[gailtate]

https://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/what-actually...13,%202021

[gailtate]

https://hbswk.hbs.edu/item/what-actually...13,%202021

[Austroturf]

Hmmmm, call me simple-minded, but I want Ws.  I don't know any fan who tires of them.

[Austroturf]

Hmmmm, call me simple-minded, but I want Ws.  I don't know any fan who tires of them.

[82lsju]

Hmmmm, call me simple-minded, but I want Ws.  I don't know any fan who tires of them.

yes but do you like showing up/watching the Ws when they are against Sac State, or UC Davis, or William & Mary, or Colgate when we are expected to win by a lot?

[82lsju]

Hmmmm, call me simple-minded, but I want Ws.  I don't know any fan who tires of them.

yes but do you like showing up/watching the Ws when they are against Sac State, or UC Davis, or William & Mary, or Colgate when we are expected to win by a lot?

[ColoradoTree]

The conclusion seems pretty logical as an expression of what drives moderate/casual fan interest. Diehard fans will watch or buy tickets either way, but if you like a sport or a team well enough but you're not crazy about it, what's going to get you to the stadium is the sense that you're buying a few hours of good entertainment, and close games are fun and exciting. 

And yes, as a fan of my teams, I just want wins. But the article seems to be asking what gets folks to show up in the first place, and it makes plenty of sense that, on average, a perceived close, competitive game would put more butts in the seats than a game perceived as one-sided. For me, I live in Colorado but I didn't grow up here, so I'm not a fan of the local professional teams. If I'm going to buy tickets to an Avs/Nuggets/Rockies game, it's going to be for what I think will be a really good game or where there's some other special aspect about the game that will draw me in (e.g., my favorite team is in town, a really good team with lots of stars is coming to town and it's always exciting to watch the very best do their thing, or there's a milestone or something else historic in play).

And 82, that's a good point. I obviously love Stanford sports or I wouldn't be on this board, but assuming I lived in the Bay Area, if I'm going to devote a fall Saturday to attending a game in person, it's going to be for a game that's expected to be exciting. We have a lot of competing demands for our entertainment dollars and our precious free time, so before I commit to buying increasingly expensive tickets, I want to have some level of confidence that I'm getting a good deal for my money.

[ColoradoTree]

The conclusion seems pretty logical as an expression of what drives moderate/casual fan interest. Diehard fans will watch or buy tickets either way, but if you like a sport or a team well enough but you're not crazy about it, what's going to get you to the stadium is the sense that you're buying a few hours of good entertainment, and close games are fun and exciting. 

And yes, as a fan of my teams, I just want wins. But the article seems to be asking what gets folks to show up in the first place, and it makes plenty of sense that, on average, a perceived close, competitive game would put more butts in the seats than a game perceived as one-sided. For me, I live in Colorado but I didn't grow up here, so I'm not a fan of the local professional teams. If I'm going to buy tickets to an Avs/Nuggets/Rockies game, it's going to be for what I think will be a really good game or where there's some other special aspect about the game that will draw me in (e.g., my favorite team is in town, a really good team with lots of stars is coming to town and it's always exciting to watch the very best do their thing, or there's a milestone or something else historic in play).

And 82, that's a good point. I obviously love Stanford sports or I wouldn't be on this board, but assuming I lived in the Bay Area, if I'm going to devote a fall Saturday to attending a game in person, it's going to be for a game that's expected to be exciting. We have a lot of competing demands for our entertainment dollars and our precious free time, so before I commit to buying increasingly expensive tickets, I want to have some level of confidence that I'm getting a good deal for my money.

[Austroturf]

Hmmmm, call me simple-minded, but I want Ws.  I don't know any fan who tires of them.

yes but do you like showing up/watching the Ws when they are against Sac State, or UC Davis, or William & Mary, or Colgate when we are expected to win by a lot?

Good point.  I am assuming Ws against the same schedule we currently play (Oregon, Notre Dame, USC, Washington, Cal, UCLA, etc.).  If all the Ws come against pushovers, it does get old.

[Austroturf]

Hmmmm, call me simple-minded, but I want Ws.  I don't know any fan who tires of them.

yes but do you like showing up/watching the Ws when they are against Sac State, or UC Davis, or William & Mary, or Colgate when we are expected to win by a lot?

Good point.  I am assuming Ws against the same schedule we currently play (Oregon, Notre Dame, USC, Washington, Cal, UCLA, etc.).  If all the Ws come against pushovers, it does get old.

[OutsiderFan]

I remember studying this in grad school in the 1990s. That uncertainly of outcome drives sports interest has been known for a while. This is why the NFL has created so much parity that drives ratings. The NFL owners cartel knows rising tides lift all boats.

If only a super majority of Americans understood this. Now you know why conservative right wing think tanks and propaganda exists. Those with wealth don't want the masses to know this. Better to keep them fighting amongst each other so they can never organize and get wealth back for themselves.

[OutsiderFan]

I remember studying this in grad school in the 1990s. That uncertainly of outcome drives sports interest has been known for a while. This is why the NFL has created so much parity that drives ratings. The NFL owners cartel knows rising tides lift all boats.

If only a super majority of Americans understood this. Now you know why conservative right wing think tanks and propaganda exists. Those with wealth don't want the masses to know this. Better to keep them fighting amongst each other so they can never organize and get wealth back for themselves.

[Mick]

Hmmmm, call me simple-minded, but I want Ws.  I don't know any fan who tires of them.

yes but do you like showing up/watching the Ws when they are against Sac State, or UC Davis, or William & Mary, or Colgate when we are expected to win by a lot?

Good point.  I am assuming Ws against the same schedule we currently play (Oregon, Notre Dame, USC, Washington, Cal, UCLA, etc.).  If all the Ws come against pushovers, it does get old.

I don't enjoy any game where I can leave at the end of the first quarter and know the outcome.

[Mick]

Hmmmm, call me simple-minded, but I want Ws.  I don't know any fan who tires of them.

yes but do you like showing up/watching the Ws when they are against Sac State, or UC Davis, or William & Mary, or Colgate when we are expected to win by a lot?

Good point.  I am assuming Ws against the same schedule we currently play (Oregon, Notre Dame, USC, Washington, Cal, UCLA, etc.).  If all the Ws come against pushovers, it does get old.

I don't enjoy any game where I can leave at the end of the first quarter and know the outcome.

[Snorlax94]

Hmmmm, call me simple-minded, but I want Ws.  I don't know any fan who tires of them.

yes but do you like showing up/watching the Ws when they are against Sac State, or UC Davis, or William & Mary, or Colgate when we are expected to win by a lot?

I don't think this article necessarily applies to Stanford -- if this held true, the Pac-12 (the most evenly matched Power 5 conference where teams beat each other up every year) would have the highest attendance of the Power 5, but it has the lowest.

If *all* the wins were to UC Davis, that would be one thing, but within the context of the Pac-12, assuming 9 of your games are against Pac-12 teams, I have argued that more local opponents, with fewer coming from the Power 5, clearly works (IE, Alabama hosting the Mercer Bears and flying in New Mexico State).

If Stanford played San Jose State and Fresno State each year, there would be enough suspense, and the teams would have more time to rest and prepare because they wouldn't be travelling across the country, they wouldn't lose a day of practice in travel, they would never have jet lag, they'd never whine about the 9AM game, they'd be closer to their medical facilities in terms of recovery and treatment, the students would have more time to study/enjoy the campus life instead of travelling, and, probably, there would be fewer injuries playing fewer Power 5 teams. And the key is that these benefits don't just help you with that one game, they help you win more games the entire season.

Stanford has been trying to get money at every end. They want the bigger $ from a bigger TV audience stacking their schedule with out-of-conference opponents like UCF and K State. But then they're jetlagged, they get beat up, and they get injured for the whole season. They played Sacramento State in 2010, and San Jose State in 2011 and 2012. In 2013, Stanford sold out of season tickets for the first (and only?) time. Winning works.

Part of the mess of 2019 was flying out to UCF, which was a total disaster in every way. Part of the success of 2020 -- even as "Road Dogs" -- was probably staying on the west coast while playing only conference games.

[Snorlax94]

Hmmmm, call me simple-minded, but I want Ws.  I don't know any fan who tires of them.

yes but do you like showing up/watching the Ws when they are against Sac State, or UC Davis, or William & Mary, or Colgate when we are expected to win by a lot?

I don't think this article necessarily applies to Stanford -- if this held true, the Pac-12 (the most evenly matched Power 5 conference where teams beat each other up every year) would have the highest attendance of the Power 5, but it has the lowest.

If *all* the wins were to UC Davis, that would be one thing, but within the context of the Pac-12, assuming 9 of your games are against Pac-12 teams, I have argued that more local opponents, with fewer coming from the Power 5, clearly works (IE, Alabama hosting the Mercer Bears and flying in New Mexico State).

If Stanford played San Jose State and Fresno State each year, there would be enough suspense, and the teams would have more time to rest and prepare because they wouldn't be travelling across the country, they wouldn't lose a day of practice in travel, they would never have jet lag, they'd never whine about the 9AM game, they'd be closer to their medical facilities in terms of recovery and treatment, the students would have more time to study/enjoy the campus life instead of travelling, and, probably, there would be fewer injuries playing fewer Power 5 teams. And the key is that these benefits don't just help you with that one game, they help you win more games the entire season.

Stanford has been trying to get money at every end. They want the bigger $ from a bigger TV audience stacking their schedule with out-of-conference opponents like UCF and K State. But then they're jetlagged, they get beat up, and they get injured for the whole season. They played Sacramento State in 2010, and San Jose State in 2011 and 2012. In 2013, Stanford sold out of season tickets for the first (and only?) time. Winning works.

Part of the mess of 2019 was flying out to UCF, which was a total disaster in every way. Part of the success of 2020 -- even as "Road Dogs" -- was probably staying on the west coast while playing only conference games.

[Papa John]

If Stanford wants to recruit nationally, it (thinks it) needs to play a national schedule. Notre Dame is not enough, so we have to schedule teams in the South, Northeast and Midwest as well.

Since 2008, we have always played at least one nonconference game outside of the Pac-12 footprint--in 2016 we played Rice in Australia! Looking forward we have:
2022--at Notre Dame
2023--at Hawaii
2024--at Notre Dame
2025--at Hawaii
2026--Two home nonconference games, away nonconference game unknown
2027--at TCU
2028--at Boston College

[Papa John]

If Stanford wants to recruit nationally, it (thinks it) needs to play a national schedule. Notre Dame is not enough, so we have to schedule teams in the South, Northeast and Midwest as well.

Since 2008, we have always played at least one nonconference game outside of the Pac-12 footprint--in 2016 we played Rice in Australia! Looking forward we have:
2022--at Notre Dame
2023--at Hawaii
2024--at Notre Dame
2025--at Hawaii
2026--Two home nonconference games, away nonconference game unknown
2027--at TCU
2028--at Boston College

[82lsju]

I'm assuming the ND series is renewed so I added them below, I would prefer to replace them with a series of home and home games with other Power 5 teams.

I'm also not sure the two trips to Hawaii in three years does a lot for recruiting

we also have the future games vs BYU (assuming they don't get eliminated with the Pac-12/Big10/ACC scheduling deal

Stanford vs. BYU eight-game series
Nov. 28, 2020 at Stanford - which did not happen
Nov. 26, 2022 at Stanford
Sept. 13, 2025 at BYU
Nov. 28, 2026 at Stanford*
Nov. 25, 2028 at Stanford*
Sept. 1, 2029 at BYU
Aug. 30, 2031 at BYU*
Sept. 1, 2035 at BYU* 
*Games added through extension

https://gostanford.com/news/2020/1/29/fo...ended.aspx 

If Stanford wants to recruit nationally, it (thinks it) needs to play a national schedule. Notre Dame is not enough, so we have to schedule teams in the South, Northeast and Midwest as well.

Since 2008, we have always played at least one nonconference game outside of the Pac-12 footprint--in 2016 we played Rice in Australia! Looking forward we have:

2022--at Notre Dame
2023--at Hawaii
2024--at Notre Dame
2025--at Hawaii, at BYU
2026--Two home nonconference games, away nonconference game unknown - likely at ND
2027--at TCU
2028--at Boston College, likely at ND

[82lsju]

I'm assuming the ND series is renewed so I added them below, I would prefer to replace them with a series of home and home games with other Power 5 teams.

I'm also not sure the two trips to Hawaii in three years does a lot for recruiting

we also have the future games vs BYU (assuming they don't get eliminated with the Pac-12/Big10/ACC scheduling deal

Stanford vs. BYU eight-game series
Nov. 28, 2020 at Stanford - which did not happen
Nov. 26, 2022 at Stanford
Sept. 13, 2025 at BYU
Nov. 28, 2026 at Stanford*
Nov. 25, 2028 at Stanford*
Sept. 1, 2029 at BYU
Aug. 30, 2031 at BYU*
Sept. 1, 2035 at BYU* 
*Games added through extension

https://gostanford.com/news/2020/1/29/fo...ended.aspx 

If Stanford wants to recruit nationally, it (thinks it) needs to play a national schedule. Notre Dame is not enough, so we have to schedule teams in the South, Northeast and Midwest as well.

Since 2008, we have always played at least one nonconference game outside of the Pac-12 footprint--in 2016 we played Rice in Australia! Looking forward we have:

2022--at Notre Dame
2023--at Hawaii
2024--at Notre Dame
2025--at Hawaii, at BYU
2026--Two home nonconference games, away nonconference game unknown - likely at ND
2027--at TCU
2028--at Boston College, likely at ND

[lex24]

I remember studying this in grad school in the 1990s. That uncertainly of outcome drives sports interest has been known for a while. This is why the NFL has created so much parity that drives ratings. The NFL owners cartel knows rising tides lift all boats.

If only a super majority of Americans understood this. Now you know why conservative right wing think tanks and propaganda exists. Those with wealth don't want the masses to know this. Better to keep them fighting amongst each other so they can never organize and get wealth back for themselves.

I thought political comments are a no-no. But thank you for your learned comment. I’m impressed, as always.

[lex24]

I remember studying this in grad school in the 1990s. That uncertainly of outcome drives sports interest has been known for a while. This is why the NFL has created so much parity that drives ratings. The NFL owners cartel knows rising tides lift all boats.

If only a super majority of Americans understood this. Now you know why conservative right wing think tanks and propaganda exists. Those with wealth don't want the masses to know this. Better to keep them fighting amongst each other so they can never organize and get wealth back for themselves.

I thought political comments are a no-no. But thank you for your learned comment. I’m impressed, as always.

[BostonCard]

That is correct, Lex.  OF, I have no idea why you thought the second paragraph was remotely relevant to Stanford sports or appropriate for this board.

BC

[BostonCard]

That is correct, Lex.  OF, I have no idea why you thought the second paragraph was remotely relevant to Stanford sports or appropriate for this board.

BC

[magnus]

Speaking of the 90s weren't the Braves struggling to fill their 1st round playoffs seats in the second half of their decade long run?

[magnus]

Speaking of the 90s weren't the Braves struggling to fill their 1st round playoffs seats in the second half of their decade long run?

[Snorlax94]

If Stanford wants to recruit nationally, it (thinks it) needs to play a national schedule. Notre Dame is not enough, so we have to schedule teams in the South, Northeast and Midwest as well.

I know the AD’s reason is that they say it will help recruiting, but my question is — do you believe it? Do you think it helps recruiting, and do you think that is their real motive?

Beating Duke and maybe Rice may help, but losing to Northwestern doesn’t help and I doubt getting blown up by UCF is going to help recruiting there.

I’m honestly curious — I don’t know what the recruiting scene is like in all the farthest corners. Have those games been helping the recruiting?

[Snorlax94]

If Stanford wants to recruit nationally, it (thinks it) needs to play a national schedule. Notre Dame is not enough, so we have to schedule teams in the South, Northeast and Midwest as well.

I know the AD’s reason is that they say it will help recruiting, but my question is — do you believe it? Do you think it helps recruiting, and do you think that is their real motive?

Beating Duke and maybe Rice may help, but losing to Northwestern doesn’t help and I doubt getting blown up by UCF is going to help recruiting there.

I’m honestly curious — I don’t know what the recruiting scene is like in all the farthest corners. Have those games been helping the recruiting?

[JJJ]

I'm assuming the ND series is renewed so I added them below, I would prefer to replace them with a series of home and home games with other Power 5 teams.

I'm also not sure the two trips to Hawaii in three years does a lot for recruiting

we also have the future games vs BYU (assuming they don't get eliminated with the Pac-12/Big10/ACC scheduling deal

Stanford vs. BYU eight-game series
Nov. 28, 2020 at Stanford - which did not happen
Nov. 26, 2022 at Stanford
Sept. 13, 2025 at BYU
Nov. 28, 2026 at Stanford*
Nov. 25, 2028 at Stanford*
Sept. 1, 2029 at BYU
Aug. 30, 2031 at BYU*
Sept. 1, 2035 at BYU* 
*Games added through extension

https://gostanford.com/news/2020/1/29/fo...ended.aspx 

If Stanford wants to recruit nationally, it (thinks it) needs to play a national schedule. Notre Dame is not enough, so we have to schedule teams in the South, Northeast and Midwest as well.

Since 2008, we have always played at least one nonconference game outside of the Pac-12 footprint--in 2016 we played Rice in Australia! Looking forward we have:

2022--at Notre Dame
2023--at Hawaii
2024--at Notre Dame
2025--at Hawaii, at BYU
2026--Two home nonconference games, away nonconference game unknown - likely at ND
2027--at TCU
2028--at Boston College, likely at ND

It may not be what most fans want, or help incrementally more with recruiting, but I don’t think too many people affiliated with the program would be unhappy with two trips to Hawaii in three years. :)

[JJJ]

I'm assuming the ND series is renewed so I added them below, I would prefer to replace them with a series of home and home games with other Power 5 teams.

I'm also not sure the two trips to Hawaii in three years does a lot for recruiting

we also have the future games vs BYU (assuming they don't get eliminated with the Pac-12/Big10/ACC scheduling deal

Stanford vs. BYU eight-game series
Nov. 28, 2020 at Stanford - which did not happen
Nov. 26, 2022 at Stanford
Sept. 13, 2025 at BYU
Nov. 28, 2026 at Stanford*
Nov. 25, 2028 at Stanford*
Sept. 1, 2029 at BYU
Aug. 30, 2031 at BYU*
Sept. 1, 2035 at BYU* 
*Games added through extension

https://gostanford.com/news/2020/1/29/fo...ended.aspx 

If Stanford wants to recruit nationally, it (thinks it) needs to play a national schedule. Notre Dame is not enough, so we have to schedule teams in the South, Northeast and Midwest as well.

Since 2008, we have always played at least one nonconference game outside of the Pac-12 footprint--in 2016 we played Rice in Australia! Looking forward we have:

2022--at Notre Dame
2023--at Hawaii
2024--at Notre Dame
2025--at Hawaii, at BYU
2026--Two home nonconference games, away nonconference game unknown - likely at ND
2027--at TCU
2028--at Boston College, likely at ND

It may not be what most fans want, or help incrementally more with recruiting, but I don’t think too many people affiliated with the program would be unhappy with two trips to Hawaii in three years. :)

[Goose]

I’m honestly curious — I don’t know what the recruiting scene is like in all the farthest corners. Have those games been helping the recruiting?

I don't know, and I am going to say nobody objectively "knows". There is no practical way to compare playing these road games with not doing so. There are too many other factors that you can't hold constant. The coaches sometimes go watch high school games in the area we are visiting, which could help. There also may be a few benighted souls that don't have any idea Stanford exists. I would suggest that it is improbable these persons newly enlightened by our visit to the area are also probable recruits, but I certainly can't prove it. I think it is more "We need to do something, playing road games far from home is something".
I would argue the people who benefit the most from these games are the alumni and the players. Alumni that live far from Stanford can get  together locally and see "their" team in person (which they otherwise couldn't), and the players get a chance to do something different than  just slog through monotonous practices day after day. Granted, it requires some extra effort, but it may be well worth it. I would imagine if the players didn't much like these road games, that word would get out. It may not change anything, but it would be known. Since we don't hear that, I assume they are either in favor or neutral at worst.

[Goose]

I’m honestly curious — I don’t know what the recruiting scene is like in all the farthest corners. Have those games been helping the recruiting?

I don't know, and I am going to say nobody objectively "knows". There is no practical way to compare playing these road games with not doing so. There are too many other factors that you can't hold constant. The coaches sometimes go watch high school games in the area we are visiting, which could help. There also may be a few benighted souls that don't have any idea Stanford exists. I would suggest that it is improbable these persons newly enlightened by our visit to the area are also probable recruits, but I certainly can't prove it. I think it is more "We need to do something, playing road games far from home is something".
I would argue the people who benefit the most from these games are the alumni and the players. Alumni that live far from Stanford can get  together locally and see "their" team in person (which they otherwise couldn't), and the players get a chance to do something different than  just slog through monotonous practices day after day. Granted, it requires some extra effort, but it may be well worth it. I would imagine if the players didn't much like these road games, that word would get out. It may not change anything, but it would be known. Since we don't hear that, I assume they are either in favor or neutral at worst.

[slide]

Speaking of the 90s weren't the Braves struggling to fill their 1st round playoffs seats in the second half of their decade long run?

yup.  WS tickets were pretty easy to come by in those years as well.  also even with reduced seating at the new field (great venue for fans btw), all seats aren't filled.  I am not sure how uncommon though.  game 4 for Dodgers-Giants was 95% full.

[slide]

Speaking of the 90s weren't the Braves struggling to fill their 1st round playoffs seats in the second half of their decade long run?

yup.  WS tickets were pretty easy to come by in those years as well.  also even with reduced seating at the new field (great venue for fans btw), all seats aren't filled.  I am not sure how uncommon though.  game 4 for Dodgers-Giants was 95% full.

[82lsju]

It may not be what most fans want, or help incrementally more with recruiting, but I don’t think too many people affiliated with the program would be unhappy with two trips to Hawaii in three years. :)

maybe not if they fly there on Friday morning and fly back on Saturday night after the game....  

[82lsju]

It may not be what most fans want, or help incrementally more with recruiting, but I don’t think too many people affiliated with the program would be unhappy with two trips to Hawaii in three years. :)

maybe not if they fly there on Friday morning and fly back on Saturday night after the game....  

[BostonCard]

If Stanford wants to recruit nationally, it (thinks it) needs to play a national schedule. Notre Dame is not enough, so we have to schedule teams in the South, Northeast and Midwest as well.

I know the AD’s reason is that they say it will help recruiting, but my question is — do you believe it? Do you think it helps recruiting, and do you think that is their real motive?

Beating Duke and maybe Rice may help, but losing to Northwestern doesn’t help and I doubt getting blown up by UCF is going to help recruiting there.

I’m honestly curious — I don’t know what the recruiting scene is like in all the farthest corners. Have those games been helping the recruiting?

I think it is less about advertising, but more about marketing to recruits. You can tell a recruit from, say Dallas, that if they come to Stanford in the class of 2023, they will be able to play in front of their family and friends when we go to TCU in 2027.  I don't know how much that matters, but I know it is used.

BC

[BostonCard]

If Stanford wants to recruit nationally, it (thinks it) needs to play a national schedule. Notre Dame is not enough, so we have to schedule teams in the South, Northeast and Midwest as well.

I know the AD’s reason is that they say it will help recruiting, but my question is — do you believe it? Do you think it helps recruiting, and do you think that is their real motive?

Beating Duke and maybe Rice may help, but losing to Northwestern doesn’t help and I doubt getting blown up by UCF is going to help recruiting there.

I’m honestly curious — I don’t know what the recruiting scene is like in all the farthest corners. Have those games been helping the recruiting?

I think it is less about advertising, but more about marketing to recruits. You can tell a recruit from, say Dallas, that if they come to Stanford in the class of 2023, they will be able to play in front of their family and friends when we go to TCU in 2027.  I don't know how much that matters, but I know it is used.

BC

[82lsju]

If Stanford wants to recruit nationally, it (thinks it) needs to play a national schedule. Notre Dame is not enough, so we have to schedule teams in the South, Northeast and Midwest as well.

I know the AD’s reason is that they say it will help recruiting, but my question is — do you believe it? Do you think it helps recruiting, and do you think that is their real motive?

Beating Duke and maybe Rice may help, but losing to Northwestern doesn’t help and I doubt getting blown up by UCF is going to help recruiting there.

I’m honestly curious — I don’t know what the recruiting scene is like in all the farthest corners. Have those games been helping the recruiting?

I think it is less about advertising, but more about marketing to recruits. You can tell a recruit from, say Dallas, that if they come to Stanford in the class of 2023, they will be able to play in front of their family and friends when we go to TCU in 2027.  I don't know how much that matters, but I know it is used.

BC

so if it does matter then we seem to think northern Indiana, Hawaii, and Utah are real hotspots for recruiting based on our current non-conference away game schedules......

and that recruit from Texas in the fall of 2023 is probably planning on being in the NFL draft in 2027 so will miss the game at TCU....  

[82lsju]

If Stanford wants to recruit nationally, it (thinks it) needs to play a national schedule. Notre Dame is not enough, so we have to schedule teams in the South, Northeast and Midwest as well.

I know the AD’s reason is that they say it will help recruiting, but my question is — do you believe it? Do you think it helps recruiting, and do you think that is their real motive?

Beating Duke and maybe Rice may help, but losing to Northwestern doesn’t help and I doubt getting blown up by UCF is going to help recruiting there.

I’m honestly curious — I don’t know what the recruiting scene is like in all the farthest corners. Have those games been helping the recruiting?

I think it is less about advertising, but more about marketing to recruits. You can tell a recruit from, say Dallas, that if they come to Stanford in the class of 2023, they will be able to play in front of their family and friends when we go to TCU in 2027.  I don't know how much that matters, but I know it is used.

BC

so if it does matter then we seem to think northern Indiana, Hawaii, and Utah are real hotspots for recruiting based on our current non-conference away game schedules......

and that recruit from Texas in the fall of 2023 is probably planning on being in the NFL draft in 2027 so will miss the game at TCU....