UCLA students/Alumni: question about the Daily Bruin (website)

[Ns1]

Is the site hosted on a dual pentium 100mhz server fed by an ISDN connection, or does it just hate me because I'm a trojan?


http://www.dailybruin.ucla.edu/

 

[kalster]

the ucla CS department isn't the best , that explains it i think

<-- went to grad school at SC

 

[Ns1]

Originally posted by: kalster
the ucla CS department isn't the best , that explains it i think

<-- went to grad school at SC

Trying to find UCLA's position on this whole Coliseum/Rose Bowl fiasco. Daily Trojan reports UCLA is ok with a short term deal but will veto any long term agreements (understandable)

If the coliseum loses USC as a tenant they're going to have the largest waste of a space ever.

 

[kalster]

Originally posted by: Ns1

Originally posted by: kalster
the ucla CS department isn't the best , that explains it i think

<-- went to grad school at SC

Trying to find UCLA's position on this whole Coliseum/Rose Bowl fiasco. Daily Trojan reports UCLA is ok with a short term deal but will veto any long term agreements (understandable)

If the coliseum loses USC as a tenant they're going to have the largest waste of a space ever.

i think they are ok having sc at the rose bowl for only 1 year, that would suck i think, play you home games at rose bowl , if you win the pac-10 play your bowl game at the rose bowl

 

[Ns1]

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: Ns1

Originally posted by: kalster
the ucla CS department isn't the best , that explains it i think

<-- went to grad school at SC

Trying to find UCLA's position on this whole Coliseum/Rose Bowl fiasco. Daily Trojan reports UCLA is ok with a short term deal but will veto any long term agreements (understandable)

If the coliseum loses USC as a tenant they're going to have the largest waste of a space ever.

i think they are ok having sc at the rose bowl for only 1 year, that would suck i think, play you home games at rose bowl , if you win the pac-10 play your bowl game at the rose bowl

I just think it sucks not having football games 1/4 mile away from the school. Tailgating is f'n HUGE; imagine the shittiness if it moves to the rosebowl! And what about transportation? half of the campus doesn't have any means of getting around but biking and walking


btw uh, does that link load for you? lol

 

[kalster]

Originally posted by: Ns1

Originally posted by: kalster

Originally posted by: Ns1

Originally posted by: kalster
the ucla CS department isn't the best , that explains it i think

<-- went to grad school at SC

Trying to find UCLA's position on this whole Coliseum/Rose Bowl fiasco. Daily Trojan reports UCLA is ok with a short term deal but will veto any long term agreements (understandable)

If the coliseum loses USC as a tenant they're going to have the largest waste of a space ever.

i think they are ok having sc at the rose bowl for only 1 year, that would suck i think, play you home games at rose bowl , if you win the pac-10 play your bowl game at the rose bowl

I just think it sucks not having football games 1/4 mile away from the school. Tailgating is f'n HUGE; imagine the shittiness if it moves to the rosebowl! And what about transportation? half of the campus doesn't have any means of getting around but biking and walking


btw uh, does that link load for you? lol

besides i am sure people will miss the ghetto surrounding too if they have to go to the rose bowl to watch sc play heh

 

[Syringer]

The site works finely for me..

Dear Bruin Football Supporter,

Because you are a donor, season ticket holder and a devoted Bruin football supporter, it is important you receive accurate information regarding the recent news about a possible temporary and secondary tenant relationship at the Rose Bowl Stadium. The Rose Bowl has been the home of UCLA Football since 1982, and has served our football program, fan and constituent base, extremely well throughout the years.

When we negotiated our new long term lease in 2005, we intentionally protected our rights as the primary tenant of the Rose Bowl. This protection, which includes approval rights for any secondary entity, was a primary covenant in the new agreement. Therefore any relationship with a secondary tenant at the Rose Bowl, subject to our approval, would need to clearly take into account the best interests of our football program.

Please find below our official statement that further outlines our position on this matter. We truly appreciate your continuing support of UCLA Football and our entire athletic program.

Go Bruins!

Dan Guerrero
Director of Athletics



STATEMENT FROM DAN GUERRERO

This 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.

 

[Ns1]

Originally posted by: Syringer
The site works finely for me..

Dear Bruin Football Supporter,

Because you are a donor, season ticket holder and a devoted Bruin football supporter, it is important you receive accurate information regarding the recent news about a possible temporary and secondary tenant relationship at the Rose Bowl Stadium. The Rose Bowl has been the home of UCLA Football since 1982, and has served our football program, fan and constituent base, extremely well throughout the years.

When we negotiated our new long term lease in 2005, we intentionally protected our rights as the primary tenant of the Rose Bowl. This protection, which includes approval rights for any secondary entity, was a primary covenant in the new agreement. Therefore any relationship with a secondary tenant at the Rose Bowl, subject to our approval, would need to clearly take into account the best interests of our football program.

Please find below our official statement that further outlines our position on this matter. We truly appreciate your continuing support of UCLA Football and our entire athletic program.

Go Bruins!

Dan Guerrero
Director of Athletics



STATEMENT FROM DAN GUERRERO

This 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.

goddamnit. i knew it. thanks though.

 

[kalster]

are most ucla games at the rose bowl sold out or near capacity?

 

[Syringer]

We averaged a over 70k this year, which is huge--but since the capacity is closer to 100k or so there's always plenty of spots available.

 

[uclaLabrat]

Originally posted by: Ns1
Is the site hosted on a dual pentium 100mhz server fed by an ISDN connection, or does it just hate me because I'm a trojan?


http://www.dailybruin.ucla.edu/

Works fine for me. I don't think the site hates you cause you're a trojan, but God sure does

Of course, I'm on campus, and god know what kinda connection I have.

 

[LordSnailz]

works here!

 

[glutenberg]

You know there's something wrong with the team's attendance when you can buy UCLA tickets at Costco. My poor Bruins, :-(. If only they would sell their basketball tickets at Costco.