What is UP with the temporary bleachers? and having to borrow a locker room? ridiculous for a school that touts their athletics.
2018 D1 Women's Soccer Talk!!
- Thread starter gkrent
- Start date
What is UP with the temporary bleachers? and having to borrow a locker room? ridiculous for a school that touts their athletics.
UCLA does a pretty good job dazzling recruits with the locker room, Hall of Fame, and the Athlete's only free snack bar.
outside!
DA
It gives the impression that the school prioritizes the baseball team.
SpeedK1llz
GOLD
First world problems...
Seriously though, I would have loved to see them build locker rooms and permanent bleachers into the berm when they were erecting that new residence hall. We could have called it the "Fandango Fieldhouse".
I thought that was part of the whole plan! I guess it was wishful thinking! Maybe we should start a "Go Fund Me"
outside!
DA
I thought someone on the forum said Pep was going to build a locker room for the soccer program and build stands. Is that not the case?
SpeedK1llz
GOLD
I'm down. Maybe we can get one of the dozen or so NBA players who practice on campus every summer to chip in some of their "lunch money".
Sheriff Joe
DA
Free.
Know this is a women’s thread but Mohammed Kamara from UCLA men’s team is a real talent. His play, skill, vision are impressive. And he can score too.
Now back to women’s soccer banter.
Sorry for the interruption.
Pet peeve - why are California tax payers subsidizing athletic scholarships for foreigners like Kamara (or Flemming)? He's a great player, but 40 million people live in California. We can't find a better use of that money for Californians? Our priorities seem totally screwed up.
rainbow_unicorn
PREMIER
So NCAA schools should not recruit international players? Is it a pet peeve that California tax payers are subsidizing for players from Colorado/Florida?
I’ve had this conversation with friends. And it’s a valid and serious conversation. We could create a whole thread on this matter and many others that impact California public colleges/universities.
Last edited:
As the risk of going way off topic, it is indeed a serious conversation. But I don't share your concern about it. While public colleges serve an important role for local residents in providing them with an inexpensive path to higher education, that is by no means their sole function. In fact, the main benefit to the state is derived when graduates (no matter where they may have come from) chose to stay and work in the state (or form businesses there). It may be that Kamara and Flemming will choose to leave the state (in part because athletic opportunities may take them elsewhere), but on the whole UCLA's retention rate is fine. In the meantime, some of UCLA's students will have made a couple of extra international connections that could be beneficial to them (and the state) down the road.
UCLA is not an inexpensive path for higher education. It's more than $30K a year for in state residents and over 50% of the students receive some sort of financial aid (meaning loans). That's the point. Public schools in California are not serving their primary function. And we are talking about athletes, not scholars. There is nothing exceptional about athletes (particularly soccer) that would provide any benefit to the state. It would be a different discussion if we were talking about gifted international scholars. The irony is that gifted international scholars pay full out of state tuition at the UCs. And those are the connections that matter.
I think this post was more for Glen. I was trying to not derail the thread.
Dos Equis
GOLD
Are you sure they are on athletic scholarship? There are also grants that are endowed/raised (not from state funds) for attracting specific categories of students. Would UCLA write the below in multiple places on their website, and risk legal action, if foreign athletes were excluded?
Diversity of experience and point of view is good for a student body, and foreign athletes may have as many valuable relationships and life experiences as a rich foreign whiz kid.
*****
UCLA does not award scholarships or financial aid to undergraduate students who are not citizens or permanent residents of the United States. International students must prove that they have sufficient funds available to them to pay for their educational and living expenses.
MakeAPlay
DA
I will take my kids international connections from over the huge amount in all of the classes that she is in (STEM major). Not to mention that 10%+ of the student body is foreign citizens. Personally I don’t care where someone comes from if they earned their spot. As soon as you find a better midfielder or keeper than my daughter’s roommates in California (or the US for that matter) let me know so that we can sign them.
Excluding anyone because of anything other than ability is sort of Fascist/3rd Reichish and doesn’t accomplish the goal of such a great institution or ANY institution.
MakeAPlay
DA
An athletic scholarship is called a “Grant in Aid” and is considered an athletic grant FYI. It doesn’t violate anything and you better believe they get lots of money!
Thanks for the info. This is helpful.
MakeAPlay
DA
Taxpayers aren’t subsidizing anything. Why is California subsidizing the rest of the US? Our economy is larger than France’s and as a state we pay out more to the federal government than we receive. We could hold the rest of America hostage due to us being by far the largest agricultural state. Although I would want us to annex Nevada and Oregon out of convenience.
Let’s lighten up on the xenophobia....
Poor response. You can do better. Focus on the financial aspect - I'm talking about subsidizing foreign students, I'm not talking about admissions. UCLA excludes also sorts of kids (even international applicants) if they don't have the money. See Dos Equis's post above. Is UCLA fascist for doing so? Those kids in your kid's stem class are paying a ton. I have no problem with that.
Not to put words in your mouth, but it appears that you think it is OK to admit and subsidize an international applicant over a state resident because the international applicant is good at a sport. On the other hand, I think we should subsidize deserving California residents that are stellar students. UCLA seems to generally agree (which I did not know until Dos Equis's post), except apparently there is an exception at UCLA for athletes.