Bear Bachmeier - 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: Bear Bachmeier (/thread-25585.html)

---

RE: Bear Bachmeier - Treebound - 04-25-2025

I don't like this new arms race and the end of amateur athletics at all.  It smacks of Robbie Benson being paid to keep alligators out of the basketball stadium and has been a free for all the last few years. This is heading towards a likely collective bargaining agreement and salary cap, but it may take a few years of craziness to get there.   What concerns me is the volume of transfers, especially with quarterbacks (this thread).  There are very few true STUDENT athletes in these ranks anymore - as Andrew calls them:  "Stanford Men."  We need to continue to seek them out and he's the right person to lead that efffort.

With more money flowing to NIL and mainly into the money sports, what really concerns me is that Universities will start to cut their other programs.  It's already happening.  The Olympic sports will start to suffer as there will be fewer programs and less competition and the US will also take a hit in it's ability to do well against state run factories like China an Russia.  

As for Football and Basketball - $15M-$20M annually to compete in football is not sustainable unless some of our billionaire alums decide to step up likely Uncle Phil with Oregon (yes, he has an MBA from our GSB).  So I worry about our ability to compete and win in these sports too.  Our run under Harbaugh and Shaw (early years) was wonderful and the broader university and alumni base really enjoyed the limelight of "winning the right way."  Crushing the "Football Factories," Nerd Nation, with real student athletes was a highlight.   Can we find a "Stanford path" again that makes sense?  This is what Andrew, Sam and Levin are all chasing.   It's easier in college Hoops given the smaller number of athletes needed.   Look at Duke..., but that program is really the only game in town in Durham.  They can charge big bucks for tickets as they have no real competition, pro or otherwise.  

Yes, I will keep going to the Chuck Tayrlor Grove and to the games, but it all feels a bit tarnished now and that's sad.  I want the "Stanford Path" to winning too!

---

RE: Bear Bachmeier - lex24 - 04-25-2025

(04-25-2025, 03:48 PM)Treebound Wrote:  I don't like this new arms race and the end of amateur athletics at all.  It smacks of Robbie Benson being paid to keep alligators out of the basketball stadium and has been a free for all the last few years. This is heading towards a likely collective bargaining agreement and salary cap, but it may take a few years of craziness to get there.   What concerns me is the volume of transfers, especially with quarterbacks (this thread).  There are very few true STUDENT athletes in these ranks anymore - as Andrew calls them:  "Stanford Men."  We need to continue to seek them out and he's the right person to lead that efffort.

With more money flowing to NIL and mainly into the money sports, what really concerns me is that Universities will start to cut their other programs.  It's already happening.  The Olympic sports will start to suffer as there will be fewer programs and less competition and the US will also take a hit in it's ability to do well against state run factories like China an Russia.  

As for Football and Basketball - $15M-$20M annually to compete in football is not sustainable unless some of our billionaire alums decide to step up likely Uncle Phil with Oregon (yes, he has an MBA from our GSB).  So I worry about our ability to compete and win in these sports too.  Our run under Harbaugh and Shaw (early years) was wonderful and the broader university and alumni base really enjoyed the limelight of "winning the right way."  Crushing the "Football Factories," Nerd Nation, with real student athletes was a highlight.   Can we find a "Stanford path" again that makes sense?  This is what Andrew, Sam and Levin are all chasing.   It's easier in college Hoops given the smaller number of athletes needed.   Look at Duke..., but that program is really the only game in town in Durham.  They can charge big bucks for tickets as they have no real competition, pro or otherwise.  

Yes, I will keep going to the Chuck Tayrlor Grove and to the games, but it all feels a bit tarnished now and that's sad.  I want the "Stanford Path" to winning too!

Stanford and its alumni have more money than almost any University on the planet.   . It’s not a matter of having the ability. It’s a matter of deciding if they want to join issue.

---

RE: Bear Bachmeier - chrisk - 04-25-2025

Stanford can likely stick out the next 5 years while the industry determines the industry direction gets reimagined.
Will the top 20-30 schools blow off the House settlement, launching into an all out arms race which will be very expensive for them, pushing Stanford and most of the ACC and Big 12 into a 2nd level. Or will all the schools abide the by the House settlement, allowing more schools to be competitive and saving the top schools a ton of money.

---

RE: Bear Bachmeier - StanUSwagU - 04-25-2025

(04-24-2025, 08:56 AM)Goose Wrote:  

(04-23-2025, 09:51 PM)MV72018 Wrote:  

(04-21-2025, 07:30 PM)BostonCard Wrote:  I’ve said it before, but we don’t need to be part of this.  It is sad to me that when modern collegiate athletics runs cross current to our academic mission, we are so willing to bend the latter.

BC

Agree with you, BC.

I too agree with BC. The real question in my mind is "Can Stanford participate in modern collegiate athletics and not bend its academic mission? If it can, what does that entail?". One thing is certain. Stanford cannot prevent admitted students from entering the transfer portal. Stanford MAY be able to restrict students from accepting certain types of employment, but that is a longshot legal argument that would have all kinds of "issues". For all practical purposes that means Stanford students will be able to accept NIL contracts. Those two things are outside Stanford's control.

Everything else, such as travel schedules, admission standards, transfer admission policy etc. is under Stanford's control. Stanford historically has considered athletics as a factor in admissibility. What has changed over time is the weight of that factor. Do athletics "count" too much in Stanford's admissions policies, both for freshman and transfers, to the point it bends the academic standards "too far"? Stanford athletic teams always have traveled to some competitions. Today the problem is how far and how often is "too much"? Stanford has also changed some policies for athletic reasons, in particular allowing incoming freshmen to matriculate "early" in some cases. Is this policy change academically sub-optimal and if so by how much? These are all factors that are inside Stanford's control. The University can decide what is compatible with its academic mission and it clearly has the power to act accordingly.

The third thing that is outside Stanford's control is the business model of modern college athletics, particularly football and basketball. In order to compete at all, let alone successfully at the higher levels requires large amounts of capital, both for infrastructure and for personnel. Paying coaches many millions of dollars a year is now a necessity. Having the best facilities is also an expensive necessity. Financing this structure year over year places demands on the University that are at best extremely loosely connected to academics. In order to raise the income to operate Stanford had to join a "major" conference. The ACC was our only choice. That imposed constraints on travel that removed Stanford's ability to control travel frequency and distance. This "big business" requirement arguably forces Stanford to do many things that are NOT in the best interest of student education. It also requires time and attention from the University upper management. For me, this is absolutely a bridge too far. Stanford should not be a for-profit corporation heavily involved in the entertainment industry. That isn't its chartered purpose and does not attract me as a fan in any way.
 
IMO the business model is literally the elephant in the room that renders modern college athletics incompatible with Stanford's academic mission. This will only become "worse" if the House settlement forces Universities to pay the athletes. The total removal of the amateur aspect of athletics removes the last arguments that college sports "builds character" etc. At least in theory, if not in practice, NIL is not connected with athletic participation or performance. A salary from the University for playing clearly is. That constrains the University to largely ignore the academic aspects of the student-athlete's "career" in favor of his current "job". I see no way participating in this system could be compatible with the academic purpose of ANY University, let alone Stanford.

*******************

Hi,

Not to sound like a broken-record, but:

(1). BC and Goose: I understand & appreciate the perspective, but dont entirely share it [NotreDame in Football & Duke in Mens Basketball, have adapted to the 'New Landscape' and managed & continued to have an outstanding 'Academic Mission' & 'Outstanding Top Level Sports']; They dont 'care less about academics than we do' ..they just put academics in its proper balance with the real-world; As I have said numerous times, having a 'University that is too focused on being in the rightmost 3% tail of academics & academic-nerds ..is not healthy or balanced'; [qualitatively & possibly (for BostonCard :o)) quantitatively, think about the suicide-ideation & 'induced mental health stress' due to academic-stress in 'ultra high pressure, exclusively rightmost 3% tail, driven, narrow slice of undergraduate student-body non-normal 'only the ultra Top 3% driven driven hyper under-pressure to succeed academically at all costs environments, & universities]. Plus, the world doesn't need more 'professional nerds'; It needs more 'well rounded, well balanced human beings that have wider perspectives, skillsets, and interests, students who (in their undergraduate college) have worked and lived alongside slightly less academically focussed students; The new era/landscape of D1 Athletics aside, Stanford desperately needs to 'broaden and ensure its undergraduate student population is more diverse, (I dont mean ethnically) I mean 'having a lesser proportion of ultra-specialized, hyper-focussed, myopic professional nerds', no insult to those nerds; I just mean the proportion of those 'types' at Stanford is getting too much like CalTech or MIT, & Dartmouth, and needs to be more like at Duke & NotreDame, imho.



(2). Goose, I understand & appreciate your perspective, but I think your 2nd Paragraph provides a solution for your 3rd Paragraph, where you say the 'Business model is a bridge too far'. If Stanford, remakes itself, with the things it can control, which are the things you mention in your 2nd Paragraph, and becomes a 'Fun, Diverse 'Balanced Top15 Academics and Top15 Football and Mens Basketball Place (like a Notre Dame) , then Top Level D1 Athletes & Coaches will 'voluntarily flock to Stanford University' ...and they won't necessarily want to 'receive TopDollar which is the Business Model you imply'. Top Level D1 Football Players & Coaches go to NotreDame on an 'NIL/Money Discount because NotreDame is a Fun place that has the 'right balance between Academics and Top15 BigTime Football !', and the same goes for Duke in Mens Basketball !

But with Stanford and its current Imbalance (i.e. over stressing the 'Rightmost 3% Tail on the Academics Normal Curve, and the under-emphasizing of BigTime Football & Mens Basketball),, Top Level D1 Football Athletes and Coaches say "The only way I will go to Stanford is if I get the Full NIL/Top Salary Business Model compensation ROI'

If Stanford modernizes and adjusts its Academic vision & Admissions for its Athletes & Possibly General Students, just a little, to be more in line with Duke & NotreDame, I think Stanford will take off on a 'Great Trajectory as a Top15 University with a Top20 Football and Top20 MensBasketball Program over the next 20 years ..and therefore be 'An Attractive landing spot for Top D1 Athletes and Top Coaches ..in those 2 sports'' ..who want to compete in a Top20 landscape, but aren't trying to get Top Market Dollar in College'; But we have to modernize/widen our Admissions, so we can admit those types of student-athletes.

Therefore Stanford being an Attractive Landing Spot (being Top15 in Academics, Top20 in Football and Top20 in MensBasketball & a more fun, more representative student body composition place), will be able to 'Somewhat Dictate the Business Model' rather than be 'a Passive Victim of the Business Model'; Stanford needs to be the place where Great D1 Athletes who are 'Good students' who would like to [a] Go to a Good Academic University [b] Earn some fair, but not TopMarketDollar NIL, & [c] Play for a Top20 Football & Top20 MensBasketball program that would give them the 'Visibility and Success' to make it to the NFL or NBA (where they could get the Large Full-Market-Value Payouts) ....want to come; (With its current Admissions Standards & Tepid/Moribund Culture for BigTime Football and Mens Basketball ...it is not !).

Some small modifications to that 'status quo' is long overdue, and will reduce the 'Academic Scandals we have experienced in the last 20 years ...which in my opinion partly comes from 'a dysfunctional over-stressing of Academic specialization & 3% culture in our Undergraduate Level' ..Leave that for Graduate Studies Programs.


(3). I know this Perspective differs from Yours (and I understand & respect yours); But I think 'small adjustments' to Stanfords current 'hyper focussed narrow Admissions & Academic Vision, would be good for both the University and the health & experience of its Students, and Student-Athletes, and Football and MensBasketball programs; Sort of a 'kill 2 birds with 1 action'; just thought as a fellow StanU Alum, I would share this perspective.

---

RE: Bear Bachmeier - TonyLima - 04-27-2025

Perhaps a warning for Bear. May be paywalled, ask me if you’d like a copy.

---

RE: Bear Bachmeier - Mick - 04-28-2025

(04-27-2025, 12:45 PM)TonyLima Wrote:  Perhaps a warning for Bear. May be paywalled, ask me if you’d like a copy.

In the old days, I thought it made sense to stay in school. With NIL, now I really think it makes sense to stay in school, unless you're a first-three-rounds pick. You know, like Shedeur Sanders...

---

RE: Bear Bachmeier - 82lsju - 04-28-2025

(04-27-2025, 12:45 PM)TonyLima Wrote:  Perhaps a warning for Bear. May be paywalled, ask me if you’d like a copy.

probably similar info here

https://sports.yahoo.com/article/instead-nfl-draft-quinn-ewers-151357258.html

---

RE: Bear Bachmeier - 82lsju - 04-28-2025

and now this...he will apparently graduate in June

---

RE: Bear Bachmeier - fullmetal - 04-28-2025

Alas.

---

RE: Bear Bachmeier - Mick - 04-28-2025

(04-28-2025, 08:55 AM)82lsju Wrote:  

(04-27-2025, 12:45 PM)TonyLima Wrote:  Perhaps a warning for Bear. May be paywalled, ask me if you’d like a copy.

probably similar info here

https://sports.yahoo.com/article/instead-nfl-draft-quinn-ewers-151357258.html

That last paragraph is instructive. He may have entered the NFL draft this year because it was expected to be a weak draft for quarterbacks.

---

RE: Bear Bachmeier - newguy - 04-29-2025

another QB has just transferred in.  Ben Gulbranson, from Oregon State.
https://www.oregonlive.com/beavers/2025/04/former-oregon-state-quarterback-ben-gulbranson-transfers-to-stanford.html

---

RE: Bear Bachmeier - Mick - 04-30-2025

(04-29-2025, 10:22 PM)newguy Wrote:  another QB has just transferred in.  Ben Gulbranson, from Oregon State.
https://www.oregonlive.com/beavers/2025/04/former-oregon-state-quarterback-ben-gulbranson-transfers-to-stanford.html

His best year was 2022 when he went 7-1 as a starter, had his best stats. Had a great game against Stanford. Played little in 2023, started three games in 2024 and did well. Here's his stats in his three starts last year:

• Threw for a career-high 294 yards and two touchdowns in the win over Washington State. Completed 22 of his 34 pass attempts
• Passed for 292 yards against San Jose State. Was 24-of-37 passing
• Ended the season with 226 yards at Boise State. Threw for one touchdown and completed 21 of his 37 pass attempts

Ben Gulbranson - Football - Oregon State University Athletics

---

RE: Bear Bachmeier - magnus - 05-03-2025

Bear to BYU

https://x.com/PeteThamel/status/1918713269008683197

---

RE: Bear Bachmeier - qwerty49 - 05-03-2025

Brother Tiger joins him.  Apparently Tiger got his Stanford degree in 2.5 years, wow.

https://www.vanquishthefoe.com/2025/5/3/24423306/stanford-wr-tiger-bachmeier-joins-brother-commits-to-byu-football-recruiting-transfer-portal

---

RE: Bear Bachmeier - BostonCard - 05-03-2025

(05-03-2025, 06:29 PM)qwerty49 Wrote:  Brother Tiger joins him.  Apparently Tiger got his Stanford degree in 2.5 years, wow.

https://www.vanquishthefoe.com/2025/5/3/24423306/stanford-wr-tiger-bachmeier-joins-brother-commits-to-byu-football-recruiting-transfer-portal

Not just a degree in 2.5 years, but an engineering degree (in CS).

Quote: The minimum major in computer science consists of 96 units, including 26 units of math, 11 units of science, 10 units of engineering fundamentals, one course in TIS (Technology in Society), and 43 units of core depth.

BC

---