[BillBradley]

So there is a lot more upside to our still developing younger players than to our graduating class, which has shown us all they have.  Umeh, too, is doing well but is a freshman.  We will get an enormous influx of talent next year--but they (of course) will all be freshmen.  Even if Paye installs a simpler offense over the summer, I think we are probably looking at 2026-27 before we get back to dominant form.  Any maybe we never will if our best player gets purchased away from us each year.

Question:  Which would you (and others) prefer?
1) Stanford "sells its soul", offers $1M in NIL (just making that up) and keeps Nunu.
2) Stanford "sticks to it's principles", only offers $400K, and Nunu goes to USC. 

I know both of those options make many throw up a little, but is there a preference? Assuming Nunu is going to do what's in her own best interest, is there even a 3rd option?

The ‘Principle’ here is that failing to pay Nunu what the market says she is worth , after allowing for the  perceived  value of a Stanford degree to Nunu vs a USC degree, is not principled at all. That will only work as long as Nunu doesn’t understand the market.

Yes, that's a good way to model the offer. But lets look at that math...Nunu has 2 more years of eligibility. So if USC does offer $1M in the example, and Stanford offers $400K plus the perceived value of a Stanford degree vs. a USC degree, then the decision is actually:
USC = $2M plus USC degree. 
Stanford = $800K plus Stanford degree.

[BillBradley]

So there is a lot more upside to our still developing younger players than to our graduating class, which has shown us all they have.  Umeh, too, is doing well but is a freshman.  We will get an enormous influx of talent next year--but they (of course) will all be freshmen.  Even if Paye installs a simpler offense over the summer, I think we are probably looking at 2026-27 before we get back to dominant form.  Any maybe we never will if our best player gets purchased away from us each year.

Question:  Which would you (and others) prefer?
1) Stanford "sells its soul", offers $1M in NIL (just making that up) and keeps Nunu.
2) Stanford "sticks to it's principles", only offers $400K, and Nunu goes to USC. 

I know both of those options make many throw up a little, but is there a preference? Assuming Nunu is going to do what's in her own best interest, is there even a 3rd option?

The ‘Principle’ here is that failing to pay Nunu what the market says she is worth , after allowing for the  perceived  value of a Stanford degree to Nunu vs a USC degree, is not principled at all. That will only work as long as Nunu doesn’t understand the market.

Yes, that's a good way to model the offer. But lets look at that math...Nunu has 2 more years of eligibility. So if USC does offer $1M in the example, and Stanford offers $400K plus the perceived value of a Stanford degree vs. a USC degree, then the decision is actually:
USC = $2M plus USC degree. 
Stanford = $800K plus Stanford degree.