Narrow Search

  • Show Only

  • Category

  • Narrow by Date

    • All
    • Today
    • Last 7 Days
    • Last 30 Days
    • Select a Date Range
    • From:


Comment Archives: stories: News & Opinion: Columns

Re: “Give Cal Plan the Ax

Your idea is so stupid, I got to puke now, thank you for ruin my breakfast, and lunch today.

Posted by Anonymous on 02/23/2007 at 10:41 AM

Re: “Give Cal Plan the Ax

Dude, Chris Thompson, your idea would actually make sense and restore a rough sense of proportionality between the priority we accord football and the priority of spending public money. This of course means, your idea is disqualified from the start. Especially in this state. Only ideas that can be b!tched about ad nauseum or which make life perfect for one of the numerous psychotic, deranged groups of wackjobs with nothing better to do than sit in trees, participate in bureaucratic pissing matches, gripe about their property values, or participate in some mass delusion of togetherness at a sporting event are permitted, Chris. Shame on you for insulting the petty fascists who pay your salary, mister. You should have known that the most costly solution is the one that accomplishes nothing of value, and that is the one they want :)

Posted by Anonymous on 02/22/2007 at 10:24 PM

Re: “Give Cal Plan the Ax

Yes, of course. Let's relocate the football program even though the stadium was there before the Panoramic Hill neighborhoods were developed. I'm going to buy a house near AT&T Park tomorrow and force the Giants to move back to Candlestick because I don't like the noise, traffic, and potential damage in an earthquake. Funny, there were no complaints from neighbors and this "newspaper" when the Haas Business School was built and Wurster Hall was retrofitted, both literally across the street from the stadium.

Posted by Anonymous on 02/22/2007 at 4:24 PM

Re: “Give Cal Plan the Ax

Good article. As a retired architect I would add that there is no way that an athletic training center could cost $1000 per square foot, unless there is a substantial hidden cost to make its structure part of the needed support for the west side of the stadium.

Posted by Anonymous on 02/22/2007 at 4:09 PM

Re: “Give Cal Plan the Ax

Dear Panoramic Hill residents, Inspired by this article, I feel we need to address problems that stretch far beyond the borders of Memorial Stadium. After giving it careful thought, it's become clear that you should no longer eat meals in your homes. The fumes created from your ill-advised "enchilada night" are not only a nuisance to your neighbors, but threaten the lives of an "ancient" breed of endangered "Common House Cat." The subsequent trash from said cooking increases traffic of garbage trucks through the hillside. Besides, these kitchens are now deemed seismically unsafe, as they were built decades ago. I know you'd love to remodel and create a kitchen that keeps your family safe and happy, but think of the cats. My resolution: Cook and eat meals in the kitchens of West Oakland homes. They have perfectly good kitchens already. Don't waste your money on maintaining your personal identity when you can simply rent someone else's. I'm sure your little rugrats will be happy to make the journey to the West O. Bon Appetit!

Posted by Anonymous on 02/22/2007 at 12:43 PM

Re: “Give Cal Plan the Ax

EBE, I'm a dedicated supporter of the tree-sit and I just want to say "Thank you" for this article. You touch in on some essential issues that many other newspapers have intentially avoided. For example: "UC arrogance", the availability of alternative sites, the $ incentive for UC and the resulting $ problems for the Berkeley comminity. I never even thought about McAfee Stadium, but it is a great idea! It would also make travel easier for visiting teams (Oakland Airport access), and there's PLENTY of parking! A long shot, but a great idea nontheless. My only concern, will Raider fans and Cal fans get along???

Posted by Anonymous on 02/22/2007 at 11:14 AM

Re: “Give Cal Plan the Ax

Your ideas are not too far fetched. The only problem is moving the games off campus. You site UCLA's plan as working. They have a very hard time getting students to go to the games. The Rose Bowl is usually half full at best. And they aren't the only example. San Diego State used to have a highly successful football program. They moved the game of campus and the whole program has gone downhill. Off campus sites might work for non-student fans, but future fans need to come from the student body to get the kind of support a college football team needs. Making it difficult for students to get to games is bad news.

Posted by Anonymous on 02/22/2007 at 10:43 AM

Re: “Give Cal Plan the Ax

McAfee Stadium stinks as a football venue. Cal is a tremendous place to watch football. The college atmosphere is unique and a fantastic experience. Tens of thousands of Cal fans and alumni are sick and tired of the naysayers. Just go ahead with the project and get it done! It will be great for the University and the Bay Area. Spending a day on the Cal campus and watching a game in Memorial is so far above anything "Mount Davis" has to offer. You're comparing the White House to the outhouse. Jeff Anderson Turlock

Posted by Anonymous on 02/22/2007 at 10:35 AM

Re: “Give Cal Plan the Ax

Thank you for the very incisive and "right-on" article about UC Berkeley's plans to retrofit California Memorial Stadium. You left out one very important point, however. The EIR issued in support of this retrofit/development outlines a way to pay for it by having an unlimited number of other "capacity events" at the 62,00 seat stadium. So the stadium becomes no longer alumni's much-beloved Cal Stadium, but a large, commercial venture with possible rock concerts, etc. In the event of an earthquake it would not be just the occassional football fan who would be a risk but the public in general- not to mention what this plan would do the the surrounding residential neighborhoods.

Posted by Anonymous on 02/22/2007 at 10:28 AM

Re: “Give Cal Plan the Ax

It certainly is a "simple" analysis.

Posted by Anonymous on 02/22/2007 at 10:08 AM

Re: “Give Cal Plan the Ax

Wow...where to begin? First, Scott is correct that Cal's football program does not need "saving." Of course, that would change if Cal were to follow your advice and move its games off-campus. Second, you state without any proof at all that an off-campus stadium "works" for UCLA. I doubt many UCLA fans would agree with that statement. The Rose Bowl may be an improvement over the team's prior home (the LA Coliseum), but most UCLA fans would love to have an on-campus stadium. If you think off-campus stadiums are such a good idea, check with Minnesota fans -- the team's move to the Metrodome almost killed that program; that's why it is moving back on campus in 2009. Finally, the only elephant in this room is the question as to why someone would move next door to a football stadium, then express shock that the university might actually hold its football games there.

Posted by Anonymous on 02/22/2007 at 9:31 AM

Re: “Give Cal Plan the Ax

Thank you for an excellent article. This is a sensical and disarmingly simple analysis.

Posted by Anonymous on 02/22/2007 at 8:11 AM

Re: “Give Cal Plan the Ax

Wow. Do you even think before you write? Or do such ill conceived "thoughts" just leak out of you when you least expect them? You state that "...moving Cal's games to the Coliseum wouldn't jeopardize Tedford's contract, which reportedly stipulates that the training center — and only the training center — be built." Oh, really? You might want to give that ludicrous statement just wee ponder. Do you really think that Tedford would stick around for the long haul if forced to play at that dump? And do you really think his contract would determine that outcome? I'm trying to be reasonably civil here, but you're just not very bright, are you? (Ditto for Janice Thomas.)

Posted by Anonymous on 02/22/2007 at 1:41 AM

Re: “Give Cal Plan the Ax

Bottomline: retrofitting the stadium is going to be less expensive then building a new one or a long term lease at the Oakland Coliseum (amortized over the expected longevity of the new renovation).

Posted by Anonymous on 02/21/2007 at 11:17 PM

Re: “Give Cal Plan the Ax

Janice, the only thing "elephant"-like in this room is your head if you think your petty needs outweigh the future of the Greatest Public University in the World. I won't bother to ask where you live because you make it abundantly clear. Go find something else to complain about like your neighbor's selection of paint color or the teenage kid's loud music across the street.

Posted by Anonymous on 02/21/2007 at 10:38 PM

Re: “Give Cal Plan the Ax

Thank you. I've been waiting for someone to write this story. It's the elephant in the room.

Posted by Anonymous on 02/21/2007 at 10:01 PM

Re: “Give Cal Plan the Ax

Good lord, where do you get your information? This so-called "article" has more holes than GW's plan in Iraq. The Coliseum is NOT a viable option for so many reasons. First off, Cal doesn't need or want a pile of luxury suites, as you so confidently claim. In fact, the new stadium renovation is unusually thin in such pursuits. The Rose Bowl does not work as well for UCLA as you believe. While it draws a significant crowd from the millions of Southern Californians that reside in the area, their fan base from the campus is extremely weak. Most students opt to stay home, rather than make the long trek to the stadium. UCLA football has little or no connection to college athletics, rather it takes the place of an absent professional franchise for most residents in that half of the hellhole we call LA. Relocating basketball games to the Oakland Arena was a huge failure for the campus, drawing only a handful of students to the games and rarely selling tickets in the upper deck. We should take a lesson from this and understand how important it is to keep the games on the campus, where the collegiate athletics experience can continue. Your agenda is quite clear and it's distressing that you feel so entitled to dig for headlines with such trash. Why don't you try doing your job instead of vomiting such propaganda?

Posted by Anonymous on 02/21/2007 at 5:22 PM

Re: “Give Cal Plan the Ax

NEWS FLASH! This project is PRIVATELY FUNDED. Nice job of "journalism", amateur. Why don't you do even a modicum of research before you go spouting your nonsense ideas? You can start with this article, which describes the specific technology being utilized in the retrofit of the stadium: Your contention is that we should prevent the spending of PRIVATE money to retrofit the stadium before the Big One hits, because down the road we will have to spend PUBLIC money to repair it after the Big One? That's some solid logic there Voltaire. Cal playing in the Oakland Coliseum is possibly the worst idea anyone anywhere has suggested. That piece of garbage stadium isn't fit to host Pop Warner, let alone College Football. You are now free to crawl back to the deep dank hole you climbed out of.

Posted by Anonymous on 02/21/2007 at 4:20 PM

Re: “Give Cal Plan the Ax

Please do some research. UC Berkeley isn't trying to "save" their football team. The team status is great. If you really wanted to know what team needs saving look across the bay into the Palo Alto area. So before you start rambling about saving programs, realize Cal is looking to upgrade (not saving) and has the resources to do it. Oh, and spare the fault excuse. Technology does wonders when you have the opportunity to apply it.

Posted by Anonymous on 02/21/2007 at 3:20 PM

Re: “Give Cal Plan the Ax

And what do we do with Memorial Stadium? Tear it down? Whoops! Here come the preservationists demanding that the university restore this historic structure!

Posted by Anonymous on 02/21/2007 at 3:13 PM

Most Popular Stories

© 2016 East Bay Express    All Rights Reserved
Powered by Foundation