07-09-2020, 01:49 PM
(07-08-2020, 07:55 PM)OutsiderFan Wrote: The Stanford statement about why cutting sports makes sense, comes off as “taking its ball and going home” when it can’t get the outcome it wants.
What about San Jose State? I’ve argued for years SJS should drop football because it has no chance to win at a high level. Then I read SJS supporters say having the team creates a certain esteem regardless of the fact they may never win.
Now here’s Stanford saying it will only compete in these sports if it can get another $200 million because it isn’t going to play unless it is funded to be a national championship contender in each sport OT plays. Meanwhile, SJS plays football in Tuscaloosa knowing it has zero chance to win.
Would you guys accept uncompetitive Stanford teams in exchange for having more of them? Or would you prefer only to pay top dollar for fewer sports capable of competing for national championships?
I think your question tees up the issue quite well. I come out differently than I think you do however. Stanford should not accept anything short of excellence in any thing it does. Excellence is what Stanford should be about.I don’t want a third rate Physics program or to be second rate in the arts. The world doesn’t need “average” graduate programs.
Obviously, you don’t measure over one year and you have to give programs a chance to improve. But in the end a program at Stanford has to be excellent.
I applaud Muir for recognizing that in the real world where even Stanford has finite resources , you have to apply the resources where you can succeed .. and you cannot in fact do it all. I have no way of second guessing his decisions but I’ll accept his competence unless given evidence to the contrary.
The $8m per year, which is part of a deficit , frees Stanford to invest the money where it feels it is needed most. Based on The President’s recent message, one of those needs is for 20 new professorial billets and large scale sensitivity training to combat the racism that has infected Stanford. It helps to accept these cuts if they can be seen as enabling other priorities. Again, I think we have to trust Stanford leadership to makes those resource allocation decisions.
