[Goose]

I’ve said it before, but we don’t need to be part of this.  It is sad to me that when modern collegiate athletics runs cross current to our academic mission, we are so willing to bend the latter.

BC

Agree with you, BC.

I too agree with BC. The real question in my mind is "Can Stanford participate in modern collegiate athletics and not bend its academic mission? If it can, what does that entail?". One thing is certain. Stanford cannot prevent admitted students from entering the transfer portal. Stanford MAY be able to restrict students from accepting certain types of employment, but that is a longshot legal argument that would have all kinds of "issues". For all practical purposes that means Stanford students will be able to accept NIL contracts. Those two things are outside Stanford's control.

Everything else, such as travel schedules, admission standards, transfer admission policy etc. is under Stanford's control. Stanford historically has considered athletics as a factor in admissibility. What has changed over time is the weight of that factor. Do athletics "count" too much in Stanford's admissions policies, both for freshman and transfers, to the point it bends the academic standards "too far"? Stanford athletic teams always have traveled to some competitions. Today the problem is how far and how often is "too much"? Stanford has also changed some policies for athletic reasons, in particular allowing incoming freshmen to matriculate "early" in some cases. Is this policy change academically sub-optimal and if so by how much? These are all factors that are inside Stanford's control. The University can decide what is compatible with its academic mission and it clearly has the power to act accordingly.

The third thing that is outside Stanford's control is the business model of modern college athletics, particularly football and basketball. In order to compete at all, let alone successfully at the higher levels requires large amounts of capital, both for infrastructure and for personnel. Paying coaches many millions of dollars a year is now a necessity. Having the best facilities is also an expensive necessity. Financing this structure year over year places demands on the University that are at best extremely loosely connected to academics. In order to raise the income to operate Stanford had to join a "major" conference. The ACC was our only choice. That imposed constraints on travel that removed Stanford's ability to control travel frequency and distance. This "big business" requirement arguably forces Stanford to do many things that are NOT in the best interest of student education. It also requires time and attention from the University upper management. For me, this is absolutely a bridge too far. Stanford should not be a for-profit corporation heavily involved in the entertainment industry. That isn't its chartered purpose and does not attract me as a fan in any way.
 
IMO the business model is literally the elephant in the room that renders modern college athletics incompatible with Stanford's academic mission. This will only become "worse" if the House settlement forces Universities to pay the athletes. The total removal of the amateur aspect of athletics removes the last arguments that college sports "builds character" etc. At least in theory, if not in practice, NIL is not connected with athletic participation or performance. A salary from the University for playing clearly is. That constrains the University to largely ignore the academic aspects of the student-athlete's "career" in favor of his current "job". I see no way participating in this system could be compatible with the academic purpose of ANY University, let alone Stanford.

[Goose]

I’ve said it before, but we don’t need to be part of this.  It is sad to me that when modern collegiate athletics runs cross current to our academic mission, we are so willing to bend the latter.

BC

Agree with you, BC.

I too agree with BC. The real question in my mind is "Can Stanford participate in modern collegiate athletics and not bend its academic mission? If it can, what does that entail?". One thing is certain. Stanford cannot prevent admitted students from entering the transfer portal. Stanford MAY be able to restrict students from accepting certain types of employment, but that is a longshot legal argument that would have all kinds of "issues". For all practical purposes that means Stanford students will be able to accept NIL contracts. Those two things are outside Stanford's control.

Everything else, such as travel schedules, admission standards, transfer admission policy etc. is under Stanford's control. Stanford historically has considered athletics as a factor in admissibility. What has changed over time is the weight of that factor. Do athletics "count" too much in Stanford's admissions policies, both for freshman and transfers, to the point it bends the academic standards "too far"? Stanford athletic teams always have traveled to some competitions. Today the problem is how far and how often is "too much"? Stanford has also changed some policies for athletic reasons, in particular allowing incoming freshmen to matriculate "early" in some cases. Is this policy change academically sub-optimal and if so by how much? These are all factors that are inside Stanford's control. The University can decide what is compatible with its academic mission and it clearly has the power to act accordingly.

The third thing that is outside Stanford's control is the business model of modern college athletics, particularly football and basketball. In order to compete at all, let alone successfully at the higher levels requires large amounts of capital, both for infrastructure and for personnel. Paying coaches many millions of dollars a year is now a necessity. Having the best facilities is also an expensive necessity. Financing this structure year over year places demands on the University that are at best extremely loosely connected to academics. In order to raise the income to operate Stanford had to join a "major" conference. The ACC was our only choice. That imposed constraints on travel that removed Stanford's ability to control travel frequency and distance. This "big business" requirement arguably forces Stanford to do many things that are NOT in the best interest of student education. It also requires time and attention from the University upper management. For me, this is absolutely a bridge too far. Stanford should not be a for-profit corporation heavily involved in the entertainment industry. That isn't its chartered purpose and does not attract me as a fan in any way.
 
IMO the business model is literally the elephant in the room that renders modern college athletics incompatible with Stanford's academic mission. This will only become "worse" if the House settlement forces Universities to pay the athletes. The total removal of the amateur aspect of athletics removes the last arguments that college sports "builds character" etc. At least in theory, if not in practice, NIL is not connected with athletic participation or performance. A salary from the University for playing clearly is. That constrains the University to largely ignore the academic aspects of the student-athlete's "career" in favor of his current "job". I see no way participating in this system could be compatible with the academic purpose of ANY University, let alone Stanford.