Clearly as a private university, Stanford has a different fundraising profile than UCLA.
I received my master's from Stanford. I give them money. I used to give UCLA more, back when we did not need to register our discontent with Morgan Center.
As a donor to Stanford, I receive a quarterly periodical, highlighting major donations. I can't say that I have seen something like this in the past from UCLA, although there may have been something. But Stanford clearly does a much better job of trying to connect alums with what is going on at their alma mater.
The Stanford document highlights major gifts across the board- undergraduate education, graduate education, the arts, and athletics. They are all treated equally.
Here are some of the purposes for major gifts highlighted in a recent issue:
over $1 million to the Department of Athletics to support the football coaching staff and to the Graduate School of Business
over $2 million to the Department of Athletics to endow an athletic scholarship fund
$1 million to the Department of Athletics to support soccer, including improved facilities
$1 million to the Department of Athletics to construct a football practice facility (what is wrong with Spaulding?)
And here is some creativity, which I am sure is lacking in Morgan Center. If you commit to donate a certain amount for 5 years, a scholarship is funded and is assigned to an individual student-athlete, who is encouraged to stay in touch with the donor. They establish a direct connection between athletes and donors.
Nobody can deny that Stanford combines athletics and academics. This is not an SEC public school letting athletics drive the school's mission. And yet the President (self-described Number 1 fan) and administration get that athletics generates a strong connection which binds alums to the university long after they have left campus. And Stanford finds a way to feed the connection, and to make athletic donors welcome and valued.
Meanwhile, Chancellor Block shows no public interest in the state of disrepair that our Athletic Program has fallen into under Dan Guerrero's stewardship. There may not be $1 million donations falling by the wayside at UCLA, but it would definitely be low hanging fruit to get rid of our overpaid AD, bring somebody in who re-establishes connections with the fan base, and see the donations roll in.
If Stanford can do it, why can't we? Again, magnitude is presumably different, but that doesn't excuse the complete lack of effort and interest from UCLA's administration.