Friday, October 3, 1997
Rose Bowl closest site to call home
"It’s our only option."
That’s practically the best thing UCLA Athletic Director Peter
Dalis will say about the Rose Bowl, UCLA’s football home since
1982. Until then, the Bruins played at the L.A. Coliseum.
The obvious disadvantage to playing in Pasadena is its distance
from the UCLA campus. Dalis acknowledges that playing in the Rose
Bowl probably costs UCLA in terms of student attendance.
An on-campus stadium, according to Dalis, would also help bring
alumni back onto campus, and would help increase fund-raising. He
estimates that out of all Division I schools, UCLA is probably
located farthest from its football stadium.
The UCLA athletic department has also had its share of problems
with Rose Bowl management, which according to Dalis has gone
through "eight or nine" different managers since the Bruins moved
in 15 years ago.
"It’s not a turn-key operation," Dalis says. "We spend far more
time than we should worrying about the stadium The Coliseum was a
turn-key operation. We just showed up to play and everything was
ready." But the Bruins were forced out of the Coliseum when the
Raiders arrived in Los Angeles.
According to Dalis, students voted in a 1966 referendum against
building a new stadium. "We’ve paid for it a thousand fold" since
then, he says, and estimates that it would now cost 100 million
dollars to build a stadium on campus.
"There aren’t that kind of resources available," he says.