I'm Thinking of a Word ... and It Rhymes with Fustercluck

by Achilles on Feb 27, 2008 11:28 AM PST in Pauley Restoration Comment 58 comments

This story from Wednesday's Los Angeles Times should come as no surprise to anyone:

Matthew Pauley relishes the sense of history inside Pauley Pavilion, the Westwood arena made possible in large part by a $1-million donation from his grandfather to UCLA during the early 1960s.

But the third generation of Pauleys to cheer on the Bruins also worries that the building risks becoming as dated as a Lew Alcindor sky hook.

"Pauley has unbelievable name recognition, and my preference would be to always keep that tradition," said the 38-year-old investment banker who watched his first Bruins basketball game as a toddler and sits in the seats once occupied by his grandfather Edwin W. Pauley. "But I realize what the economics of college sports are, and that the building itself doesn't live up to today's standards of what spectators expect."

The fact that "Big Ed" Pauley's grandson is open to UCLA's athletic department adding a corporate naming-rights partner underscores the spiraling costs and expectations associated with collegiate athletics since Pauley Pavilion opened in 1965 -- with a $5-million price tag.

Changes in store for Pauley could go well beyond a new name. University officials are discussing plans that range from a modest face-lift to an extreme makeover.

But talk of even tinkering with the building where John Wooden's teams made basketball history has created divisions in Bruin Nation. Some say the 38 NCAA championships won by Pauley's basketball, volleyball and gymnastics teams prove that, with a few nips and tucks, the arena can remain competitive with such newer facilities as USC's $146-million Galen Center.

Others suggest that more radical measures, even construction of a new venue on the crowded Westwood campus, be considered.

"It would be awfully hard to put all the things they want to into that building, and make it work without effectively tearing it down," said former UCLA Chancellor Charles Young, who oversaw Pauley's design and construction.

And:

Officials have yet to produce a detailed plan or a timetable for the proposed renovation. That hasn't stopped a high-powered group of alumni and boosters from raising cash and commitments of $40 million so far in a drive that is expected to clear $100 million. And, earlier this month, a new architect was hired to refine the proposed renovation.

Pauley's deficiencies clearly are evident to fans who struggle with uneven aisle steps, inadequate bathrooms and meager food concessions. UCLA also acknowledges the need to improve handicapped access, stay current with earthquake codes and upgrade aging electrical and mechanical systems.

Guerrero is considering a project that could cost more than $200 million, the price tag calculated by an architectural firm last year based upon an extensive wish list submitted by the multipurpose arena's many tenants.

That list included upgraded locker rooms for athletes, coaches and officials, improved weight and training facilities, additional office and meeting space and a practice court. Guerrero, however, cautioned that the initial study was but one stop along the way.

"It would be nice to push the button and go all the way to the penthouse, but that's not how it works," Guerrero said. "It's a fluid process. We have to raise the money, make sure we remain on point with everything and make sure we don't hit any snags along the way."

Feel free to read the whole article, linked above. But the bottom line is, when you hear talk of having a new building for the basketball team by "Coach's 100th birthday," they're talking about Coach Howland, not Coach Wooden.

UPDATE (A): About that headline ...

As I've gone back and forth in the comments section with a few posters, I've started to regret a bit such a confrontational headline. My initial reaction to the Times' article was that someone, somewhere was screwing up.

The more I think about it, I'm not sure that's the case. It's possible someone is screwing up, it's also possible that this is just an enormous project and that it's going to take time.

If anything was "fusterclucked" it was that expectations were raised as to the timing of the project and those expectations were never realistic.

Overall, I'm willing to back off a bit, wait and see, give it a little more time. It may be a while before the whole thing hits fustercluck status.

0 recs | Comment 58 comments

Story-email Email Printer Print

Comments

Why make radical changes to Pauley?

That would be like radically changing the White House or the Capital or one of the many monuments in D.C. Pauley was the home of the '84 Olympics and all of our national championships. Sure, make the modifications to the bathrooms, stairs, handicap, electrical, and locker rooms, but don't radically change how it looks.

And the corporate sponsorship sounds terrible. Just as the corporations have ruined college football via the BCS (see http://www.coacheshotseat.com/) do we really want to say our UCLA Bruins play at the Tostidos/FedEx/AllState Pavilion sponsored by Citi?

Minor renovations as mentioned above shouldn't cost $200,000,000 and shouldn't require we sell out to corporate sponsors like the BCS has done. Keep the "spirit" of Pauley Pavilion.

by mark the bruin on Feb 27, 2008 11:45 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

Next thing you know ...

the Celtics will move out of the Boston Garden and the Yankees will build a new Yankee Stadium.

Did it matter to the Lakers when they played in the Great Western Forum? Did you know that Staples Center is named after a chain of popular office-supply stores?

Go Bruins

by Achilles on Feb 27, 2008 11:49 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

agree with everything but the naming rights

Having a corporate name on Pauley Pavillion is revolting. We have to raise the money some other way. Next thing you know our basketball jerseys will look like NASCAR racing suits.

"when you've seen how big the world is, how can you make due with this?"

by silverlakebruin on Feb 27, 2008 11:54 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Fine

then you donate $25-50 million. They've made it clear that they do not want to go with a corporate name, but if it comes down to a corporate name being the only way to get the money, they'll do it. All the nostalgia and tradition is nice, but are you willing to keep that tradition and leave our current program lagging behind?

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Feb 27, 2008 11:58 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

touchy!

if you don't like it, why don't you donate $50M?

What kind of arguement is that?

SUC was able to get their money without corporate sponsorship, and we have the best Basketball program in history.

We should be able to do the same.

"when you've seen how big the world is, how can you make due with this?"

by silverlakebruin on Feb 27, 2008 12:04 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

USC also gets money

from the general fund. They can divert their money any way they want. We can't do that at UCLA. We have trouble raising money and right now, we're having trouble raising money for Pauley. The point I was making about you donating money is unless someone like you is going to donate the money, corporate sponsorship will be necessary. Are you going to donate all that money? I doubt it, which means that unless someone like you steps up, corporate sponsorship is the only way to get our basketball program the facility they deserve. As much as I love tradition, I'd rather be in a beautiful AT&T Comcast Taco Bell Arena than an outdated Pauley Pavilion that is holding our program back.

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Feb 27, 2008 12:19 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

"holding our program back"?

than an outdated Pauley Pavilion that is holding our program back

Please tell me how having an old building such as Pauley Pavilion is "holding our program back." The last time I checked we were in back-to-back Final Fours, Pac-10 champs, are are #4 in the nation.

by mark the bruin on Feb 27, 2008 12:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

It's holding us back

because the video room is a joke. The video coordinators have outdated equipment that forces them to spend longer cutting video than necessary. That time could go to working on other things or putting together recruit videos. Coach Howland doesn't even have full video capabilities in his own office.

Pauley leaves so much revenue on the table it's remarkable. We don't have a single suite or a donor's room. There are no club seats and the concessions are so terribly set up that a lot of people don't bother eating at games. That's millions of dollars the program could be making and could boost the recruiting budget or be used to charter more flights for the team.

Recruits today put emphasis on the facilities of a program when making their choice. Our dilapidated facilities may cause us to lose a recruit or two we could use. The shared weight room could keep players from spending as much time in there as they'd like. The lack of their own rehabilitation center and training centers means the trainers and doctors don't have the freedom to do what they want with players when they want to do it.

We have such an amazing coaching staff that we can win without these things and yes, we are very good now. Our facilities aren't holding us back from being a very good program, but looking at what we're missing, it's hard to argue that it's not holding us back from what we are capable of being. We can be better and if a new facility can help us be better, throw a corporate name on there.

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Feb 27, 2008 12:51 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks for saving me a post

What he said.

by Menelaus on Feb 27, 2008 12:55 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

It's ...

not the quality of the program that's relevant, it's the scope of the project and the attraction to a name donor.

SC's project cost 100 mil, I think, and that was with cost overages. I might be off on the exact number. And Galen -- whoever that is -- donated a huge amount.

I don't think anyone prefers a corporate sponsor, everyone would rather some great Bruin person or family step in and write a huge check.

Our project might be as high as 200 million. If there is an alum with 50 or 100 million to donate, fantastic. But I'd rather do a 200 million dollar project with a corporate sponsor involved, than a 100 million dollar project (translation = half as nice) without corporate money, just because there is something "wrong" with taking corporate money.

When you think about it, there is no difference between corporate money and private money. People with private money often got their money by owning corporations.

For what it's worth, I could see caring what kind of sponsor. I'd have no problem with adidas Arena. Purina Cat Chow Arena wouldn't have the same ring to it.

Go Bruins

by Achilles on Feb 27, 2008 12:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

$147 million

was the number on the Galen Center and went up to $156 in the end I believe. The Galen's donated $10 million initially to get it going, another $25 million later to avoid a corporate name and then $15 million more to keep a corporate name off the practice facility...a total of $50 million.

The Galen Center cost that much, but it will cost more to do renovations to an existing facility as opposed to building from scratch so let's guess and say that brings the total to $175 million. Add in the fact that building costs have gone up, Pauley holds more people and we will build more suites and club areas, I think it will take $200 million. That number if only for now though. The longer we wait, the more it will cost and the price in increase rapidly. Just look at the planned renovation to the Coliseum for the NFL that were estimated at $600 million and only 5 years later, $1 billion.

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Feb 27, 2008 12:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks for the correction ...

I admitted I didn't know the exact figures.

You make a point I wanted to make: That every day the price goes up.

It would be interesting to look at the Ronald Reagan hospital That project has taken/is taking forever. It is finally open? I haven't been there for a while to check. But it took a long time to finish on campus.

(I wonder how many Bruins know the new hospital on campus is named after Ronald Reagan, btw?)

We need to be fair. This is not an easy project. Dan Guerrero and his staff have a monumental task in front of them. Raising 200 million and getting a project of this scope done is admittedly way beyond my area of expertise ... I know it takes more than just passing a hat and grabbing some shovels.

That's why nothing should be off the table. Corporate sponsorship is not the preferred method of doing it. No one wants that as their first choice. But nothing should be off the table and nothing should be sacrosanct.

Go Bruins

by Achilles on Feb 27, 2008 12:48 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

The Ronald Reagan Hospital

is still not open. I've heard from a few people their new target date is the end of this year and others say while it is the target date, they're not optimistic.

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Feb 27, 2008 12:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Exactly

I don't know the details of the conversations right now inside the fund raising office, but I've got to imagine that they are going something like this:

Fundraising Guy: Now, Mr. X, having explained the scope of the project, I was hoping that UCLA could count on you for your support. Can we?

Donor Guy: Not if there's corporate sponsorship.

FG: Anything else?

DG: And not if Pauley is no longer part of the name.

FG: Okay...

DG: And, not if there is seating above the luxury boxes like at Staples.

FG: Uhm....

DG: And not if the orientation of the court is any different- Wooden wanted the extra space on the sides. And not if....

FG: I quit.

Honestly, now that the only reasonable precondition to making a donation has gone away (firing KD, of course), nothing should be off the table and nothing should be sacrosanct, as Achilles put it so well.

by Menelaus on Feb 27, 2008 1:03 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Actually...

I work at the UCLA Call Center and I do a lot of these fundraising calls. I haven't called for athletics yet (I'm hoping to someday), but I just wanted to comment on a few things.

First off, we like to think that as a public institution of learning, we are absolved from having to rely on corporate sponsorships. Fact: UCLA actually only receives about 12% of its support from the state, which leaves a huge portion for UCLA to find on its own. We have turned to donors, but even that isn't enough to cover the massive expenses we have running a top-notch educational institution like UCLA. So what we have done in recent years is turn to corporate support. At the dorms here, all the drinks we use are from PepsiCo., while all the cereals we have are from Kellogg's. Like it or not, the money has to come from somewhere, otherwise we are taking a hit in terms of undergraduate programs, professor retention, and a whole lot of other stuff.

Now you may ask, what does this have to do with UCLA athletics? Well I think the same rule applies. The money has to come from somewhere. The fact of the matter is that Pauley Pavilion is an out-dated sports venue which is in major need of improvements. For those of us who dislike this line of thinking, I am reminded of an Ikea commercial in which a lamp is thrown out onto the street, where it sits, alone out in the cold, accompanied by tragic orchestral music. I'll admit it's a bit of a stretch to compare the glorious Pauley Pavilion to a lamp, but the connections are there. In the end, we must always push for progress. There is no reason to cling on to the past unless you believe that somehow, Pauley gives us some mojo while we play and recruit. And honestly, if you truly believe that, you are at least the slightest bit naive and ignorant.

The Ronald Reagan Medical Center will finally be opening this May. The posters above are correct - every year, the prices for these kinds of projects go up. RRMC has cost the school a lot more than we should have invested in it. I have been inside RRMC and glanced at the OR's, the ICU's, and the patient rooms, and I dare you to find one doctor who tells you that he or she would rather stay in the old hospital simply because we've done so many great things there. We have - UCLA Medical Center is ranked the best in the west, and consistently ranks in the top five among hospitals in the nation. But the fact of the matter is that building is outdated. We cram too many patients into rooms, there are too little OR's, and transportation is a b---h, since there are so few elevators. If the argument holds for the Medical Center, then why not Pauley Pavilion?

By the way, I've been reading this blog loyally ever since I was admitted to UCLA (this is my first-year). This is the first time I ever figured I had anything to say about a matter. You guys do great stuff here. I was here for the whole Dorrell ordeal, and I have to say...everything I saw here made me even more proud to be a Bruin.

by nhoj on Feb 27, 2008 2:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Keep posting ...

thanks for the input.

Go Bruins

by Achilles on Feb 27, 2008 3:31 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I am disappointed how quickly some Bruins fans are

willing to sell out to a corporate name in collegiate, amateur sports! Just because there is a trend, that does not mean it's good or that we should not resist it.

The Times reported that UCLA has already received $40 million in commitments and is expected to clear $100 million. If we can all generate some more support that should be plenty for a good renovation that preserves the Pauley name and serves the needs of our athletics programs.

by PeterUCLA on Feb 27, 2008 12:45 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Peter ...

I hope this doesn't seem to confrontational.

The Pauley family donated a million dollars in the sixties. I'm grateful for their generosity. But why does that mean their name is some how holy and must be forever etched on the side of the basketball arena.

Even the Pauley family (read the article) is more realistic than that.

Is it because John Wooden's teams played in a building called "Pauley Pavilion?"

That building is no longer state of the art. The people who attend games there also attend games in other facilities. They're well aware that more modern facilities have much more enjoyable amenities.

~~~

As for the amateur thing, well --

There are sponsors all over Pauley Pavilion. There's signage and ads. adidas sponsors our uniforms and all our gear. Easton sponsors the baseball team and the softball team (who play in "Easton" Stadium, btw -- and, yes, I know Easton is also a man named Jim Easton.)

There is a reason why the team drinks out of bottles marked "Gatorade."

The only thing "amateur" about our basketball team is that the players don't get paid. But these games are on television where sponsors and corporations pay big money.

And, I respect you and know you know these things. I'm not being patronizing. I just think, with all due respect, that your value of tradition and perhaps nostalgia is coloring your views.

Maybe I'm wrong and if so, my bad.

As for me, I'm not that nostalgic. I didn't care when the Lakers moved out of the Great Western Forum.

And, yeah, I know that you are differentiating between the pros and college. But, if I recall correctly, the North Carolina program built the building now known as the "Dean Dome" which replaced their original building and their program seems to have survived.

Go Bruins

by Achilles on Feb 27, 2008 12:59 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

We've all said

we'd rather keep a corporate name off of Pauley. We'd all love it to stay Pauley Pavilion forever, but we'd rather see a beautiful facility with a corporate name than a mediocre facility with the Pauley name on it.

We've received $40 million so far, but the majority of that is from our big donors. The smaller donors are good for about 1/3 of the money ($65-ish million), but we're still $95 million short. With the small money already accounted for and the majority of the big donors already in, where is that $95 million going to come from. If someone like Lou Galen steps in and donates $50 million, we could get it done with a corporate name, but if nobody steps up then the corporate sponsor is the only way.

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Feb 27, 2008 1:01 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Why not a combo like the Rose Bowl

Where it is ___ presents the Rose Bowl.

by Free the 16 on Feb 27, 2008 2:36 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

By that I mean

The Rose Bowl game on New Year's day, versus the venue. But the same theory still applies.

Granted, most corporations would want top billing, but for a name like Pauley Pavilion, they might be willing to compromise.

by Free the 16 on Feb 27, 2008 2:38 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Not a bad idea*

by bluestreet on Feb 27, 2008 6:40 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Not trying to be cantankerous ...

but our uniforms already say "adidas" on them and so do our shoes.

Corporate sponsorship is not on the horizon, it's in the rear-view mirror.

I personally would rather sit in a beautiful arena and have a fantastic game experience. I don't really care whose name hangs on the side of the building.

I have great respect for the Pauley family. They've done amazing things for UCLA. But, really, is there a big difference between a family or a person cutting a check to sponsor a building and a company cutting a check? Maybe there is, I'm just not sure what it is.

Go Bruins

by Achilles on Feb 27, 2008 11:59 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Can we stop with the straw men?

No one is suggesting that the basketball jerseys look like NASCAR suits. All people are saying is that an appropriate corporate sponsorship shouldn't automatically be off the table in the absence of adequate generosity from the donor base.

As it stands, UCLA doesn't have a Galen to kick in $50 mil. I hope that changes, and believe that we should be able to get donations sufficient to do a full-fledged renovation without corporate sponsorships, but I think it's unwise to limit one's options this early (yes, it's revoltingly early) in the process.

by Menelaus on Feb 27, 2008 12:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

The garden

Um, buddy, the Celtics haven't played in the Garden since '95! Keep Up. you know that the Lakers aren't in the Forum anymore right? And, oh yeah, Magic retired a while back.

by RobbStarzz on Feb 27, 2008 7:27 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Um, that was the point

Original Poster: Don't change Pauley

Response: Times change, teams move into different venues

Your Response: Times change, teams move into different venues. Mocking of previous response due to lack of understanding of the message.

To borrow your terminology, do try to "keep up".

by Tydides on Feb 27, 2008 8:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

lol

Sigh ... some people will never get satire/snark.

by Nestor on Feb 28, 2008 5:29 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

And the Yankees are building a new stadium

How odd is it that every team he mentioned is changing or has changed stadiums? It's almost like he said the wrong teams on purpose.

by SuperBruinMan on Feb 27, 2008 9:50 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Pauley does need a major overhaul though

It's not just a matter of making it a decent place to watch a game, but also to provide increased revenue that will support the rest of our sports.

We need a donors club/lounge and suites and a club level. All of this will provide millions in revenue.

In addition, the team needs a new practice facility, weight rooms, locker rooms, coaches' offices and video equipment. All of this costs millions. If we decide to lower costs and only do $100 million in renovations I will be upset because we aren't doing everything necessary.

Remember that we are building within an existing facility, which increases costs. If we just built a brand new arena next to Pauley, we could get a better arena for $150 million than we could get for a $200 million Pauley renovation.

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Feb 27, 2008 11:56 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

there's no room to build a new facility

According to the article, even tearing down Pauley won't allow a new, square-shaped arena to be put on campus. My guess is that Spauling field would have to be gutted. But then where will our football team practice? Maybe the new IM field?

by mark the bruin on Feb 27, 2008 12:33 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't want us to build a new arena

All I was saying was that we have to acknowledge the fact that we're going to spend more on a Pauley renovation than we would on a new arena. It will cost more and there is no way around it.

That said, they couldn't build an arena on the Pauley footprint, but they could build it on the Pauley footprint and adjacent space (like a part of the IM field). If we were willing to leave Pauley, a new arena would be a distinct possibility.

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Feb 27, 2008 1:05 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Oh boy

I don't mean to be critical of you personally, Mark, but this comment reflects one of the reasons this project is having so much difficulty getting moving.

Everyone has their opinions, and many of those are inconsistent with those of others, and with the concept of a renovation generally.

So, let's see, we can't make a major change that would change how Pauley looks. And we can't do a corporate sponsorship (presumably even one that is not a ridiculous as your example).

Well, that's pretty flexible.

Of course, you are entitled to your opinion, but I think that if people actually want this restoration to happen, they need to approach this project with an open mind. Sure, we want them to do the best they can, but sacrifices will be made from many people's perspectives. And that's fine, because the goal is to have a world-class facility that honors Pauley and Wooden, and not just one that fits into any one persons individual perceptions as to what the project "should" be.

by Menelaus on Feb 27, 2008 12:49 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

It sounds like I'm in the minority, but ...

Personally, I would be appalled if UCLA spent $100 million (not to mention $200 million) renovating Pauley Pavilion. I haven't been to the Galen Center, but I picture a sterile environment along the lines of the Staples Center with the requisite luxury suites, pointless, flashing, electronic thingy encircling the mid-level of the arena, and a sound system constantly blaring out some sort of music that I'd much prefer remain silent.

Sure, let's fix the safety and accessibility issues, let's upgrade the restroom and concession facilities, let's modernize the locker and training rooms. But anything else we certainly don't need and, in my opinion, would only detract from what even in its current decrepit state, is a magnificent college environment.

Let's keep it simple and let the Basketball (Volleyball, Gymnastics, etc.) being contested on the court speak for itself.

by snorkeldorf on Feb 27, 2008 1:16 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

A simple question for you ...

have you ever sat in the areas of the arena beyond the baselines?

The site lines in Pauley are great if you're between the baskets, but they are really lousy if you sit behind the baskets, even in the corners of the arena.

I couldn't imagine a project that failed to correct the strange placement of the court, so far from the fans sitting being the baskets.

Go Bruins

by Achilles on Feb 27, 2008 1:20 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Agree

That is the one thing the Galen center really got right. As I climbed and climbed to get to my seats there, I truly expected to be miles away from the court.

Instead, my seat on the corner of the baseline had great sightlines and I was really near the court. Certainly much closer than a similar seat in the corner of the building at Pauley.

by Free the 16 on Feb 27, 2008 2:32 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

We can renovate it without all that stuff

has anyone here been to Conseco Fieldhouse in Indianapolis? It's a new arena with a retro feel that doesn't have the glaring spotlights everywhere and pointless boards. It's very tastefully done and keeps the focus on basketball. It has wide concourses that are decorated with old Indiana high school, college and NBA collectables. It is a throwback to the old fieldhouses of Indiana and is a celebration to the basketball history of the state.

A $200 million Pauley renovation can be the same, honoring the UCLA tradition in a beautiful facility that emphasizes basketball. USC chose to make the Galen Center similar to Staples Center because they wanted to make people feel like they were in a big time environment and place. UCLA has the on court production and basketball related atmosphere that doesn't make those things necessary. UCLA is the one spending the money here and they control the direction of the project. We can make a smaller Conseco Fieldhouse, not another Galen Center.

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Feb 27, 2008 1:24 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

flashing lights and sound system takes away from

college basketball. If I wanted to see annoying flashing lights and hear equally annoying music pumped at high levels, I'd go to a pro basketball game.

We don't need flashing lights - we have our cheerleaders & dance team. :-)

We don't need music playing over the sound system - we have our band and yell crew.

These things separate the hollowed-out, boring-as-hell pro basketball games from the fun and excitement that is college basketball.

by mark the bruin on Feb 27, 2008 2:39 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

I don't get where

you're making the jump from extensive renovation to flashing lights and a sterile environment. We can do an extensive renovation without all that stuff. As I said in another post, check out Conseco Fieldhouse. How about the Haas Pavilion renovation in Berkeley or Hec Ed at Washington? An extensive renovation doesn't mean we're going to build another Galen Center. I don't get your thinking on this one.

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Feb 27, 2008 2:46 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Re: Pauley

As much as I believe Pauley is the greatest basketball venue in the world, I have to admit it's looking every one of it's 40 years.
My uncle had season tickets (he moved to Oregon last year), his tickets were in the front row on the second tier. There was a fat metal bar running through the middle of your field of vision in his seats, not to mention that my uncle has back problems and would complain like Tim Floyd when he had to walk down the middle rows of the stadium because there were no hand rails. I can't tell you how many bad dreams I had of falling down those concrete stairs out side of Pauley.

In all, just for the sake of 'creature comforts' Pauley needs to be updated. In order to make our team even more superior we need updated media and video rooms.

As an aside, did any one see that ESPN special on Memphis' basketball program, I think it was called 'behind the hoops.' It was filmed in their new (I think 3 or 4 year old) practice facility. They camera would pan their two practice courts and a full sized gym right next to the court. When I saw that I thought: why can't we have something like that?

Victory or until next year!

by ncrpz2 on Feb 27, 2008 1:16 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

A older perspective

As a student in the late '60s, I remember being anxious, first, for Pauley to be finished, and, second, for the pleasure of seeing Lew Alcindor playing with the varsity. The days of playing in the old men's gym and the Sports Arena had only recently ended, and we had this jewel of a facility right on campus!

But, believe it or not, there was a naming controversy back then, too. We students, among others, were outraged that the building would be named after a guy solely because he gave a lot of money. We thought the facility should be named Wooden Pavilion.

Of course, now, I would gladly take a refurbished Pauley Pavilion over a brand new Dominos Cheese Burst Pizza Pavilion. But, as others have pointed out, nonpayers are not consulted in this matter.

by Bruinut on Feb 27, 2008 2:50 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

AN older perspective

(that's what I get for changing "geezer's" to "older" at the last minute)

by Bruinut on Feb 27, 2008 2:54 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Did you know....

Five important points:

The JD Morgan Center expansion and rennovation (including the awesome Hall of Fame) was paid for by the adidas contract when UCLA switched from Reebok. That adidas logo is on all apparel and shoes. The NCAA limits logos on uniforms being 1 inch by 1 inch. Ever notice how DC's undershirts during the NCAA Tournament have a cut out just below the neck line? Its because the NCAA cuts down on the number of logos allowed and so the equipment folks have to cut the additional adidas logo out.
That the coaching staff doesn't show recruits the men's basketball locker rooms because they are so out dated compared to our competitors. Obviously UCLA has tradition and that goes a long way...but so do new facilities. Anyone that thinks otherwise should look at what Nike's money has done at Oregon.
The amount of red tape to do anything at UCLA would astonish even Federal Employees. The amount of parties that have to be coordinated on this project is ridiculous. I'll be surprised if it happens before 2020.
I "believe" that the general UCLA Fund also takes a piece of the action anytime a large donation is made to UCLA Athletics. So even if someone wants to donate $10 millin to this Pauley project...a large chunk of that gets sent to the general UCLA Fund. In other words, it gets put to uses other than intended.
Suggestions? How else can Athletics raise funds? Have DG win over Pete Blackman to go battle getting at least some of the revenue from UCLA Athletic event parking. $8 (soon to be $9) per car adds up quick.

by Bailey on Feb 27, 2008 2:51 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Do any of you GO to basketball games?

Having been a season ticker holder for years in football and basketball the contrast between 2 legendary facilities is startling.

The Rose Bowl is old with great tradition. But they have added lots of amenities over the years. Probably does not compete directly with new stadiums all over the country, but the whole experience of going to football games there is positive: lots of restrooms, lots of food, OK screen etc. And Pasadena STILL wants to make a significant upgrade if they can. (When asked on an online survey the only change I wanted was SHADE.)

Pauley is old, poorly maintained with only tradition on its side. The seats, handrails etc are often seedy. As noted above, site lines are horrible. HAving to go to the restroom buts the whole game at risk...because the lines are often quite long. Food...well when you hope you have time to get to Ackerman before the game you know the food stinks. The multipurpose nature of the pavilion makes the behind the basket seats quite a distance from the ground. (When asked on an online survey the changes I wanted were more seats between the baskets -- a second tier -- because I did not see the room for another multipurpose environment on campus.)

Clearly it needs to be updated. And we are going to have to live with whatever it takes to get that done. Naming rights if necessary. The athletic department seems focused on suites etc (based on the on-line surveys since there were lots of questions on what I would pay for suites).

Having been to the Wooden Classic at the Arrowhead Pond/Honda Center, it is clear how dated the Pavilion is.

Keep the banners...in fact lets win more banners...that is where the tradition is (and have you taken a close look at them...the one near me is ratty and needs to be replaced)

This is a huge project and let's hope it gets done as well as the hiring of CRN and CBH.

Finally a question about the old men's and woman's gyms: can they be upgraded as practice facilities?? Isn't that where the high powered summer practices are held including NBA players, and if so, can't that serve for much of the practice gym problems. OK the locker room needs to be improved but can anyone tell me?????

Go Team Go!

by bruins grad and dad on Feb 27, 2008 5:18 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

If Love leaves early, he could donate sooner.

Why not hit up some of the guys who've played there? Baron? Walton? Reggie? Kareem?

by jaffa on Feb 27, 2008 5:19 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Old men's and women's gym as practice facilities?

From what I hear, at least Howland doesn't want to do that. He wants his team practicing on the court that they are going to play...which makes sense.

I like the idea of hitting up former players...but I can't imagine the Ross Bjork and Dan Guerrero haven't thought of that.

by Bailey on Feb 27, 2008 5:46 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Nothing to worry about

Unless Neuheisel gets involved and then it will be rebuilt and awesome in 15minutes.

Been hearing this same CRAP about Pauley for 20+ years and of course NOTHING has happened. Remember, you're talking about the Morgan center, it will be a slow disaster in which nothing gets done, and poorly. You think the Galen center and USC taking over the Coliseum would get them moving but of course not. Who wants to bet that in three years the Coliseum is new and incredible and Pauley is unchanged?

by greatgymnasticschool on Feb 27, 2008 6:09 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Well well well

Look who's back! Doom and Gloom Redux! Man you are grumpy! :)

You thought football was doomed too...doesn't look like it. Again, let's allow Guerrero to work his magic before abandoning hope on this.

by tasser10 on Feb 28, 2008 10:50 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

the biggest think that is...

fusterclucked on campus is this hospital they've been trying to build for the last several years. i forgot how many years behind the project is, but its so bad that they've had to rip out drywall that was just put up...

by redsand514 on Feb 27, 2008 6:18 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

You may be right...

The hospital was set to open in 2004, but is finally truly opening in May of this year. Of course, we're still not completely sure, but they have started doing staff/volunteer orientation (which is why I've been inside). It's a beautiful building, but it truly is a tragedy it took so long to get up and running.

by nhoj on Feb 27, 2008 7:15 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

the only renovations

I want to be made on Pauley are ones that increase seating, make it closer to the floor...and possibly design it for better noise containment...The worst thing that happens with these new renovations is that you lose your home court advantage.

I Could care less about having panda express at every gate, and I will be really disappointed if they turn it into some sort corporate named luxury Megaplex with strobe lights, pyrotechnics, and a dj that blasts that soldier boy song every time we dribble down the court!

O.A.

by Ollie on Feb 27, 2008 6:18 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Pauley and corporate money

I was in school for the opening of Pauley. I didn't know who Pauley was or why the building was named after him. I always, from the first day, thought it should properly be named Wooden Pavilion. When you think UCLA and tradition and basketball and success and all that, you don't think about Edwin Pauley (I think it was Edwin), you think of John Robert Wooden.

Somehow the court got named for Coach (and I assume he wouldn't allow his name to be put on it unless his wife's name was on it also.)

My solution no. 1: Get rid of the name Pauley and call it the "RCA - Wooden Arena" or the "Bank of America - Wooden Arena." And any really dopey name, like Hostess Twinkies would be required to turn Drake into a football stadium and lots of other things, just to make sure we don't end up with something really crummy.

My solution no. 2: Even though no one has heard of Edwin Pauley, everyone in the world has heard of Pauley Pavilion." So call it the "RCA - Pauley Pavilion."

In short, get the corporate money, let them put their name on the building, but make sure the focus stays where it should.

(And as an aside, naming rights involve lots and lots of money. I cannot believe that a company like Arco generates $1.00000000001 in revenue for every $1.00 it spent on naming rights. My thesis - unscientific and based on my buying habits only - is that the notion that "naming rights" actually generates a benefit to the business entity is a pure myth created and maintained by guys whose positions would be eliminated if rational human beings were running those same corporations. Example - how many incremental bags of Tostitos did you eat because their logo was on a football field? Did you switch to AT&T because they sponsored a bowl? (Cotton Bowl?) I would by the Wal Mart house bran cereal because it's indistinguishable from Kelloggs or Post in taste and quality, but only costs half as much. But if Wal Mart spent $35M on naming rights, I think it is highly likely that there would be fewer price roll backs.)

End of rant.

by Fox 71 on Feb 27, 2008 10:13 PM PST reply actions 0 recs

Exactly

I think something like that would work. People would still call it Pauley Pavilion, just like they still refer to the Anaheim Pond. Honda Center sounds like a car dealership, of course.

So let's start a new thread: what would be the perfect corporation to combine with Pauley Pavilion? Fox suggested RCa, but that's already being used. How about Sony? Maybe Apple? Just throwing names out there. Let's brainstorm!

by tasser10 on Feb 28, 2008 10:47 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Just a few things to note

I agree that Pauley could use a face lift, but just a couple points worth noting...

(1) Pauley's current state isn't doing anything to hinder our recruiting (last I checked, we had one of the nation's top recruiting classes for next year - and that's just the continuation of a trend)

(2) Pauley's current state isn't doing anything to hinder attendance (every game is sold out and the arena's always full)

I don't know if any of you have had the chance to go to a game at Cameron Indoor. I went a bunch of times while in law school, and despite the fact that it's somewhere between 20 and 40 years older than Pauley (I can't quite remember), it's one of the greatest places to see a game. It's crowded, borderline uncomfortable, has really poor crowd circulation, etc. But at the end of the day, the team does well, the fans are content with having a team that wins, and isn't that what matters?

Back at the dark end of the Lavin days, and even the early Howland days, when the team was struggling and attendance was down, there was plenty of talk about rennovating Pauley. My dad said something really brilliant though - "There's nothing wrong with Pauley that winning won't fix". My dad now has season tickets in the last row, a section or two over from one of the corners. Goes to every game and has a great time. Even though I rib him about the quality of his seats, I know they're not really that bad when you're actually there, because you're watching one of the greatest college programs in history.

by London on Feb 28, 2008 3:58 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

There is no way ...

that every game in Pauley is sold out.

I doubt if any of the non-conference games other than Texas was sold out and it's not even clear to me that Texas was sold out (but let's agree that it was, so that no one has to look it up).

There a a lot of empty seats in Pauley at a lot of games. Some of the seats in Pauley are so bad, I wouldn't sit in them if they were free.

Go Bruins

by Achilles on Feb 28, 2008 9:45 AM PST up reply actions 0 recs

The entire arena

is sold out for the entire season, however that just means the tickets are sold. It doesn't mean people will show up. In addition, a lot of the seats are bought by ticket brokers who have trouble selling the tickets for the non-conference games, leading to empty seats. The games are sold out though.

by Ryan Rosenblatt on Feb 28, 2008 12:16 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Thanks ...

I stand corrected.

Go Bruins

by Achilles on Feb 28, 2008 2:13 PM PST up reply actions 0 recs

Cameron Indoor

Is VERY different from Pauley... There fans are basically sitting on the court as opposed to about 5 miles away. Pauley is simply poorly designed. Half the seats in the place are terrible and a TON of money is lost because of all the other factors. It simply needs to be redone. No, it needed to be redone 15 years ago.

by greatgymnasticschool on Feb 28, 2008 7:21 AM PST reply actions 0 recs

New Vs Refurbished

Let me say at the outset that I love Pauley even with it's flaws, I had shivers the first time I went inside for a game.

Having said that:

It would seem to me from strictly a financial viewpoint that spending 150m on a new arena would be far better than 200m to refurbish an old one (Pauley). I understand it probably isn't feasable from a land standpoint but for that kind of of savings they need to get very creative.

If naming rights gets you the money faster and more of it, then that's what needs to be done. There are always ways to maintain the look of the building and the name of Pauley if anything new was built.

I guess my point is I would hate to see a shitpot (I believe that is the technical term) full of money spent to refurbish Pauley with all the inherent problems of design give and take when possibly for less money a state of the art (no pun intended) facility could be realized.

The Campus. the banners, Coaches, the team on the floor, the students and season ticket holders is what makes Pauley great. With the right design it could be the same in a new arena.

And Lastly, if a new arena was built i would still attempt to raise the 200 million and take the difference and put it in a fund that would only be used for the care and maintenance of the new facility.

I'm done, I need a beer.

by artybruin on Feb 28, 2008 12:00 PM PST reply actions 0 recs