07-08-2020, 12:15 PM
the very definition of a gut punch.
Cal delenda est
(07-08-2020, 12:28 PM)81alum Wrote: The message indicated that only one other university fielded more teams than Stanford, but it did not say who it was. Does anyone know?
One of the disadvantages of Stanford being a private school is that we fans have no access to the athletics budget. Using the USA Today public database it is possible to know, for example, just how much money 10 of the 12 Pac 12 schools are losing, and why they are losing it. But for schools like Stanford and USC we fans really have no idea. That makes this more of a surprise than if we had been aware that the ICA budget had been underwater for years.
(07-08-2020, 12:28 PM)81alum Wrote: The message indicated that only one other university fielded more teams than Stanford, but it did not say who it was. Does anyone know?
One of the disadvantages of Stanford being a private school is that we fans have no access to the athletics budget. Using the USA Today public database it is possible to know, for example, just how much money 10 of the 12 Pac 12 schools are losing, and why they are losing it. But for schools like Stanford and USC we fans really have no idea. That makes this more of a surprise than if we had been aware that the ICA budget had been underwater for years.
(07-08-2020, 12:38 PM)Canalejas Wrote:(07-08-2020, 12:28 PM)81alum Wrote: The message indicated that only one other university fielded more teams than Stanford, but it did not say who it was. Does anyone know?
One of the disadvantages of Stanford being a private school is that we fans have no access to the athletics budget. Using the USA Today public database it is possible to know, for example, just how much money 10 of the 12 Pac 12 schools are losing, and why they are losing it. But for schools like Stanford and USC we fans really have no idea. That makes this more of a surprise than if we had been aware that the ICA budget had been underwater for years.
I believe it's Ohio State. Wikipedia lists them as having 37 varsity sports. Harvard has 42, but as they are non-scholarship I'm not sure we ever compared our numbers to theirs.
(07-08-2020, 12:38 PM)Canalejas Wrote:(07-08-2020, 12:28 PM)81alum Wrote: The message indicated that only one other university fielded more teams than Stanford, but it did not say who it was. Does anyone know?
One of the disadvantages of Stanford being a private school is that we fans have no access to the athletics budget. Using the USA Today public database it is possible to know, for example, just how much money 10 of the 12 Pac 12 schools are losing, and why they are losing it. But for schools like Stanford and USC we fans really have no idea. That makes this more of a surprise than if we had been aware that the ICA budget had been underwater for years.
I believe it's Ohio State. Wikipedia lists them as having 37 varsity sports. Harvard has 42, but as they are non-scholarship I'm not sure we ever compared our numbers to theirs.
(07-08-2020, 12:09 PM)Farm93 Wrote: Of the group only Men's volleyball is a shock, and I hope it would stay since most those that play the sport are in CA. Hopefully we can have a Cal Baseball style effort to keep it going.
Quote:[b]6. If donors step forward, can any of these sports retain their varsity status?[/b]
(07-08-2020, 12:09 PM)Farm93 Wrote: Of the group only Men's volleyball is a shock, and I hope it would stay since most those that play the sport are in CA. Hopefully we can have a Cal Baseball style effort to keep it going.
Quote:[b]6. If donors step forward, can any of these sports retain their varsity status?[/b]
![[Image: iJrf0VB.png]](https://i.imgur.com/iJrf0VB.png)
![[Image: iJrf0VB.png]](https://i.imgur.com/iJrf0VB.png)
(07-08-2020, 12:22 PM)JustAnotherFan Wrote:That's likely true. The CTE thing is really driving away smart parents with smart kids. If Stanford is still playing football in 2040 I will be amazed.(07-08-2020, 12:09 PM)Farm93 Wrote: If/when Stanford returns to a decade of 4-8, 5-7, 6-6, 7-5 type seasons, a rate aligned to our historic averages, the AD's budget would simply be too bloated.
And that decade is called the 2020s. At least we will be undefeated this fall.
(07-08-2020, 12:22 PM)JustAnotherFan Wrote:That's likely true. The CTE thing is really driving away smart parents with smart kids. If Stanford is still playing football in 2040 I will be amazed.(07-08-2020, 12:09 PM)Farm93 Wrote: If/when Stanford returns to a decade of 4-8, 5-7, 6-6, 7-5 type seasons, a rate aligned to our historic averages, the AD's budget would simply be too bloated.
And that decade is called the 2020s. At least we will be undefeated this fall.
(07-08-2020, 10:46 AM)teejers1 Wrote:(07-08-2020, 10:38 AM)Mick Wrote: I'm devastated. While I recognize financial reality, it saddens me beyond belief that Stanford can't support all of those supports. It's a genuine shame. But we don't sell enough football or MVB tickets, so something had to go.
20 national championships. 27 Olympic medals.
So they're keeping softball and eliminating men's volleyball. Makes all the sense in the world.
Mick, you know it's not acceptable to criticize Shaw and his boring/underperforming offense ==> unmet potential and lagging ticket sales/revenue for the AD. We all "know" he is the best football coach since . . . like ever!
Fortunately, he doesn't command a big salar . . . um . . . never mind.
And in fairness, men's basketball ticket sales haven't been good, either (though I suspect the trend line on that is up while for football it continues down).
(07-08-2020, 10:46 AM)teejers1 Wrote:(07-08-2020, 10:38 AM)Mick Wrote: I'm devastated. While I recognize financial reality, it saddens me beyond belief that Stanford can't support all of those supports. It's a genuine shame. But we don't sell enough football or MVB tickets, so something had to go.
20 national championships. 27 Olympic medals.
So they're keeping softball and eliminating men's volleyball. Makes all the sense in the world.
Mick, you know it's not acceptable to criticize Shaw and his boring/underperforming offense ==> unmet potential and lagging ticket sales/revenue for the AD. We all "know" he is the best football coach since . . . like ever!
Fortunately, he doesn't command a big salar . . . um . . . never mind.
And in fairness, men's basketball ticket sales haven't been good, either (though I suspect the trend line on that is up while for football it continues down).