DG's Note To Football Season Ticket Holders
From the diaries. GO BRUINS. -N
For those of you concerned with SUC's attempt to co-occupy the Rose Bowl any time soon, here is a link to the canned e-mail that the UCLA Athletic's Department sent to us as season ticket holders. Take it for what its worth. It includes an official statement from Gan Guerrero, who is obviously concerned with our continued patronage:
STATEMENT FROM DAN GUERREROThis statement is to clarify UCLA's position regarding the possibility of USC becoming a temporary secondary tenant at the Rose Bowl.
First, there is no agreement in place. At the request of USC, UCLA permitted USC to have preliminary discussions with the Rose Bowl regarding the possibility of temporary usage while it continues to negotiate with the Coliseum Commission. This is where the matter presently stands.
Any possible agreement would be for one year and subject to approval by UCLA. No long-term arrangement between USC and the Rose Bowl would even be considered by UCLA. Our position as the primary tenant is protected by our long-term lease, which runs through 2023.
Any temporary usage by USC at the Rose Bowl would have to be non-impactful on UCLA, our football program and our fans. Any such arrangement would have to ensure that the integrity of the UCLA football experience for our team and fans would not be compromised in any way. The Rose Bowl is UCLA's home venue and the occupancy of any additional tenant on a temporary basis, if approved by UCLA, must be clearly secondary to that concept.
I feel that it is in the best interest of college football in Southern California for each institution to have its own home stadium and I remain hopeful that USC and the Coliseum Commission can reach a satisfactory accord.
And here is the link to the email.BEAT SC!!!
This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of BruinsNation's (BN) editors. It does reflect the views of this particular fan though, which is as important as the views of BN's editors.
0 recs |
11 comments
Comments
Funny
This would just be another reason USC is second class compared to UCLA.
by gilbert on Nov 28, 2007 5:26 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I am relieved...
Before reading DG's letter, I didn't know what say UCLA had, and what their position was. Reading DG's take calmed my breathing. One year's supply of Lysol isn't nearly so nauseating as a long-term supply.
by Bruinut on Nov 28, 2007 7:10 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
I actually like the statement...
... and DG just stuck it to him by saying publicly that $C would have to get UCLA's approval FIRST.
In other words, Garrett tried for leverage, and DG broke his stick.
Take THAT, $C.
M
by Meriones on Nov 28, 2007 8:29 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Wow DG
Does he watch the games?
Does he sit in Rose Bowl seats?
Does he drive the 20 miles to the Rose Bowl.
Does he watch the games?
Why don't we have USC pay to make Drake a stadium? Genius plan!
by greatgymnasticschool on Nov 28, 2007 8:52 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Wow
by Linguica on Nov 28, 2007 9:43 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
Pasadena would love it
by doublebonus on Nov 28, 2007 9:50 PM PST reply actions 0 recs
bruin territory
by PasadenaBruin on Nov 28, 2007 11:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs
Drake Stadium
In any event, none was built. Instead Drake stadium was constructed in its place. After its completion, I remember the DB running an article describing the "conspiratorial" nature of the trustees/power brokers. It claimed that Drake Stadium was the camel's nose under the tent and that a series of upgrades would yield a full-blown stadium. It even provided documentation citing the hefty foundations for the stands and provisions for light towers, etc.
The rest is, as they say, history. I cannot recall if I was pro or con on the subject; I think I was a cheap bastard at the time and liked the fraternity-bus-ride-with-the-beer-keg-on-board, so the sojourn to the Mausoleum was just fine.
..we were young and fearless and didn't need Lysol in those days but I often wondered what it would have been like to walk over to Drake stadium to see a football game.
by whp68 on Nov 29, 2007 6:21 AM PST reply actions 0 recs
It would have been great!
by tasser10 on Nov 29, 2007 11:51 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs
It was an extra dollar on the incidental fee
As I recall, the vote was before the Free Speech Movement and "issues" because important. The football stadium disappeared because of apathy by me, by sgj and by whp 68, et al.
by Fox 71 on Nov 29, 2007 1:25 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs






















