Showdown looming at UC-Davis... students don't want to pay athletics fees

[SoldierGriz]

$570 per year is a steep price for most college students. I don't blame them at all for trying to eliminate it. UC Davis is the crown jewel of the BSC as far as academics. It would suck to lose such a prestigious conference member.

No. Cal Poly by a large margin.

 

[SoldierGriz]

UCDavis is among the top universities in the country, if not the world. I don't think athletics is a big part of the student experience. The numbers of applicants is over 75,000+ while the acceptance is @8%. not sure many students enrolled are going to "choose from" literally thousands of colleges.....UCD is a very highly respected school in California for good reasons.

I know little about UC Davis, but I DO know that acceptance rate alone is not an accurate measure of how “top” the university is.

but if they’re THAT great (I’ll stipulate it), then fine, I’ll go with what another poster said: this is a prime opportunity for the BSC to whittle out another school and get the conference down to a more manageable size. I say we encourage the movement. :lol:

They are not. Cal Poly is a billion times better. It's not close.

 

[GrizLA]

I know little about UC Davis, but I DO know that acceptance rate alone is not an accurate measure of how “top” the university is.

but if they’re THAT great (I’ll stipulate it), then fine, I’ll go with what another poster said: this is a prime opportunity for the BSC to whittle out another school and get the conference down to a more manageable size. I say we encourage the movement. :lol:

They are not. Cal Poly is a billion times better. It's not close.

It speaks volumes that the people of California pay their taxes and support these great institutions and many more as our future depends upon the young people in outstanding and challenging colleges. It would be good for the BSC to lose UCD and a couple of others and it wouldn't surprise me if that happens. A win win...

 

[indian-outlaw]

$570 per year is a steep price for most college students. I don't blame them at all for trying to eliminate it. UC Davis is the crown jewel of the BSC as far as academics. It would suck to lose such a prestigious conference member.

No. Cal Poly by a large margin.

Uh no dude.... although Cal Poly and UCD are both Eng/Ag schools, Cal Poly is a second tier research university along with ISU, UI, NAU and UM. MSU and UCD are the only tier I research universities in the BSC.

 

[DrainBramage]

Back in my day on UM's campus we had a 'Maroon Fee' that was a cause for complaint. The athletic dept new fee coincided with the change in colors.

 

[SoldierGriz]

No. Cal Poly by a large margin.

Uh no dude.... although Cal Poly and UCD are both Eng/Ag schools, Cal Poly is a second tier research university along with ISU, UI, NAU and UM. MSU and UCD are the only tier I research universities in the BSC.

Don't think the students, parents or future employers give 2 shits about research tiering...

It is much harder to get into Cal Poly. Cal Poly grad average starting salary is 59,300 vs UC Davis at 45,000. Mid Career Salaries - Cal Poly = 102,000 vs Davis - 65,200.

Cal Poly has much smaller class sizes.

It is simply better - I would send my kid to Cal Poly way before sending to UC Davis. Doesn't mean you have to.

 

[Special H]

My daughter pays $75 a semester at UM

 

[AZGrizFan]

Uh no dude.... although Cal Poly and UCD are both Eng/Ag schools, Cal Poly is a second tier research university along with ISU, UI, NAU and UM. MSU and UCD are the only tier I research universities in the BSC.

Don't think the students, parents or future employers give 2 shits about research tiering...

It is much harder to get into Cal Poly. Cal Poly grad average starting salary is 59,300 vs UC Davis at 45,000. Mid Career Salaries - Cal Poly = 102,000 vs Davis - 65,200.

Cal Poly has much smaller class sizes.

It is simply better - I would send my kid to Cal Poly way before sending to UC Davis. Doesn't mean you have to.

Agreed. Plus, San Luis Obispo >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Suckramento. :lol: :lol:

 

[CDAGRIZ]

Uh no dude.... although Cal Poly and UCD are both Eng/Ag schools, Cal Poly is a second tier research university along with ISU, UI, NAU and UM. MSU and UCD are the only tier I research universities in the BSC.

Don't think the students, parents or future employers give 2 shits about research tiering...

It is much harder to get into Cal Poly. Cal Poly grad average starting salary is 59,300 vs UC Davis at 45,000. Mid Career Salaries - Cal Poly = 102,000 vs Davis - 65,200.

Cal Poly has much smaller class sizes.

It is simply better - I would send my kid to Cal Poly way before sending to UC Davis. Doesn't mean you have to.

I think both are excellent schools. I know the public perception is that any UC (other than Merced) is better than any CSU, but I think there is overlap on the edges.

One thing to keep in mind on admissions rates: For the UC system, you fill out one application and check the boxes of the campuses you'd be willing to attend. I personally know that a lot of overqualified students check the Davis box as a safety just because it's there and it'll work if Berkeley, UCLA, UCI, and UCSD fall through somehow. So, they are counted as "accepted" and it can kind of skew the numbers because it's so easy to check one more box.

Conversely, I'd be willing to bet there are a lot of supremely underqualified applicants to SLO given that I believe the CSU system uses a similar application process, and SLO is arguably the Berkeley of the CSU system. That could kind of skew the numbers in the other direction.

I guess one would have to look at the quality of the applicants, rather than acceptance rates, to really determine which is "harder to get into". Just a couple of thoughts.

 

[indian-outlaw]

Uh no dude.... although Cal Poly and UCD are both Eng/Ag schools, Cal Poly is a second tier research university along with ISU, UI, NAU and UM. MSU and UCD are the only tier I research universities in the BSC.

Don't think the students, parents or future employers give 2 shits about research tiering...

It is much harder to get into Cal Poly. Cal Poly grad average starting salary is 59,300 vs UC Davis at 45,000. Mid Career Salaries - Cal Poly = 102,000 vs Davis - 65,200.

Cal Poly has much smaller class sizes.

It is simply better - I would send my kid to Cal Poly way before sending to UC Davis. Doesn't mean you have to.

Shows what you know, research and Phd's are the very definition of universities vs college. And Davis is one of the very best in the country.. Oh, and it is not harder to get into Poly, not sure where you got that idea but it aint do. Also, starting salaries are not necessarily the measuring stick. Poly is a great school but itis primarily an engineering school which inflates their salaries. Davis has an engineering school which is every bit as good.

 

[AZGrizFan]

Don't think the students, parents or future employers give 2 shits about research tiering...

It is much harder to get into Cal Poly. Cal Poly grad average starting salary is 59,300 vs UC Davis at 45,000. Mid Career Salaries - Cal Poly = 102,000 vs Davis - 65,200.

Cal Poly has much smaller class sizes.

It is simply better - I would send my kid to Cal Poly way before sending to UC Davis. Doesn't mean you have to.

I think both are excellent schools. I know the public perception is that any UC (other than Merced) is better than any CSU, but I think there is overlap on the edges.

One thing to keep in mind on admissions rates: For the UC system, you fill out one application and check the boxes of the campuses you'd be willing to attend. I personally know that a lot of overqualified students check the Davis box as a safety just because it's there and it'll work if Berkeley, UCLA, UCI, and UCSD fall through somehow. So, they are counted as "accepted" and it can kind of skew the numbers because it's so easy to check one more box.

Conversely, I'd be willing to bet there are a lot of supremely underqualified applicants to SLO given that I believe the CSU system uses a similar application process, and SLO is arguably the Berkeley of the CSU system. That could kind of skew the numbers in the other direction.

I guess one would have to look at the quality of the applicants, rather than acceptance rates, to really determine which is "harder to get into". Just a couple of thoughts.

I don't care about all that mumbo jumbo. They don't want athletics fees? Don't let the door hit ya where the good Lord split ya on the way out. And take Suck State with you. Presto change-o, one less BSC team to worry about.

 

[CDAGRIZ]

I think both are excellent schools. I know the public perception is that any UC (other than Merced) is better than any CSU, but I think there is overlap on the edges.

One thing to keep in mind on admissions rates: For the UC system, you fill out one application and check the boxes of the campuses you'd be willing to attend. I personally know that a lot of overqualified students check the Davis box as a safety just because it's there and it'll work if Berkeley, UCLA, UCI, and UCSD fall through somehow. So, they are counted as "accepted" and it can kind of skew the numbers because it's so easy to check one more box.

Conversely, I'd be willing to bet there are a lot of supremely underqualified applicants to SLO given that I believe the CSU system uses a similar application process, and SLO is arguably the Berkeley of the CSU system. That could kind of skew the numbers in the other direction.

I guess one would have to look at the quality of the applicants, rather than acceptance rates, to really determine which is "harder to get into". Just a couple of thoughts.

I don't care about all that mumbo jumbo. They don't want athletics fees? Don't let the door hit ya where the good Lord split ya on the way out. And take Suck State with you. Presto change-o, one less BSC team to worry about.

Totally agree, AZ. I was just responding to the conversation.

Can't administrations just find a way to bake the athletic fee into tuition? Just say, "OK, great job. You win. Based on your incredible arguments, athletic fees are now $70 per year. On a completely unrelated note, we will be raising full time tuition by $500 to offset inflation." Problem solved.

 

[kemajic]

I don't care about all that mumbo jumbo. They don't want athletics fees? Don't let the door hit ya where the good Lord split ya on the way out. And take Suck State with you. Presto change-o, one less BSC team to worry about.

Totally agree, AZ. I was just responding to the conversation.

Can't administrations just find a way to bake the athletic fee into tuition? Just say, "OK, great job. You win. Based on your incredible arguments, athletic fees are now $70 per year. On a completely unrelated note, we will be raising full time tuition by $500 to offset inflation." Problem solved.

It's proven to work for government; why not academia...

 

[SoldierGriz]

Don't think the students, parents or future employers give 2 shits about research tiering...

It is much harder to get into Cal Poly. Cal Poly grad average starting salary is 59,300 vs UC Davis at 45,000. Mid Career Salaries - Cal Poly = 102,000 vs Davis - 65,200.

Cal Poly has much smaller class sizes.

It is simply better - I would send my kid to Cal Poly way before sending to UC Davis. Doesn't mean you have to.

Shows what you know, research and Phd's are the very definition of universities vs college. And Davis is one of the very best in the country.. Oh, and it is not harder to get into Poly, not sure where you got that idea but it aint do. Also, starting salaries are not necessarily the measuring stick. Poly is a great school but itis primarily an engineering school which inflates their salaries. Davis has an engineering school which is every bit as good.

Really? I thought universities existed to propel people into the workforce. Are you suggesting they exist to produce PhDs to compete for grants to do research?

And, it is harder to get into CP. That is just a fact. Feel free to look it up...there are literally dozens of sources.

 

[kemajic]

Really? I thought universities existed to propel people into the workforce. Are you suggesting they exist to produce PhDs to compete for grants to do research?

Are you suggesting most PhDs compete for grants to do research? Far from true, a much higher percentage are, as you would say, propelled into the workforce.

 

[GrizLA]

Shows what you know, research and Phd's are the very definition of universities vs college. And Davis is one of the very best in the country.. Oh, and it is not harder to get into Poly, not sure where you got that idea but it aint do. Also, starting salaries are not necessarily the measuring stick. Poly is a great school but itis primarily an engineering school which inflates their salaries. Davis has an engineering school which is every bit as good.

Really? I thought universities existed to propel people into the workforce. Are you suggesting they exist to produce PhDs to compete for grants to do research?

And, it is harder to get into CP. That is just a fact. Feel free to look it up...there are literally dozens of sources.

Are you aware that there are two Cal Poly campuses, in SLO another in Pomona? I don't think athletics is high on anyone's mind in either place nor at UCD, unless it is soccer. Club sports are more popular.
So, I agree that the BSC would gain by losing UCD.
I think it would be great if Montana fans had the argument here of which school is a world reknown research institution and which school has the most difficult entry requirements. I read UCLA apps for 4 years and there is simply no match, outside Stanford, of high achievers. I doubt many Calif kids who are qualified (top 10% of hs class, in most cases) would choose Cal Poly (including Pomona) over UCD, unless they were dedicated to architectural engineering. Then it might be close. All 3 schools are major ag schools with leading research facilities. Calif is lucky to have had leaders with the foresight to establish so many great institutions and the taxes paid by its residents who see the value of it all.

 

[kemajic]

Really? I thought universities existed to propel people into the workforce. Are you suggesting they exist to produce PhDs to compete for grants to do research?

And, it is harder to get into CP. That is just a fact. Feel free to look it up...there are literally dozens of sources.

Are you aware that there are two Cal Poly campuses, in SLO another in Pomona? I don't think athletics is high on anyone's mind in either place nor at UCD, unless it is soccer. Club sports are more popular.
So, I agree that the BSC would gain by losing UCD.
I think it would be great if Montana fans had the argument here of which school is a world reknown research institution and which school has the most difficult entry requirements. I read UCLA apps for 4 years and there is simply no match, outside Stanford, of high achievers. I doubt many Calif kids who are qualified (top 10% of hs class, in most cases) would choose Cal Poly (including Pomona) over UCD, unless they were dedicated to architectural engineering. Then it might be close. All 3 schools are major ag schools with leading research facilities. Calif is lucky to have had leaders with the foresight to establish so many great institutions and the taxes paid by its residents who see the value of it all.

So lucky to pay those taxes.

 

[GrizLA]

Are you aware that there are two Cal Poly campuses, in SLO another in Pomona? I don't think athletics is high on anyone's mind in either place nor at UCD, unless it is soccer. Club sports are more popular.
So, I agree that the BSC would gain by losing UCD.
I think it would be great if Montana fans had the argument here of which school is a world reknown research institution and which school has the most difficult entry requirements. I read UCLA apps for 4 years and there is simply no match, outside Stanford, of high achievers. I doubt many Calif kids who are qualified (top 10% of hs class, in most cases) would choose Cal Poly (including Pomona) over UCD, unless they were dedicated to architectural engineering. Then it might be close. All 3 schools are major ag schools with leading research facilities. Calif is lucky to have had leaders with the foresight to establish so many great institutions and the taxes paid by its residents who see the value of it all.

So lucky to pay those taxes.

I would hope so, as Montana profits greatly from UC research. You live in a rural town, and should know that. I've never heard of shrinking student enrollment in any school in Calif., much less the top tier. That is tax money well spent. I've paid a lot in taxes in Calif. and happy to do so because what we get back is what makes that place a center of creativity and enterprise, and agricultural advances. Nothing wrong with taxes if they are well spent.

 

[Grizzlies1982]

I don't care about all that mumbo jumbo. They don't want athletics fees? Don't let the door hit ya where the good Lord split ya on the way out. And take Suck State with you. Presto change-o, one less BSC team to worry about.

Totally agree, AZ. I was just responding to the conversation.

Can't administrations just find a way to bake the athletic fee into tuition? Just say, "OK, great job. You win. Based on your incredible arguments, athletic fees are now $70 per year. On a completely unrelated note, we will be raising full time tuition by $500 to offset inflation." Problem solved.

CDA, for several years now the schools have been taking it the other direction. The schools can brag how "We haven't raised our tuition rates in years". Meanwhile the fees being paid creep higher, and the list of those fees keeps growing longer.

 

[kemajic]

So lucky to pay those taxes.

I would hope so, as Montana profits greatly from UC research. You live in a rural town, and should know that. I've never heard of shrinking student enrollment in any school in Calif., much less the top tier. That is tax money well spent. I've paid a lot in taxes in Calif. and happy to do so because what we get back is what makes that place a center of creativity and enterprise, and agricultural advances. Nothing wrong with taxes if they are well spent.

A conversation of how CA taxes are spent would be instructive, but it would get into politics and create a lot of whining.