[BillBradley]

@Goose, @Pete 

Trying to understand, but I'm still not following the "corruption" argument or the cheat-on-taxes analogy. I think it's one thing to say "I don't think the athletes should be compensated". If that's where we are, then fine - we can agree to disagree. And again, we should quit the discussions about the mechanism because you don't agree philosophically. Or are you saying "I'm OK with athletes being compensated, but Stanford needs to stay out of the NIL game because it's by definition corrupt now that it's become pay-for-play". 

In my mind, if you are in the camp that supports athlete compensation, then what does it matter if it's pay-for-play or not? You don't like the free agency/bidding war aspect of it because then it feels to much like the professional leagues and that's just too far? 

Just trying to understand.

Also, side point - one of the drivers of an NIL approach is that there is a recognition that athletes deliver various levels of value. There's a big difference between Caitlin Clark and what she's done for the University of Iowa vs. some other random athlete at the University of Iowa. And I think Kiki deserves to be rewarded after her last season. Linking back to the value she delivered to Stanford....Every Pac12 channel interview, Sportscenter clip, Instagram highlight, YouTube reels, etc. have the word "Stanford" on her jersey and the university does benefit from that image. It is the wild wild west right now, but that's a big point and it shouldn't get lost in the madness.

[BillBradley]

@Goose, @Pete 

Trying to understand, but I'm still not following the "corruption" argument or the cheat-on-taxes analogy. I think it's one thing to say "I don't think the athletes should be compensated". If that's where we are, then fine - we can agree to disagree. And again, we should quit the discussions about the mechanism because you don't agree philosophically. Or are you saying "I'm OK with athletes being compensated, but Stanford needs to stay out of the NIL game because it's by definition corrupt now that it's become pay-for-play". 

In my mind, if you are in the camp that supports athlete compensation, then what does it matter if it's pay-for-play or not? You don't like the free agency/bidding war aspect of it because then it feels to much like the professional leagues and that's just too far? 

Just trying to understand.

Also, side point - one of the drivers of an NIL approach is that there is a recognition that athletes deliver various levels of value. There's a big difference between Caitlin Clark and what she's done for the University of Iowa vs. some other random athlete at the University of Iowa. And I think Kiki deserves to be rewarded after her last season. Linking back to the value she delivered to Stanford....Every Pac12 channel interview, Sportscenter clip, Instagram highlight, YouTube reels, etc. have the word "Stanford" on her jersey and the university does benefit from that image. It is the wild wild west right now, but that's a big point and it shouldn't get lost in the madness.