[lex24]

The 40-year decision is essentially meaningless today. Kaput. The kind of football athletes that drive a successful program, some of whom Stanford would attract in sufficient numbers in the past, pay no attention today to the next 40 years. They want to succeed right now, under the tutelage of the best football minds and conditions (that, in case you haven't noticed, Stanford no longer has) to see how far they can go. NOW. Big bowls, big awards, and BIG MONEY. The Harbaugh-effect gave us a taste of this recently, but it was short-lived and temporary and unsustainable--as we now know. I struggle see a future in which Cardinal Football even returns to .500, let alone to relevance in the brave new world. As others have noted, this is slow-death to Stanford given the  business model for its sprawling athletics. Not to mention the hapless leadership therein, which is a whole other sad tale. We've landed in the worst of all worlds. Who'd-a-thunk-it in the afterglow of that Iowa Rose Bowl?

Question:  would you (and others) be satisfied with essentially what they had in the 70s - a team that would generally be a bit above  500 and occasionally knock off a big foe? And then once in a while being in a position to challenge for the conference.

[lex24]

The 40-year decision is essentially meaningless today. Kaput. The kind of football athletes that drive a successful program, some of whom Stanford would attract in sufficient numbers in the past, pay no attention today to the next 40 years. They want to succeed right now, under the tutelage of the best football minds and conditions (that, in case you haven't noticed, Stanford no longer has) to see how far they can go. NOW. Big bowls, big awards, and BIG MONEY. The Harbaugh-effect gave us a taste of this recently, but it was short-lived and temporary and unsustainable--as we now know. I struggle see a future in which Cardinal Football even returns to .500, let alone to relevance in the brave new world. As others have noted, this is slow-death to Stanford given the  business model for its sprawling athletics. Not to mention the hapless leadership therein, which is a whole other sad tale. We've landed in the worst of all worlds. Who'd-a-thunk-it in the afterglow of that Iowa Rose Bowl?

Question:  would you (and others) be satisfied with essentially what they had in the 70s - a team that would generally be a bit above  500 and occasionally knock off a big foe? And then once in a while being in a position to challenge for the conference.