Met with a Vice-Chancellor.....

You did an outstanding job of representing all of us who want Hope and Change.

One theme resonates with me: I chose UCLA over an Ivy League school because of a childhood loyalty I built with UCLA sports. It just seemed the right place for me and it was. I wonder how many Bruins felt the brand and/or the athletic programs important enough to influence a decision?

I fully support the ad idea, and will chip in.

Now, a couple of questions:

Do you feel that the VC was sincerely interested or that she was simply placating you?

Do you think there is a realistic chance for change?

Do you think they are feeling the loss of our contributions? We are hardly the three wealthy alums. How much do we count?

Great job.

My frustration with the current Chancellor is that he come across as indifferent towards athletics. When I’ve read his rare public comments, met him in person, or read about other people’s interactions with him, my perception is that his passion for our Athletics programs is non-existent.

http://www.bruinsnation.com/2011/11/2/2534639/my-conversation-with-chancellor-block

I’m not saying he’s got to exhibit the same passion as CRN but the Chancellor could at least do a better job of communicating to us that UCLA Athletics is important.

The question is where. I don’t want to support the Slimes.

The NYT is not our market — but is read by the effete and may push some of the Chancellor’s buttons.

I agree, a classy, fact filled ad — theme: we are excellent in so many areas how can we tolerate failure in this, important one?

as well as heartening. It shows that the administration is sensitive to public perception, and is not just blindly yielding to DG on issues in his domain.

I was told the administration collectively cringed when DG said his plan for finding a new coach and subsequent search would be private knowing that this would not sit well with students, alumni, boosters and the media.

However, it also shows that a huge part of the problem with communications, another area in which the VC expressed concern, is due primarily to the secretive, insular culture of DG and the Morgan Center. DG has shown that, not only is he not interested in real and honest communications with alumni, students, and fans, he goes out of his way to shut us out. This is a downright hostile modus operandi; as such, I do not accept responsibility for any vitriol that flows their way. That is entirely on them.

Taz, you’re terrific. Thank you for being such a great representative for us all. Count me in for contributions to an ad and to your new Bruin wardrobe.

…and left a message for the chancellor letting his secretary know that we are not renewing our season tickets to football until guerrero is removed as athletic director.

But if the VC is minimizing the bumbler because we properly vent on this blog, that is myopic and elitist at best and worse, downright disrespectful to the alumni who love this university. It would also be a distortion since, despite our clever and witty names for the bumbler, no one on this Board tolerates Luddite thinking or defamatory innuendos of any kind. We are simply demanding a commitment to excellence, vision and leadership of our football and basketball programs. Chianti Dan, the bumbler, Guerreror, et cetera, have all been well earned by him based on his incompetence, period. Satire is our primary means of therapy.

“Welcome Mora, Fire Dan!” is a cry for professionalism at our school of the four letters. After thirteen years of blind wandering on the gridiron, after the debacle of the Pauley renovation and the implosion of our historic basketball program, after ten years of sclerotic, bureaucratic covering of rear ends at the Moribund Center we need an AD committed to making us a great program with on campus facilities at least the equal of our old brother Cal. And yes, that means a 70,000+ on campus stadium. (The idea that one stupid student referendum in 1966 should be determinative of the the next 50 years is beyond asinine. We need to break the self-imposed shackles of mindless bureaucrats.)

And all the more because it is a terrible recession! The fricking Crapiseum was built in the middle of the Great Depression. It just takes vision, people. Vision. Focus. Direction. Leadership. All the things Mr. Guererror has never had and never will.

Welcome Mora. Fire Dan!

…and what John Wooden represented. Sure, both my parents are alumni, but neither of my brothers are UCLA alums, so it’s not as if we all just inherited it. And given that my father was a college president, I could have gotten in almost anywhere via professional courtesy and a few phone calls.

John Wooden’s values. The way he won.

And it didn’t hurt that the very first UCLA football game I really paid attention to was the 1975 game against USC in which we fumbled 11 times, lost eight of them — and won. Dick Vermeil had style. He is the standard I measure UCLA football coaches by, not Terry Donahue.

And then there’s Al Scates. What can anyone say about Al Scates? 19 NCAA titles?

Being legendary at sports is a way of showing the world that we do everything right. It’s a huge image boost. When I moved to Tokyo in 1985, were all the kids in Harajuku wearing UCLA gear because of the med center? I don’t think so. More people apply to UCLA than any other university in the world. Is that because of the med center? I don’t think so.

The med center may save lives, but sports gives UCLA cachet. UC Berkeley outranks UCLA in almost every department. But you don’t see Berkeley (or Harvard) sweatshirts all over the globe. Sports, not the med center or academics are what have turned UCLA into a global phenomenon.

A global branding phenomenon. And, like any successful branding, it succeeds by creating an emotional bond with its target audience. Gene Block may think that sports are trivial compared to the pure awesomeness of the med center, but we cannot afford mediocrity ad failure in anything we do, east of in activities that are viewed by millions of people.

UCLA has been living off the success of its sports legends for decades. It is a tribute to those legends that we have gotten away with mediocrity for as long as we have. But the last 10 years of football have been worse than mediocre. Worse than simple failure. They have been pathetic, which we really can’t afford.

And then there is the Pauley Pavilion/Sports Arena/student seating fiasco and the unforgivable, inexcusable arrogance that went with that. Morgan Center fired a million-dollar donor to the project for having the temerity to consult Frank Gehry and challenge one aspect of the architectural plans. Read that again, VC, if you’ve gotten this far. Million-dollar donor. Frank Gehry. Fired and disrespected, respectively, by a bunch of people whose decision-making about the project has proven to be faulty in major respects. That’s not just arrogance, it’s self-delusion. Dan Guerrero should have been told to clean out his desk that very day. Instead he hung around long enough to give us the student seating fiasco. And more.

First of all, thank your for representing us with a stoic and indefensible logic. Thank you for reminding us how to comport ourselves and respect the many officials we have perhaps lost all respect for, which thereby increases the disconnect.

I want to point out that you mailed in your jersey. I have not had the courage you have shown to mail mine in. But, I want to remind everybody that when Oregon travelled to Boise State and not only embarrassed their university, they embarrassed their fans with a lack of decorum; one fan asked for a refund for the cost of his ticket.

Plenty of disgruntled fans have said they wanted their money back after an underwhelming performance.

But how many have made that complaint — and then received a check in the mail, signed by the coach?

Tony Seminary did.

The story starts in Boise, Idaho, where on Sept. 3, Oregon lost its season opener to Boise State — and star running back LeGarrette Blount lost his temper and responded to an apparent taunt from Boise State’s Byron Hout with a punch.

Tony Seminary is an alumni. You are an alumni. You have gone far and beyond what he did by mailing in your jersey. I think the embarrassing fight coupled with embarrassing loss in Arizona rivals the events of that day. The key difference between Oregon’s embarrassment and ours is that their game was a match up of two highly ranked teams with National Championship aspirations. Don’t tell me sports do not matter.

Chip Kelly and by extension the University of Oregon did the same thing. I hope our own university can realize the significance of symbolic gestures; and the importance of sports.

For what it’s worth, I had a very real epiphany in my first quarter at UCLA. It was the defining moment in my life in which I realized I am a Bruin. It was at my first ever UCLA v USC game. I looked around at all the pageantry and passion and wished dearly I was a part of it. That’s when I realized I was a Bruin.

I don’t think our students are getting that epiphany. They are not getting it because no one is showing them the way. My epiphany had nothing to do with the score, or even the fact we had won 6 straight at that point. I had my moment of clarity before the game had even started.

Chancellor Gene Block, and Vice Chancellor Rhea Turtletaub please replace Dan Guerrero with someone who is not only competent, but someone who can lead the charge.

not only are we not renewing our tickets (season ticket holders since 76) but we are cancelling our annual trip into the student store for Bruin merchandise for next year. A tradition that goes back 15 years where we totally load up on Bruin gear for the entire family. I’m sure Dan doesn’t care about my measly two thousand dollars in merchandise but every little bit of action makes a difference.

Thank you Tazmiami for taking the time to speak to the VC.

You are the Man! First for sending in your stuff, which i’m guessing was gut wrenching…and secondly for representing the Bruins who are sick and tired of just getting by. I don’t know if we’ll ever be a powerhouse in football, but we should damn well be trying…

continuing boycott, aye

Guerrero MUST go.

You spent an hour on the phone explaining your position. I assume you articulated facts, rather than feelings. You had already taken tangible action, and you made it clear that you were going to continue to take action.

The school’s official reply was nothing. The person in charge of the entire school in the chancellor’s absence promised nothing. Absolutely nothing. The school’s official position is that there had been poor communication. Which means that the school’s official position is that we outsiders cannot appreciate what our athletic director has done in the past, is doing now, and will continue to do in the future. Or to put it another way, the school just told you that it’s official position is that we who sit at the children’s table just don’t understand what the grown ups are doing, and that’s really their fault, because if they explained it better then we would not be so critical.

Would this lady allow another interview, but this time to be conducted in front of a video camera? With any of the thousand or so denizens of the Bruins Nation who have had Cross-Examination 101? And with the understanding that her interviewer would ask the same question over and over until it was answered? Nope. She would never do that in a thousand years, and I wouldn’t either if I had her position.

I have no intention of criticizing you or your efforts. You have done more than anyone else in the BN to bring the point directly to the ears of one of the bureaucrats. If I called her and started to cross-examine her, she would just hang up and that would be that. You got a lot accomplished. You got the school’s official position, which, as I stated, is that they view us as children.
I am proud of you, but totally disappointed with my alma mater. I’m not suprirsed at these feelings at all.

I chose UCLA because it was the “whole” package. Academics, campus life, name recognition with employers, international exchange program (EAP), location, athletics, etc.

When I got there (fall of 1982) I was pretty happy with all of it except one; how undergraduates are treated. Examples:

1. I asked a librarian in URL a simple question and she asked me “are you a graduate student?”. I said “no”. She replied “I’m not paid to help undergraduates.” Oh well.

I am now married to a university reference librarian and to this day she can’t believe any librarian on the planet would say that to any student.

2. During the 1980’s there was this illegal thing called the “theme party ban”. The University actually passed and enforced a ban on theme parties by some, but not all, fraternities. In fact, actual theme parties took place and actual punishments were meted out on students.

In a meeting with a vice chancellor or dean (I forget which) with some students it was pointed out to this official that there was this thing called the US Constitution which guaranteed free speech. The dean actually said, and I quote, “the US Constitution does not apply to UCLA”. So the illegal policy continued.

3. The one or two times I ever had any reason to go to Murphy Hall for something minor like replacing a registration card or getting transcripts, I was always spoken to rudely and treated poorly by the staff who seemed to hate students, particularly undergraduates.

So then about a month after graduation, of course, I start getting the phone calls asking for money. And of course the sales pitch is all about the warm and fuzzy feelings I am supposed to have towards UCLA. And I do. But I have a lot less warm and fuzzy feelings towards the administration and I am less interested in writing checks had I been treated decently and had the administration acknowledged that UCLA is in fact part of the United States and covered by the Constitution.

When I went to graduate school at a different school I saw how the undergraduates were treated there and the difference was between night and day. There the administration was actually glad to have the undergraduates there and realized that it might be a good idea not to treat them poorly.

The point is, if you want alumni to support the University financially, you need to create and keep the bonds which tie people to the University. One way is to treat students well while they are students. Another way is to make the alumni proud to be alumni. One way to make us proud is to not have scandals like other universities, and the other way is to win. If Stanford can do it then UCLA can do it.

Thank you for listening.

….the VC and others in the administration have read many of the responses to my original post/update.
Their integrity and genuine interest in the concerns of BN members was questioned. They reached out to me and by my posting the details of that interaction, the ridicule and some of the vicious responses were not warranted.

Any further interactions and communications, if any, will be done on a one to one basis and likely not with me. There was a meeting with the Chancellor where he was given an update and review of alumni concerns. I am no longer privileged to know what his thoughts or responses were in that meeting.

Burned the boats and the bridges too.

There alleged concern has never been manifested in anything tangible as far as I can see. Absolutely nothing. The vice chancellor apparently thought that holding hands, singing Kumbaya and raising awareness of the ineptitude was sufficient, and it isn’t.

When I was a worker bee, I had an audience of one or twelve – the judge or the jury. If that audience thought that I had the losing side, my response was not to tell the judge or the jury that I just wasn’t going to say anything. I had to find evidence and argument that addressed the concerns. Or I lost. Here, the administration has done nothing, is doing nothing, and is going to do nothing in the future. And the apparent reason is that their sincerity has been called out. I am not surprised. Why should they do anything. We’re powerless to affect their lives.

This isn’t on you at all, Taz. It’s on them. Our administration is continuing the tradition that has existed as far back as my freshman year. There are never, ever any changes to university policies which are designed solely to benefit the students, at least from an athletic point of view. Where was the student section at Pauley when you were a student, Taz? My guess is that your seats weren’t as good as the student section when I was in college. Those seats got changed, and that kind of change did not enhance the university experience for the student.

If it were within my power, I would charge the literal Blockhouse, throw all the incumbents out and barricade myself inside until the Regents listened and did some cleaning out, or until the SWAT team took me out on a gurney. (Well, maybe that’s a bit of hyperbole.)

Or in much shorter form, remember when you asked your mom if you could go over to Billy’s house and spend the night, and she answered “We’ll see.” That, of course, meant “Never in a million years will you get to do something like that.” The administration, wearing the face of that particular vice chancellor, has just smiled at the entire Bruins Nation, patted us on the head, and said “We’ll see.” What she meant, of course, was “STFU” and “GTFO.”

I just got an email from UCLA in a last minute appeal for 2011 donations.

I sent my standard “not until Dan Guerrero is gone” response.

I think it important that we continue to send the message lest our silence be interpreted as our having given up.

The Chancellors office continues to play off our anger and not engage us Alumns. They sound like politicians! How about they get off their high horses and start to talk frank with us.