenues that only football/basketball produce, and only at some schools.

Very, VERY sad day for college baseball. Incredibly disappointing for a warm weather school that has produced a lot of baseball talent.

I worry its the first in a series of setbacks for our favorite pastime.

What year does this take place?

Very sad indeed. Next Season.

Link here

quote:

Originally posted by justbaseball:
I worry its the first in a series of setbacks for our favorite pastime.

No way is it the first unfortunately - it is just another link in the chain of canceled programs (UNI, Duquesne, Vermont). Cal can maybe claim to be the biggest one/most successful one to have folded but this train left the station well before Cal got on board.

Wow, I would have thought Cal would make some adjustments to the program vs cutting it all together so quickly.

Over the last few years, there have been forces that effected the athletic program which caused it to have to spend much more on their future upgrades to their training facilities had it not happened.

Heard this.So sad. California in deep trouble. I feel for the players.Esp. the Juniors. The only positive is they will be able to try to transfer without penalty of sitting a year.

I just find it difficult for these players who have worked so hard on and off the field, to be being told at practice today that they won't have a team.

So they play this year? And fold after the season. I hope they go out with a flame.

Sometimes this is a way to try to flush major donors out of the woodwork. So, don't nail the coffin shut just yet. Less than 10 years ago, UVA was talking about deleting baseball, and look where they are now. And while some programs have indeed died, others (James Madison and Wm. & Mary come to mind) have somehow found miraculous ways to stay afloat, often in the form of donors who stepped up only when the program was at death's door.

One aspect that may become the future, if choices like this continue to become part of the decision tree in college athletics and especially college baseball, is the possible transition from "how much scholarship" to how much fund raising/what can I/do I need to do to help our son...AND his teammates have a chance to play and compete at a high level in college baseball.
It, sometimes, has been and continues to be part of life in DIII baseball for players, coaches and some parents.
I sure don't see that in the SEC or some schools in the ACC. I also don't see it at schools like Oregon with a Phil Knight to underwrite or at those like the Fullertons where baseball is THE sport.
But at the Cal's of DI college baseball, and that is the vast majority, revenue generation appears to becoming the top priority.

The Rival's article did mention the possibly that it may not totally be dead....but this could be a big wake-up call.

"A source with knowledge of the situation believes this may not be the last we hear about the baseball program and that a ploy to save the program likely will be made."

Unfortunately they will need a big time fund raiser as the head coach to get it done.

I don't find it sad at all. If the school is not committed, then the sport ought not to exist there. If there is a groundswell and this is reversed, then it will be better as a result than it is today. Cal is a wacky place anyway.

Jemaz, you are all heart. I am sure there are a lot of players and coaches that have committed their heart and soul to the program who were blind sided by the announcement.

Cal is one of the great Universities in the world. The baseball program has very good GPA and graduation rates and there has never been the hint, "smell" or taint of an NCAA infraction with Cal baseball.

USA Today just put up a very good article showing Cal generates athletic revenues of about $59,000,000 with projected 2010 athletic expenses of $74,000,000. While not broken down, one can expect those numbers are largely football/basketball driven on each side.
Within that financial scheme, who can say Cal was not committed to baseball or any other sport vis a vis trying to do too much.
Cal sponsored 27 sports, second only to Stanford in the Pac 10 and amongst the leaders in the NCAA for sports sponsorship.
This is a very sad day indeed, in my opinion, for a group of high quality who have complied with every NCAA standard.
I just received this email from a good friend who played at Cal and am touched by the content on the finances with the "human toll" in conclusion. Very sad indeed:


Dear Cal Supporters,

Of the many communications which we are sending out today regarding our plan for Cal Athletics’ future, this letter, to our loyal fans and alumni, is among the most difficult. Your passion for and belief in the Cal Athletics program are not and never will be taken for granted: we have to earn it every day. Although we know that our decisions will be cause for concern and difficult for a number of you, we are confident that we have worked out a plan that will guarantee the preeminence of Intercollegiate Athletics at Berkeley while simultaneously helping address the serious financial challenges that our campus is facing.

We have made a set of decisions that will meet our goal to have a sustainable, financially responsible program that will remain broad based and fully capable of continuing to support our commitment to excellence in the university’s every endeavor. We are committed to maintaining the indispensable role that Athletics plays as a vehicle for community building and an engine of philanthropy for the whole campus.

The status quo is simply unsustainable. Given the economic environment, the campus cannot continue to provide Cal Athletics with recent levels of annual financial support that exceeded $12 million during the last fiscal year. After an exhaustive consideration of every reasonable option, it became clear to us that the only credible way to balance our twin objectives of financial sustainability and continued excellence is through a reduction in the program’s scope, along with new steps to contain costs and increase revenues. At the end of this academic year, baseball, men’s and women’s gymnastics, and women’s lacrosse will no longer represent the university in varsity intercollegiate competition. In addition one team, rugby, will be transitioned to a newly created varsity club status. The team’s history indicates that this change should not affect its competitive opportunities or abilities, and the varsity club status will allow us to maintain rugby’s unsurpassed excellence with continued campus support in terms of admissions, sports medicine and access to training facilities. Rugby was a club sport at Cal from the 1950’s to the early 1990’s, and is today the only remaining varsity team in Division 1 of the NCAA.

We will do everything in our power to help student-athletes, coaches and staff successfully manage the challenges of this transition. We will honor scholarship commitments for all student-athletes who choose to remain at Berkeley, and assist those who may wish to explore the possibility of continuing to compete at another institution.

Together, these steps will save an estimated $4 million in direct and indirect costs beginning in the next fiscal year and bring down institutional support to a level that we can sustain. Factoring in reasonable estimates of increased revenues, including funds we expect to receive from a new Pac-12 media contract, annual institutional support for Athletics will be reduced to approximately $5 million a year by FY 2014. We anticipate that this support will represent about one-half of the cost of athletics scholarships at that time and recognizes that our intercollegiate athletes are students first and athletes second.

We will retain, at 24 teams, one of the larger programs in the country at an annual cost that is consistent with the level of support provided to athletics by our peer institutions. This country’s best universities have long understood the value of high-quality athletics programs and the extent to which they are an integral part of what defines institutional character and identity. To ensure this tradition continues at Cal, we will protect and preserve the essential attributes that distinguish our program: a rare combination of competitive excellence, academic achievement and broad-based engagement with the campus and neighboring communities.

We examined three possible options for Cal Athletics’ future that would allow us to maintain the campus support to Intercollegiate Athletics at approximately $5 million annually, after taking into account our obligations to gender equity, plans to increase revenue and aggressive steps that we will take to contain costs.

The first option entailed extensive cuts across the board that would have damaged the competitive abilities of every single team and provided sub-standard support for our student-athletes. The second option would have called for a larger reduction in the number of teams – a completely unsatisfactory alternative given our conviction that the campus greatly benefits from a broad based program. The third and best option, the middle ground, is the one that we selected: a hybrid strategy that combines a moderate reduction in scope; limiting operational costs; and targeted investment and operational changes that will enhance philanthropy and other new and existing sources of revenue.

We came to these conclusions very reluctantly, and the decisions were as painful as they were unavoidable. We realize that this plan will not please everyone; some will say that we have gone too far, other will insist that it is not far enough. Many on the Chancellor’s Advisory Council were opposed to any reduction in teams, and some on the Academic Senate Task Force advocated for even lower or non-existent institutional support, in contrast to the situation at virtually all of our peer institutions.

Decisions of this nature are complex, multifaceted and always difficult. As an institution we looked at a myriad of criteria once it became clear that we could no longer support 29 teams. Factors such as net cost, donor impact, maximizing student opportunity, existence of national/regional varsity competition, contribution to diversity, impact on our ability to comply with Title IX, opportunity for NCAA and Pac 10 success, utilization of support services and history of competitive excellence were among the factors considered. The broad excellence of our program made the decisions all the more difficult. Virtually every intercollegiate program at Cal has a rich tradition of competitive success and a community of fervent backers who surround and support the team. Our decisions mark the end of this process and, hopefully, will reduce the uncertainty and anxiety in our community.

We hope that you will take the time to read through the details of the plan in the online FAQ. You will find that while financial issues were at the heart of our analysis, they could not be addressed in isolation or solely on a team-by-team basis. Addressing the funding needs of any particular team through additional philanthropy would have only pushed the problem onto another squad due to our obligation to comply with Title IX and to ensure that, going forward, Athletics has the capacity to support and service excellence among our student athletes.

We hope that this outcome will have your broad support. With a new, strong financial foundation, the Athletics program will be better positioned to provide support for the members of its community. In some key areas, Athletics has been stretched thin in terms of human resources and services that exist to support our student-athletes. For example, on a per student-athlete basis, we are currently at or near the bottom of the Pac-10 in terms of sports medicine and strength training resources. Once this plan is implemented, we will be in the upper half of the conference in terms of our ability to provide all that our student athletes need to succeed and excel on and off the field.

We deeply regret the human toll that these decisions will take and the impact that they will have on valued members of our community who were in no way responsible for the challenges that we face. We also hope and believe that the entire Cal Athletics family will pull together in support of our student-athletes, coaches and staff. Their long-standing and well-known passion, commitment and determination to overcome adversity demand our respect and reciprocity.


Sincerely,



Robert J. Birgeneau Sandy Barbour
Chancellor Director of Athletics

quote:

Originally posted by Proud Dad 24:
Jemaz, you are all heart. I am sure there are a lot of players and coaches that have committed their heart and soul to the program who were blind sided by the announcement.

True. One of my son's buddies just verballed to CAL last week. Heck, CAL was represented at the PG Nationals this past weekend. I don't think the coaching staff would've sent someone out to Arizona if they thought this was truly coming? It really is too bad!

Our son just sent a USA today article from earlier this year. Amongst the items reported was that every NCAA Division I athletic program lost money in 2009, every one including Ohio State.
This conclusion is especially mind boggling:

"That's as drops in ticket sales, declining endowments and other issues have translated to increased dependence on subsidies at Division I public schools, USA TODAY found in its most recent examination of college athletic finances.

About $1.8 billion in student fees and university funds went to cover gaps in athletic operating costs at those schools last year, the newspaper found. The analysis was based on thousands of pages of inflation-adjusted NCAA athletic data reported since 2005, from open-records requests to hundreds of Division I public schools."

That is an amazing/astounding number: $1.8 billion being used to underwrite losses in athletics.
From reading the article, Cal looks like it could be only the first school/public university to attempt to come to grips with the deficit issues. The article mentions numerous other public universities where the issue is being scrutinized. They include the Arizona schools where pressure is being brought to reallocate the deficit funding out of athletics and into education.

It is a very sad state of affairs. First dropped by the Olympics and now some colleges. I know in our state that aside from parents whose kids play baseball, almost nobody could name even one University baseball player from the past 10 years. They could tell you all about every former quarterback. Its very evident by the lack of attendance at the state high school tournaments and National Legion World series that very few people are attending the greatest game that we love so much. It requires donations to make it work here.

Cal continues with 24 sports, more than nearly every other university. Clearly, baseball is not a priority. It is a choice that the university is making -- an unfortunate one, but a free one, nonetheless.

As I said above, heartless as it sounds, without a commitment this is a better result because it was inevitable. If, like Virginia nearly a decade ago, the end result is a true commitment and sustained excellence, that is much better than what exists today. For that to happen, the broader university community will have to step up, which, again, involves a clear choice.

I do feel bad for the coaches and players, but mostly because they are victimized by some idiots making very stupid decisions.

I hate to hear this... the women's fastpitch program is one of the perennial powerhouse programs. I would think the baseball would also be successful. Good luck to all those directly affected... make some lemonade.

quote:

Amongst the items reported was that every NCAA Division I athletic program lost money in 2009,

Very few programs make money even in the best of years. For the most part, collegiate athletics is not a break-even endeavor. The sports rely on student fees and donors' generosity to make it work.

The problem most likely is a decline in donations due to the current economy and the years of stock market decline/underperformance. People give more when they feel flush with cash.

Maybe you will have a IVY league of Academic West Coast schools. No scholarships. Travel by bus, etc.

There are probably three other west coast schools
in the same budget situations. Each player if he signs or receives a job with a Fortune 500 company contributes 10% of his bonus or 1st year salary to the baseball program.

Bob Williams

For people that love baseball this sucks (to be blunt). It also may be the tip of the ice berg for CA schools that are in dire financial need. So, when can the players transfer w/o penalty- after the end of this season when the bb program no longer exists or now???? I can see this may have a ripple effect on other players/programs that will be recruiting the proven Cal players.

If they are allowed to transfer this semester (w/o penalty) will they bump existing roster players in other programs??? And what about the players that have already verbaled for next year. They are now scrambling for a place to play.

And how much is the new football facility/athletic center going to cost?? The regents seem to be charging ahead with this enormous cost. It's all very sad for those athletes that will be effected and for us baseball fans.

quote:

Originally posted by CaBB:
So, when can the players transfer w/o penalty- after the end of this season when the bb program no longer exists or now????

If they are allowed to transfer this semester (w/o penalty) will they bump existing roster players in other programs???

I believe the Cal situation falls under the discontinued/nonsponsored sport exception. (Section 14.5.5.2.6)

Here is the rule for mid-year transfers....

14.5.5.5 Baseball and Basketball—Midyear Enrollee. In baseball and basketball, a student-athlete who
initially enrolls at the certifying institution as a full-time student after the conclusion of the first term of the
academic year and qualifies for an exception to the one-year residence requirements shall not be eligible for
competition until the ensuing academic year. (Adopted: 6/24/09)

3fingeredglove could explain the rules better than I but it is my understanding that for baseball Division I you cannot transfer mid-year to another DI and play in the spring. I am assuming school has already started for this fall at Cal, according to the rules they may not transfer to another DI until after the spring season without sitting out the 2011 spring season. They could transfer to another DI at Christmas, they just would not be elgible to compete this next spring.

After the spring 2011 semester, the players will be able to transfer to another DI for the next school year and will not be required to sit a year, they will be eligible to compete effective in the fall of 2011.

It is unfortunate that this decision was not made prior to school starting, if it had been made in July or August the players could have transferred before the fall semester started, assuming they could have quickly found a new baseball home.

I believe you are right, they can not transfer to another DI program and play this spring, they can transfer to a DII program, but interesting enough, a freshman and sophomore can transfer to a JC program, play in the spring, and be eligible for the draft, or go to another four year program if desired.

There may also be conference restrictions on transfers to another school in the Pac 10.

I think that the Cal players may be able to transfer now, in the early part of the quarter, provided the new school will accept them. I don't see any NCAA rule to prevent that.

Perhaps the players can get a NCAA waiver to transfer at mid-year and still be eligible for spring baseball. I doubt that the rule makers had this discontinued sports in mind while writing the mid-year transfer rule.

Not sure what one can do however I am starting with writing a letter to the NCAA to get involved before this turns into an avalanche. Then I am sending a letter to my alma mater (another college) telling them if they drop baseball I will never donate another dollar to their general fund. Next, I will try to think of more things that can be done. I do not pretend to be a Cal intellectual however I can say this smells especially if they are spending 100 million on football upgrades to the stadium.

Keep the oldest sports and sports invented in America and cut the newer ones with less tradition thats my vote.

This along with all the conference changes just makes for a complicated college sports environment.

Where has America the beautiful gone?

I bet they kept mens and woman s****r.

I am upset.

Area newspaper's take on the move to drop baseball at Cal.

Cal Whiffs by Axing Baseball

This was also a topic on the biggest sports talk radio evening drive last night. Hosts were incredulous. I was pleasantly surprised by that.

And another...

Cal's baseball demise shocks big league alums

With the current economic situation in the United States I would not be shocked if other universities decided to drop there baseball program. The baseball community needs to become proactive and work like other sports to have an endowment that fully funds their baseball programs. I know of no D1 college baseball program that is in the black when you figure in coaching salaries, travel, scholarships, equipment, stadium maintence, etc... All of these things cost big money that many schools just don't have today. IMO, the only mens programs that are truly safe from the chopping block are basketball and football and football is not looking great at some schools. I know that this will create a stir but I have been saying for over 10 years that all D1 sports but football & basketball should be nonscholarship sports. The university would pay for travel, coaching staff and equipment but no athletic scholarships would be provided. The kids that qualify for financial aid would be given those funds, academic & civic scholarships (rotary club, elks lodge, etc...) would be allowed but everything else would be provided by the athlete and their family. This would also force some student/athletes to make the decision as to signing a professional contract out of high school or becoming a serious student. College baseball would probably no longer be a launching pad to professional baseball as the most talented kids would sign and go onto the minor leagues to begin their career.

cbg

It's a good thing you don't get to decide. Plus, what you propose exits today. It is called club baseball. You pay your dues and you play. Sometimes a tryout is involved and some of the teams are very competitive in their own context. But it is not intercollegiate athletics at any kind of meaningfully high level. It's just for fun.

Here is the link to a short article in the daily Cal newspaper.

http://www.dailycal.org/articl...s_cut_effective_2012

There are 2 comments in the article that caught my focus.
The baseball item that caught my focus was the factor of success of the program in making value judgments about which to keep and which to cut. This article suggests that the performance of the Cal baseball team vis a vis the talent levels, as contrasted with other sports, may have played a role.
For those who wonder why college baseball is a demanding and business like entity, where kids are shown the door, scholarships not renewed and the like(none of which is reported to have occurred at Cal), this is a reason.
Going forward, will what happened at Cal result in even more expectations, perhaps rigid expectations, from an increasing number of college coaches for players to perform or not be on scholarship.
I have regularly posted that if college coaches at the DI level did not win, they get fired. Perhaps the stakes might be greater than I ever assumed possible.
I can certainly appreciate some college coaches could hear that message from the Cal situation.
The non-baseball factor that caught my focus/jumped off the page wasn't the cost per player for baseball(I think it is low and does not include coaches salaries and some other items) but rather the $92,000 per player per year cost for the each member of the Cal womens' basketball team.
I am an admitted advocate for womens' college sports and for equal opportunity.
If $92,000 per player per year is correct, that is ridiculous, on its face and should mandate serious review of a program/cost in a time of severe financial crisis in CA.
With all that said, the comments I have read from the coaching staff indicate there is no turning back. The administration left them no hope and no reason to think the door is even ajar, even slightly, for Cal baseball.

cheapseats,
The rule says that the player is not eligible if the transfer occurs after the conclusion of the first term. The excerpt of a letter that you quoted says the same thing.

I think that means that if the player transfers now (which is before the conclusion of the first term), he would be eligible in the spring, assuming academics are in order.

Baseball is in a unique position in many universities in that it occupies property that is dedicated to it as single use facility. If you don't have a baseball team, surely you don't need a dedicated baseball field. If you don't have a baseball field, then you have room for something else. Perhaps more dormitories, which could be used to house more full paying students. Or, in some cases, coaches of other sports covet the additional facility that could be added to them. I'm aware of one situation where a wrestling room was converted into a football weightroom....in that case the AD didn't care for the coaches, either.

in any case, I agree with those who think that this will become somewhat contagious.

What is unbelievable about these types of decisions is that if you were beginning and athletic program from scratch, and were deciding which sports to include, surely baseball would be among the top four or five in the list.

The Contra Costa Times has followed this issue and reported it from day one.
Here is one observation they provide in the context of a factual comment from the Cal AD:"

"The money lies in football and men's basketball. A lesser but not-insignificant amount of money is generated by women's basketball. So those programs were golden.

True, the money those programs use on athletic tape would probably have saved women's lacrosse. But without the moneymakers -- and their TV revenue, ticket sales, bowl game and NCAA tournament payouts -- there is no athletic program.

Baseball? According to Barbour, it has the highest net cost of any men's sport. And one of the highest concentrations of male athletes."

quote:

Originally posted by jemaz:
cbg

It's a good thing you don't get to decide. Plus, what you propose exits today. It is called club baseball. You pay your dues and you play. Sometimes a tryout is involved and some of the teams are very competitive in their own context. But it is not intercollegiate athletics at any kind of meaningfully high level. It's just for fun.

No, it's called being a true student athlete and the university being fiscially responsible. The Ivy League does not offer athletic scholarships so why would it be so difficult for every other D1 school to do the same? FYI, I received an athletic scholarship at a D1 and coached at a D1 institution but I still feel that minor sports programs should not offer athletic scholarships. If you don't already know it's now very difficult to balance an athletic budeget at most D1 schools. How would you suggest that D1 baseball programs move out of the RED and balance their budget? I am sorry but college athletics is a business and for minor sports to survive on the D1 level something different must be done.

Universities are not fiscally responsible. Not even close. None of them. They don't operate that way, and they don't know how to be. I am sure that Cal could save all the money it needed and more without cutting any sports by eliminating the waste inherent in most college programs. You are correct -- go down your path and you will find more great players turning pro.

You may view that as good; I would view that as tragic. You hold the Ivy League up as an ideal; I view is as misguided. The decision at Cal is a piece of work and an embarrassment to his institution.

And by the way, I will never say that baseball is a revenue-generating sport, but at at least some schools, it is very close, much more so than women's basketball. But what it requires is real commitment from the entire organization. Without that commitment, the program will wallow or fail or both. Cal clearly lacked commitment within much of the organization. Not good for an otherwise great university. And, then, look at the sports they kept. I can only surmise that someone there is on drugs.

.
My Inner Cynic says...

...tremendous political pressure/haranguing has been going on at Cal. With the football facilities being updated to the tune of many many millions,(and trees being taken out) the athletic department was costing/bleeding the school millions the political climate was poison for sports before the meltdown...and add budgets were being slashed, the school cutting staff, roofs leaking...the rancor had reached a din.

I can make a case that while baseball was indeed expensive…Baseball may not have been chosen primarily because of its cost as much as because of its High political value...cutting small sports, finding outside funding...would not have been enough of a statement. If that is the underlying decision which it may have been, then it is even sadder. I believe that a way could have been found to avoid this or save it...but it was more politically correct to do some high profile trimming...it had to hurt and hit the front pages to give football (big time revenue producers) some political breathing room.

You have to hope that baseball being axed at such a high profile institution is not the ticket other schools need to do the same thing. There is a clear danger of a domino effect.

44
.