Enthusiasm isn't enough - 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: Enthusiasm isn't enough (/thread-26311.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: Enthusiasm isn't enough (/thread-26311.html)
Enthusiasm isn't enough - Row80Critic - 09-19-2026
Stanford is playing college football in a professional league.
Player payrolls of top teams...
1. Texas Longhorns – $45–$55 million
2. Ohio State Buckeyes – $49–$54 million
3. Oregon Ducks – $48–$54 million
4. LSU Tigers – $47–$50 million
5. Texas A&M Aggies – $45–$50 million
6. Miami Hurricanes – $44–$50 million
7. Notre Dame Fighting Irish – $41–$48 million
8. Tennessee Volunteers – $41–$43 million
9. Ole Miss Rebels – $39–$45 million
10. Alabama Crimson Tide – $38–$42 million
RE: Enthusiasm isn't enough - old spanish trail - 09-19-2026
(09-19-2026, 06:02 PM)Row80Critic Wrote: Stanford is playing college football in a professional league.
Player payrolls of top teams...
1. Texas Longhorns – $45–$55 million
2. Ohio State Buckeyes – $49–$54 million
3. Oregon Ducks – $48–$54 million
4. LSU Tigers – $47–$50 million
5. Texas A&M Aggies – $45–$50 million
6. Miami Hurricanes – $44–$50 million
7. Notre Dame Fighting Irish – $41–$48 million
8. Tennessee Volunteers – $41–$43 million
9. Ole Miss Rebels – $39–$45 million
10. Alabama Crimson Tide – $38–$42 million
What is our payroll?
RE: Enthusiasm isn't enough - cardcrimson - 09-20-2026
(09-19-2026, 11:13 PM)old spanish trail Wrote:(09-19-2026, 06:02 PM)Row80Critic Wrote: Stanford is playing college football in a professional league.
Player payrolls of top teams...
1. Texas Longhorns – $45–$55 million
2. Ohio State Buckeyes – $49–$54 million
3. Oregon Ducks – $48–$54 million
4. LSU Tigers – $47–$50 million
5. Texas A&M Aggies – $45–$50 million
6. Miami Hurricanes – $44–$50 million
7. Notre Dame Fighting Irish – $41–$48 million
8. Tennessee Volunteers – $41–$43 million
9. Ole Miss Rebels – $39–$45 million
10. Alabama Crimson Tide – $38–$42 million
What is our payroll?
https://thecardboard.org/board/thread-26301.html
RE: Enthusiasm isn't enough - KartyFan - 09-20-2026
Considering that a team reportedly below us in NIL spend trounced us 35-7 yesterday, I don't think we can just blame NIL. I think our near-term goal should be to be a respectable ACC team, meaning average or better most years and posting a winning record more often than not. Top 10 in the country feels out of reach in the current environment given the spending gap.
Seems to me that the proposed legislation at least gives Stanford the option to be more competitive if we choose to do so. If we are hitting the current cap, the added retention budget is easier for us to tap into than cutting "legitimate" deals with third parties to increase our budget.
Whether we should spend nearly $50 million or year paying players is a whole other question, and I'm not sure how I feel about it. But as a selfish fan I sayets go for it :)
RE: Enthusiasm isn't enough - BostonCard - 09-20-2026
Easier to spend OPM than your own, but ask yourself if that were your own money assuming you had made it big and had $20 million that you could direct anywhere you wanted, would you direct it to double Stanford’s pool to pay football players or direct it somewhere else?
BC
RE: Enthusiasm isn't enough - M T - 09-20-2026
(09-20-2026, 04:38 PM)BostonCard Wrote: Easier to spend OPM than your own, but ask yourself if that were your own money assuming you had made it big and had $20 million that you could direct anywhere you wanted, would you direct it to double Stanford’s pool to pay football players or direct it somewhere else?
There's also the tax consequences. I don't see how paying the salaries (or NIL, which is commercial money) of pro athletes should be tax deductible, for the public benefit.
RE: Enthusiasm isn't enough - Giants - 09-21-2026
(09-19-2026, 11:13 PM)old spanish trail Wrote:(09-19-2026, 06:02 PM)Row80Critic Wrote: Stanford is playing college football in a professional league.
Player payrolls of top teams...
1. Texas Longhorns – $45–$55 million
2. Ohio State Buckeyes – $49–$54 million
3. Oregon Ducks – $48–$54 million
4. LSU Tigers – $47–$50 million
5. Texas A&M Aggies – $45–$50 million
6. Miami Hurricanes – $44–$50 million
7. Notre Dame Fighting Irish – $41–$48 million
8. Tennessee Volunteers – $41–$43 million
9. Ole Miss Rebels – $39–$45 million
10. Alabama Crimson Tide – $38–$42 million
What is our payroll?
Per The Athletic: $16-$20 million (tied for 13th in the ACC).
RE: Enthusiasm isn't enough - BostonCard - 09-21-2026
(09-20-2026, 04:42 PM)M T Wrote:(09-20-2026, 04:38 PM)BostonCard Wrote: Easier to spend OPM than your own, but ask yourself if that were your own money assuming you had made it big and had $20 million that you could direct anywhere you wanted, would you direct it to double Stanford’s pool to pay football players or direct it somewhere else?
There's also the tax consequences. I don't see how paying the salaries (or NIL, which is commercial money) of pro athletes should be tax deductible, for the public benefit.
Good point. In my thought experiment, even ceteris paribus, if I have $20 million laying around that I had to give away in a way that could not benefit me or a family member, I can think of a lot better uses for the money. Even if I had to give it to Stanford, I probably would give it to non-athletic endeavors, and even if I had to give it to the department of athletics, I think there is much more bang for the buck by giving to other sports.
BC
RE: Enthusiasm isn't enough - KartyFan - 09-21-2026
(09-21-2026, 01:26 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(09-20-2026, 04:42 PM)M T Wrote:(09-20-2026, 04:38 PM)BostonCard Wrote: Easier to spend OPM than your own, but ask yourself if that were your own money assuming you had made it big and had $20 million that you could direct anywhere you wanted, would you direct it to double Stanford’s pool to pay football players or direct it somewhere else?
There's also the tax consequences. I don't see how paying the salaries (or NIL, which is commercial money) of pro athletes should be tax deductible, for the public benefit.
Good point. In my thought experiment, even ceteris paribus, if I have $20 million laying around that I had to give away in a way that could not benefit me or a family member, I can think of a lot better uses for the money. Even if I had to give it to Stanford, I probably would give it to non-athletic endeavors, and even if I had to give it to the department of athletics, I think there is much more bang for the buck by giving to other sports.
BC
You make great points, BC, and when you frame it this way it is hard to argue for that $20 million going to NIL.
I am admittedly trying to get to yes here, and with that pretext my counterarguments might be:
1. Stanford Athletics and Stanford Football's success brings benefits to the university, financial and otherwise, that allow Stanford to increase its positive impact.
2. We need to bridge the gap for a period of time in college athletics that are not sustainable in order to have an athletics program long term. A respectable football program is needed to keep us in the game while everyone figures out a more sustainable model. We can succeed in that future model but need help getting there.
RE: Enthusiasm isn't enough - Hurlburt88 - 09-26-2026
some perspective on the attempts to calm the insanity in Washington
https://www.wsj.com/opinion/congress-college-sports-ncaa-bill-f4a9fc7e?st=1oF54y&reflink=desktopwebshare_permalink
RE: Enthusiasm isn't enough - needle - 09-26-2026
(09-21-2026, 01:26 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(09-20-2026, 04:42 PM)M T Wrote:(09-20-2026, 04:38 PM)BostonCard Wrote: Easier to spend OPM than your own, but ask yourself if that were your own money assuming you had made it big and had $20 million that you could direct anywhere you wanted, would you direct it to double Stanford’s pool to pay football players or direct it somewhere else?
There's also the tax consequences. I don't see how paying the salaries (or NIL, which is commercial money) of pro athletes should be tax deductible, for the public benefit.
Good point. In my thought experiment, even ceteris paribus, if I have $20 million laying around that I had to give away in a way that could not benefit me or a family member, I can think of a lot better uses for the money. Even if I had to give it to Stanford, I probably would give it to non-athletic endeavors, and even if I had to give it to the department of athletics, I think there is much more bang for the buck by giving to other sports.
BC
I think people like Cody Campbell (Texas Tech megadonor) give multi-million in support of NIL as much for their own benefit as for the benefit of the team they support. Campbell is now a West Texas legend, and, like big-time donors who pay for a building and make sure to have thier name on it, surely he believes that his gifts burnish his legacy in a way that few other things might.
I don't know any megadonors to universities, but I do sense that "legacy" includes or at least can include next-gen family members getting something out of the deal as well. (I'm thinking of Dallas Cowboys owner and University of Arkansas supporter Jerry Jones' grandson getting a roster spot on the Arkansas Razorbacks football team, though that was I think pre-NIL and so probably a bad example for this particular thought exercise.)
Just my thoughts.
RE: Enthusiasm isn't enough - chrisk - 09-26-2026
(09-26-2026, 04:22 PM)needle Wrote:(09-21-2026, 01:26 PM)BostonCard Wrote:(09-20-2026, 04:42 PM)M T Wrote:(09-20-2026, 04:38 PM)BostonCard Wrote: Easier to spend OPM than your own, but ask yourself if that were your own money assuming you had made it big and had $20 million that you could direct anywhere you wanted, would you direct it to double Stanford’s pool to pay football players or direct it somewhere else?
There's also the tax consequences. I don't see how paying the salaries (or NIL, which is commercial money) of pro athletes should be tax deductible, for the public benefit.
Good point. In my thought experiment, even ceteris paribus, if I have $20 million laying around that I had to give away in a way that could not benefit me or a family member, I can think of a lot better uses for the money. Even if I had to give it to Stanford, I probably would give it to non-athletic endeavors, and even if I had to give it to the department of athletics, I think there is much more bang for the buck by giving to other sports.
BC
I think people like Cody Campbell (Texas Tech megadonor) give multi-million in support of NIL as much for their own benefit as for the benefit of the team they support. Campbell is now a West Texas legend, and, like big-time donors who pay for a building and make sure to have thier name on it, surely he believes that his gifts burnish his legacy in a way that few other things might.
I don't know any megadonors to universities, but I do sense that "legacy" includes or at least can include next-gen family members getting something out of the deal as well. (I'm thinking of Dallas Cowboys owner and University of Arkansas supporter Jerry Jones' grandson getting a roster spot on the Arkansas Razorbacks football team, though that was I think pre-NIL and so probably a bad example for this particular thought exercise.)
Just my thoughts.
We should stop confusing the $20M+ House settlement payments with NIL from third parties. The House payments have nothing to do with active NIL. They are damages to settle the House case. NIL payments come from 3rd parties, not the university.
RE: Enthusiasm isn't enough - KartyFan - 09-26-2026
NIL payments come both from universities directly and from third parties.
RE: Enthusiasm isn't enough - chrisk - 09-27-2026
(09-26-2026, 11:54 PM)KartyFan Wrote: NIL payments come both from universities directly and from third parties.
The point is that payments that fall under the House settlement cap paid by a university are not subject to fair-market value restrictions. The House settlement payments made by a university are limited by the $21.5M cap. Any payments above the cap must come from third parties and are subject to fair-market value restrictions.
The estimates that the Athletic published seem to indicate that Stanford's direct payments are close to the cap, but that third party NIL payments are still relatively small and in the bottom tier of the ACC.