[82lsju]

The solution is money, lots of money, and the brains to spend it wisely, but out of ignorance and a desire to think more robustly on this, let me ask:

1. If we get a transformational QB for $4 million, how many English professors lose their jobs? Are these even connected?
2. I understand the University is subsidizing the AD due to the crappy ACC payouts. What percent of the AD's operating budget does that represent? What percent of the University's operating budget?
3. If Bradford Freeman wasn't giving $50 million to the football program, would he give it instead to the English Department? Or maybe the Econ Department?
4. How many Bradford Freeman are out there? My impression is that the donor class floats the boat, not the University.
5. Aside from me caring about football more than any other sport, is there a model for Stanford to be good at sports without football? I really don't want football just there doing whatever only so that Stanford avoids the WCC.

1.  Maybe indirectly, the AD can pay out ~$20m to athletes so they can presumably spend it how they want to (is this an incremental $20m of spend?   I think so which may impact University funding to the AD (see item 2).  If it is outside money not from the AD (e.g., NIL) then likely not
2.  in 2023-24 (still pac-12 TV money) the AD annual report shows "university support" as ~33% of ~$144m so ~$47m, which is likely higher  in 2024-25 and following years with the lower ACC TV money
3.  who knows, he and his business partner did also fund the Freeman-Spogli Institute so maybe he has diverse interests.  He appears to be ~83 years old so maybe is looking to leave a legacy....
4.  It depends on if you are looking for rich ex-football players, rich people with an interest in football, rich alums in general
5.  I'd would not be surprised with the lower ACC TV payout if the football team could be losing money given they have a very high burn rate (and yes some of their costs are covered by endowment payouts (e.g., scholarships for many players, at least part of several coaches salaries)), several of the "Olympic" sports have been raising endowed funding since their "moment of truth" when the University was going to cut them, I would guess those parts of the endowment are pretty restrictive in their use..... 

I still think Stanford football's last, best hope is that one of the eventual "Power 2" conferences wants some teams in the Pacific and Mountain time zone and we could be one....and one of the "Power 2" already has four of them....

[82lsju]

The solution is money, lots of money, and the brains to spend it wisely, but out of ignorance and a desire to think more robustly on this, let me ask:

1. If we get a transformational QB for $4 million, how many English professors lose their jobs? Are these even connected?
2. I understand the University is subsidizing the AD due to the crappy ACC payouts. What percent of the AD's operating budget does that represent? What percent of the University's operating budget?
3. If Bradford Freeman wasn't giving $50 million to the football program, would he give it instead to the English Department? Or maybe the Econ Department?
4. How many Bradford Freeman are out there? My impression is that the donor class floats the boat, not the University.
5. Aside from me caring about football more than any other sport, is there a model for Stanford to be good at sports without football? I really don't want football just there doing whatever only so that Stanford avoids the WCC.

1.  Maybe indirectly, the AD can pay out ~$20m to athletes so they can presumably spend it how they want to (is this an incremental $20m of spend?   I think so which may impact University funding to the AD (see item 2).  If it is outside money not from the AD (e.g., NIL) then likely not
2.  in 2023-24 (still pac-12 TV money) the AD annual report shows "university support" as ~33% of ~$144m so ~$47m, which is likely higher  in 2024-25 and following years with the lower ACC TV money
3.  who knows, he and his business partner did also fund the Freeman-Spogli Institute so maybe he has diverse interests.  He appears to be ~83 years old so maybe is looking to leave a legacy....
4.  It depends on if you are looking for rich ex-football players, rich people with an interest in football, rich alums in general
5.  I'd would not be surprised with the lower ACC TV payout if the football team could be losing money given they have a very high burn rate (and yes some of their costs are covered by endowment payouts (e.g., scholarships for many players, at least part of several coaches salaries)), several of the "Olympic" sports have been raising endowed funding since their "moment of truth" when the University was going to cut them, I would guess those parts of the endowment are pretty restrictive in their use..... 

I still think Stanford football's last, best hope is that one of the eventual "Power 2" conferences wants some teams in the Pacific and Mountain time zone and we could be one....and one of the "Power 2" already has four of them....