[TriangleTree]

Those decrying paying college athletes are like those who believe the beatings should continue until morale improves.

The athletes are saying we work hard and take risks with our bodies so we want to get paid. Then the Ivory Tower types are like "let them eat cake" because if they eat a five star meal, it somehow bothers them? Why?!?!?!

Does Stanford not have to pay top dollar to professors that keep Stanford on top academically, and by extension maintain the equity of your Stanford education?  I mean just think if Stanford said "Pfft, we're not paying the top Astrophysicist researcher in the country $1M per year. Let them go to MIT where they are comfortable buying the best academic reputation. At Stanford, we want researchers to be here because they love to see cows grazing on our campus more than they want to earn as much as they can..."?

The whole psychosis against paying athletes to play for your entertainment, or in this case, just allowing them to get paid to perform for your entertainment when you aren't paying, simply baffles me.

Don’t think the astrophysics analogy works, that’s clearly well within the university mission and I think takes away from your argument.

The question of why anyone would be against players getting paid for our entertainment is obviously a good one, and I certainly want to keep an open mind. 
What I’m clear on is that I wouldn’t be supportive of a fully professional Stanford team for which education is no longer an objective. That seems inconsistent with my affiliation and rationale to support Stanford sports. I don’t follow minor league baseball or the XFL so not sure why I would want to follow a substandard professional league, even if they sport a Stanford logo on their hat.
Paying student athletes on a free agent, free market model does not automatically take us fully there, but it’s certainly a step closer. 

So I don’t find the concerns mind boggling at all. To be clear, I am well in support of student athletes getting compensated in some shape or form.  I find it obscene that coaches are  becoming multimillionaires and that there is an industry profiting immensely, all on the back of unpaid student athletes. I’m just naive enough to believe that there is a ton of good in college sports and that it creates opportunities for so many that would otherwise not exist. If this important transition is not well managed, it puts all of that at risk. 

There are some compensation models that I could live with and there are some that I think would put me off. Stanford will at some point have to make their own call.

[TriangleTree]

Those decrying paying college athletes are like those who believe the beatings should continue until morale improves.

The athletes are saying we work hard and take risks with our bodies so we want to get paid. Then the Ivory Tower types are like "let them eat cake" because if they eat a five star meal, it somehow bothers them? Why?!?!?!

Does Stanford not have to pay top dollar to professors that keep Stanford on top academically, and by extension maintain the equity of your Stanford education?  I mean just think if Stanford said "Pfft, we're not paying the top Astrophysicist researcher in the country $1M per year. Let them go to MIT where they are comfortable buying the best academic reputation. At Stanford, we want researchers to be here because they love to see cows grazing on our campus more than they want to earn as much as they can..."?

The whole psychosis against paying athletes to play for your entertainment, or in this case, just allowing them to get paid to perform for your entertainment when you aren't paying, simply baffles me.

Don’t think the astrophysics analogy works, that’s clearly well within the university mission and I think takes away from your argument.

The question of why anyone would be against players getting paid for our entertainment is obviously a good one, and I certainly want to keep an open mind. 
What I’m clear on is that I wouldn’t be supportive of a fully professional Stanford team for which education is no longer an objective. That seems inconsistent with my affiliation and rationale to support Stanford sports. I don’t follow minor league baseball or the XFL so not sure why I would want to follow a substandard professional league, even if they sport a Stanford logo on their hat.
Paying student athletes on a free agent, free market model does not automatically take us fully there, but it’s certainly a step closer. 

So I don’t find the concerns mind boggling at all. To be clear, I am well in support of student athletes getting compensated in some shape or form.  I find it obscene that coaches are  becoming multimillionaires and that there is an industry profiting immensely, all on the back of unpaid student athletes. I’m just naive enough to believe that there is a ton of good in college sports and that it creates opportunities for so many that would otherwise not exist. If this important transition is not well managed, it puts all of that at risk. 

There are some compensation models that I could live with and there are some that I think would put me off. Stanford will at some point have to make their own call.