Is Stanford creating an NIL collective? - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Is Stanford creating an NIL collective? (/thread-23240.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Is Stanford creating an NIL collective? (/thread-23240.html)
RE: Is Stanford creating an NIL collective? - Phogge - 06-10-2022
The kids should get as many dollars as they can from their images and endorsements and if they are the few who become prominent in high school they should cash in on that too. Stanford needs to get with the program or wither and die as an athletic power.
RE: Is Stanford creating an NIL collective? - BostonCard - 06-11-2022
It’s not a number or proportion of fifth years, it’s which ones come back. In the past, when eligible players didn’t come back for their fifth year, it was because they were non-contributors who we didn’t have room on the roster for. Until recently, Shaw had us under the scholarship limit, which meant we brought back some very marginal players, because, why not, we had room. The players who didn’t come back grad transferred out or went pro; many of those could have been contributors. As Matt notes, there are a couple players who came back, who are marginal contributors, and we would have been better off retaining a few players who left. The numbers wind up being the same (and limited by the 85 scholarship limit), but it is clear that we did not wind up with all our preferred returnees.
BC
RE: Is Stanford creating an NIL collective? - CowboyIndian - 06-11-2022
(06-10-2022, 11:26 PM)Phogge Wrote: The kids should get as many dollars as they can from their images and endorsements and if they are the few who become prominent in high school they should cash in on that too. Stanford needs to get with the program or wither and die as an athletic power.
No problem with image and likeness. Do have a BIG problem with schools buying players and making college football NFL Lite.
RE: Is Stanford creating an NIL collective? - SamuelMcF - 06-11-2022
(06-10-2022, 12:41 PM)Giants Wrote: How does 2020 (a free redshirt year for everyone whether they played or not) figure in these calculations?
This past offseason saw a transfer portal exodus because the 85-man scholarship limit DID NOT include seniors/5th years whose last year was during the 2020-21 Covid season. Hence, all those guys could stay an extra year and many many programs had closer to 100 players for one year only. That massive volume had to be cut down to 85 again after this past season.
So while many current players still have an extra possible year of eligibility due to the Covid year, the hard and fast limit on players is once again 85. For the next couple years we'll see massive transfer portal numbers since guys will be able to stay an extra year and mostly "transfer down" for playing time. (The select few "transferring up" to the big boys should be similar in number regardless.)
(06-11-2022, 01:31 AM)CowboyIndian Wrote:(06-10-2022, 11:26 PM)Phogge Wrote: The kids should get as many dollars as they can from their images and endorsements and if they are the few who become prominent in high school they should cash in on that too. Stanford needs to get with the program or wither and die as an athletic power.
No problem with image and likeness. Do have a BIG problem with schools buying players and making college football NFL Lite.
The issue is it's technically not the schools buying players. It's their boosters and collectives. (Obviously "technically" the key word and we all know it.)
RE: Is Stanford creating an NIL collective? - Phogge - 06-11-2022
There should be a Cardboard Collective composed of the high rollers around here, probably the scions of powerful families and the beneficiaries of the "40 Year Decision" that most of you guys boast about. That would cover near 95% of this site so what an incredible war chest for Stanford. A little kickback to the Admissions Director should cut through the red tape.
RE: Is Stanford creating an NIL collective? - BostonCard - 06-11-2022
And here I was thinking Shaw was slow to adapt. In reality, he was ahead of his time, and created extra space on the roster by staying well below the 85 scholarship limit. Alas, COVID hit after he rectified the situation.
BC
RE: Is Stanford creating an NIL collective? - Maple Leaf - 06-12-2022
(06-11-2022, 09:51 AM)Phogge Wrote: There should be a Cardboard Collective composed of the high rollers around here, probably the scions of powerful families and the beneficiaries of the "40 Year Decision" that most of you guys boast about. That would cover near 95% of this site so what an incredible war chest for Stanford. A little kickback to the Admissions Director should cut through the red tape.
It has been reported that Tiger Woods is now worth $1 Billion. Even if his ex wife gets 50%, $500 Million should allow for some excellent seed monies for the war chest, not to mention the name recognition of being with a Tiger Woods/Stanford NIL group.
RE: Is Stanford creating an NIL collective? - akiddoc - 06-13-2022
(06-12-2022, 09:29 AM)Maple Leaf Wrote:(06-11-2022, 09:51 AM)Phogge Wrote: There should be a Cardboard Collective composed of the high rollers around here, probably the scions of powerful families and the beneficiaries of the "40 Year Decision" that most of you guys boast about. That would cover near 95% of this site so what an incredible war chest for Stanford. A little kickback to the Admissions Director should cut through the red tape.
It has been reported that Tiger Woods is now worth $1 Billion. Even if his ex wife gets 50%, $500 Million should allow for some excellent seed monies for the war chest, not to mention the name recognition of being with a Tiger Woods/Stanford NIL group.
His ex-wife already got her cut. About 100 million IIRC. He's worth 1 billion even after taking that hit. A hit he deserved, of course.
She is apparently now worth 200 million. Good financial advisors. Apparently has done well in real estate.
RE: Is Stanford creating an NIL collective? - Genuine Realist - 06-13-2022
With all due respect to those here interested in minor sports, I don't think anyone is going to go to the matt about the possibility of buying players for the women's golf team. It's the money sports - football and men's and women's basketball - that are going to generate controversy. (As I write this, it occurs to me as I write this that nearly all junior tennis players of any promise at all have equipment deals with tennis equipment manufactures - rackets and the like, various kinds of sponsorship. I wonder what the NCAA regs on the matter are, since it doesn't seem to inhibit star players from accepting scholarships.)
Schools themselves shouldn't buy players, because of its effect on the academic model. But third party money shouldn't matter at all.
But hypocrisy does matter, albeit it is somewhat peripheral in this context. If it's not NIL - and my strong hunch is that individual contracts with young athletes without reputation are not that - then identify it as what it is.
I'd like to see an open platform for investment by professional franchises, which I believe would marginalize actual NIL money and allow such rational adjustment between academic and athletic potential with those individuals fortunate enough to possess both.
RE: Is Stanford creating an NIL collective? - Phogge - 06-13-2022
It obviously is time for Tiger to purchase some five star D linemen. Just hustle them through Admissions. They could write on their application, "Tiger sent me, when and where do I report?"
RE: Is Stanford creating an NIL collective? - BostonCard - 06-13-2022
Rumor is that the LIV tour offered Tiger a cool $1 Billion (with a B) to play in the tour. Not to encourage sports washing by a murderous autocratic regime, but if Guo could represent China at the Olympics, Tiger could make bank by playing some exhibition golf at the twilight of his career, and use the proceeds to ensure the continued excellence in Stanford sports.
Or he could maintain what self respect he has left and give the Saudis the middle finger.
BC
RE: Is Stanford creating an NIL collective? - DC 86 - 06-13-2022
And of course Stanford has dozens of alumni who are wealthier than Tiger, including some who are literally 100x as wealthy as him. If certain Stanford alums formed a collective it could be the most powerful one in FBS by far.
RE: Is Stanford creating an NIL collective? - Phogge - 06-13-2022
Some million dollar kickbacks to Admissions personnel would do the trick. Maybe a collective of high rollers doubling faculty salaries too. Get 'em on your side.
Arch Manning, how about $10 million to sign a LOI?
RE: Is Stanford creating an NIL collective? - 82lsju - 06-13-2022
(06-13-2022, 05:11 PM)DC 86 Wrote: And of course Stanford has dozens of alumni who are wealthier than Tiger, including some who are literally 100x as wealthy as him. If certain Stanford alums formed a collective it could be the most powerful one in FBS by far.
here's one estimate of the # of "Stanford Billionaires", from April 2021 so some may no longer be billionaires....
Quote:28 BILLIONAIRES
LOCATION: STANFORD, CALIFORNIA
TOTAL NET WORTH: $124.4 BILLION
A breeding ground for startups, Stanford is the alma mater of more newly minted billionaires this year than any other school. The school’s eight newcomers comprise the founders of Carvana, DoorDash, Nubank, Robinhood and Zillow—all technology or tech-adjacent companies. They include Colombian David Velez, who built Nubank into the most valuable digital bank in the world, as well as Baiju Bhatt and Bulgaria-born Vlad Tenev, whose no-commission trading platform Robinhood was at the center of the GameStop short squeeze in January and February. Another Stanford grad, Yahoo cofounder Jerry Yang, was elected to chair the university’s board of trustees and will begin his term later this year.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrickcai/2021/04/14/these-10-colleges-have-produced-the-most-billionaire-alumni/?sh=764d028a6a9a
RE: Is Stanford creating an NIL collective? - Phogge - 06-13-2022
Eric, they missed Himes.
RE: Is Stanford creating an NIL collective? - Softball Fan - 06-13-2022
Well I wouldn't count on a big donation from Carvana owner this year.
https://fortune.com/2022/05/06/stock-portfolio-carvana-ernie-garcia-ii-iii-fortune-down-80-percent-billionaires/
"Ernie Garcia II and Ernie Garcia III have now shed almost 80% of that wealth, one of the biggest and fastest declines of any billionaire family..."
RE: Is Stanford creating an NIL collective? - 82lsju - 06-13-2022
(06-13-2022, 05:43 PM)Phogge Wrote: Eric, they missed Himes.
he's got his $$ well hidden from prying eyes, of course how much has he spent on Tonga Juice over the years??????
(06-13-2022, 05:44 PM)paloalto Wrote: Well I wouldn't count on a big donation from Carvana owner this year.
https://fortune.com/2022/05/06/stock-portfolio-carvana-ernie-garcia-ii-iii-fortune-down-80-percent-billionaires/
"Ernie Garcia II and Ernie Garcia III have now shed almost 80% of that wealth, one of the biggest and fastest declines of any billionaire family..."
but even with an 80% drop they are still worth over $5b......
RE: Is Stanford creating an NIL collective? - DC 86 - 06-13-2022
(06-13-2022, 05:34 PM)82lsju Wrote:(06-13-2022, 05:11 PM)DC 86 Wrote: And of course Stanford has dozens of alumni who are wealthier than Tiger, including some who are literally 100x as wealthy as him. If certain Stanford alums formed a collective it could be the most powerful one in FBS by far.
here's one estimate of the # of "Stanford Billionaires", from April 2021 so some may no longer be billionaires....
Quote:28 BILLIONAIRES
LOCATION: STANFORD, CALIFORNIA
TOTAL NET WORTH: $124.4 BILLION
A breeding ground for startups, Stanford is the alma mater of more newly minted billionaires this year than any other school. The school’s eight newcomers comprise the founders of Carvana, DoorDash, Nubank, Robinhood and Zillow—all technology or tech-adjacent companies. They include Colombian David Velez, who built Nubank into the most valuable digital bank in the world, as well as Baiju Bhatt and Bulgaria-born Vlad Tenev, whose no-commission trading platform Robinhood was at the center of the GameStop short squeeze in January and February. Another Stanford grad, Yahoo cofounder Jerry Yang, was elected to chair the university’s board of trustees and will begin his term later this year.
https://www.forbes.com/sites/kenrickcai/2021/04/14/these-10-colleges-have-produced-the-most-billionaire-alumni/?sh=764d028a6a9a
Silicon Valley Business Journal claimed (back in 2018) that Stanford had 74 billionaire alums, but didn't provide more detail, so I'm not sure how reliable that figure was.
https://www.bizjournals.com/sanjose/news/2018/05/18/stanford-harvard-billionaires-bay-area-zuckerberg.html
RE: Is Stanford creating an NIL collective? - Phogge - 06-13-2022
46 must have kicked the bucket.
RE: Is Stanford creating an NIL collective? - BostonCard - 06-13-2022
With the new Jurassic Park movie out, I’m reminded of this quote:
“Your scientists were so preoccupied with whether they could, they didn’t stop to think if they should.”
Maybe we should be less preoccupied with whether our tech billionaires could find a ginormous NIL and think more of whether they should.
BC