Canady - Printable Version
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Canady (/thread-25025.html)
+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: Canady (/thread-25025.html)
RE: Hieronymus - GK3 - 07-25-2024
(07-24-2024, 10:06 PM)Hieronymus Wrote: I have to admit this seems like a general fail in decision making to me. If Canady wanted to maximize the dollars, she should have transferred a year earlier. Same if it was a school culture issue or a problem with being too far from home. If she wanted the Stanford degree, she needed to stick it out another year at Stanford. If she wanted a better chance at a championship, Texas Tech ain’t it. It’s not my decision, but I don’t really get it. It didn’t maximize anything….It certainly maximized the money she will receive next year. She can always move on somewhere else for her senior year. Stanford won't/can't/isn't interested in joining the NIL rat race. So we recruit more 3 stars and hope our coaches and develop them, and then if they do, be prepared to say goodbye. How long we are going to be willing to try and compete in this rat race is another question. We certainly didn't move to less competitive group when we joined the ACC. It will be interesting to see how this all plays out. One big negative is none of this helps put more people in the seats, so we will probably be playing lots of games in lots of sports in half empty venues.
RE: Canady - Goose - 07-25-2024
(07-24-2024, 10:25 PM)old spanish trail Wrote:I have no idea what her family circumstances are, but $1.2 million is "significant", no matter what her circumstances may be. It is also necessary to remember that softball is in general not a "career choice". In two years Canady will very probably not be in any position to command $1.2 million compensation. She can't "postpone" the payday, as NFL and NBA candidates perhaps can.(07-24-2024, 02:34 PM)StanfordMatt Wrote: She'll be getting $1.2 million from TTU per @On3Sports. Good for her.
Agree totally, good for her. It's most likely more than any amount ever on her family's kitchen table.
IMO it might be a good idea for Stanford and its fans to reflect on the possibility that perhaps Stanford's athletic recruiting is attracting quite a few people who in the absence of active inducements would not chose or remain at Stanford. When all one could receive was a scholarship, finding an available scholarship that had the "maximal value" made sense. At that point the "40 year decision" was clearly a valid argument. For quite a few athletes Stanford was a struggle. For others it wasn't "fun" but once you signed up moving elsewhere was difficult so you had to stay and make the best of it. For many others it was a life-changing experience, but that wasn't always how it felt along the way. In the present environment the first two sets of athletes will not stay and a large part of the third set will not either if they have an obviously "better" offer.
College athletics becoming a "business" for the players leaves little time to do much else. If one has to complete a Stanford education while working at what is an almost full time job, it is difficult and sometimes unpleasant. It is especially difficult in a job that has little flexibility on hours and attendance. If one can get a degree elsewhere that requires much less effort, it is an attractive option, particularly if all you want is a "certificate" of education, not the education itself. That IMO describes most (not all) college athletes today. The very good ones will always have "other offers" which are for more money and not incidentally less academic pressure. They will almost universally accept these offers when received. Those "offers" sometimes come from the NFL and NBA. They also come (much more commonly) from other "perfectly fine" colleges/universities. It isn't as if the athletes are making "bad" decisions. For them, it may be clearly the best choice to accept the offer.
RE: Canady - Mick - 07-25-2024
Really starting to hate college athletics now. It's fully departed from my experience.
I wonder how many of these athletes have looming tax issues in the near future?
RE: Canady - Vandelay - 07-25-2024
I'm not surprise that she got $1.2M. I predicted she would we get $1M. I am surprised that it is Texas Tech. I thought the SEC schools would have a bidding war. $1M is a small price to pay for a national championship, which Canady is absolutely capable of delivering.
RE: Canady - BobK - 07-25-2024
Earthquake near Lubbock yesterday. Just about a 4.0. Must mean all the celebrations
RE: Canady - Vandelay - 07-25-2024
If Canady really is destined to be the Caitlin Clark of women's softball (as ESPN announcers were claiming during WCWS) then Texas Tech just got the steal of the century. I predict they will see an influx of talent via the transfer portal and will be one of the top ranked teams next year.
RE: Canady - 81alum - 07-25-2024
(07-24-2024, 02:48 PM)jonnyss Wrote: .Now you know one such person.
further, does anyone really value amateurism any more? i don't know a single person who watches a sporting event because it's amateur..
I increasingly dislike professional sports. I did not much like any sports, originally. I became a Stanford sports fan precisely because I found the ideal of a highly accomplished athlete trading their skill for an elite education to be very appealing. I particularly liked WBB because there was not really a viable professional alternative when I started and so the athletes were doing it for the love of the game and for their education, and not for money.
I think the only options left for me may be to find a sport to cheer for that is not often on television and that has no professional future and so retains something of the old amateur ideal. What do the rest of you think would be the most exciting/compelling sport that qualifies on both? Field Hockey?
RE: Canady - qwerty49 - 07-25-2024
(07-25-2024, 10:17 AM)81alum Wrote:(07-24-2024, 02:48 PM)jonnyss Wrote: .
further, does anyone really value amateurism any more? i don't know a single person who watches a sporting event because it's amateur..
I think the only options left for me may be to find a sport to cheer for that is not often on television and that has no professional future and so retains something of the old amateur ideal.
I don't make it a point to go searching for it on Sling etc, so I would have thought softball fit both those criteria.
Maybe we should hire somebody like Scott Boras to head our NIL program, LOL. And give him a piece of the action.
RE: Canady - BobK - 07-25-2024
Softball is often on tv Thankfully
RE: Hieronymus - old spanish trail - 07-25-2024
(07-24-2024, 10:06 PM)Hieronymus Wrote: I have to admit this seems like a general fail in decision making to me. If Canady wanted to maximize the dollars, she should have transferred a year earlier. Same if it was a school culture issue or a problem with being too far from home. If she wanted the Stanford degree, she needed to stick it out another year at Stanford. If she wanted a better chance at a championship, Texas Tech ain’t it. It’s not my decision, but I don’t really get it. It didn’t maximize anything….
A year earlier, these bucks were not available.
RE: Canady - jacket3ree - 07-25-2024
I'm 61 years old and 40 years into a professional career. I've never brought $1.2 million home in a year. She'd be an idiot not to take it. I happen to think there are a bunch of idiots willing to pay that much for one player in softball, but I don't know where it is all coming from nor do I care. I guess a star softball pitcher is worth a fifth of a QB, so the market has spoken.
My son parlayed a decent but not scholarship worthy high school career in football and baseball into an appointment at USNA. There he played and then coached Sprint Football, an NCAA-sanctioned sport against other mid-Atlantic and northeastern colleges and universities. That was true amateurism, but he has friends and brothers for life. His wedding last summer was a team reunion of sorts for those not deployed too far away. Although, one of his groomsmen flew an F18 from Japan to be there. He worked the system - kind of like moving a rental car across half the globe. Total badassery, although an even more badass plan to stage a groomsmen landing on the beach at their wedding venue didn't happen out of fear of upstaging the bride. About a quarter of his side of the wedding party were Navy Seals. His best man, however, is a KNBR personality. The toast was sensational. Also amazing is how tight all the parents of that team remain after several years away. Many were at his wedding too. Will that be the case with NIL and constant portal movement?
It wasn't idealistic as much as fun and worthwhile. Also, totally irrelevant to big time college sports these days. Unfortunately, but that's the reality. Watch and care or don't.
RE: Hieronymus - MV72018 - 07-25-2024
(07-25-2024, 11:59 AM)old spanish trail Wrote:(07-24-2024, 10:06 PM)Hieronymus Wrote: I have to admit this seems like a general fail in decision making to me. If Canady wanted to maximize the dollars, she should have transferred a year earlier. Same if it was a school culture issue or a problem with being too far from home. If she wanted the Stanford degree, she needed to stick it out another year at Stanford. If she wanted a better chance at a championship, Texas Tech ain’t it. It’s not my decision, but I don’t really get it. It didn’t maximize anything….
A year earlier, these bucks were not available.
How decadent (and revealing of donor priorities) that people with a lot of money to spare give it to be used to hire talented athlete-mercenaries for their alma maters for a year or two of "bragging rights," rather than to support enhanced educational quality and the lives of those who would permanently benefit from it. Welcome to college athletic competition in America 2024!
RE: Canady - StanfordMatt - 07-25-2024
Can we all agree to dispense with the term mercenary when describing these athletes? After its use in the context of military soldiers, the next most common definition of the term is: "a person primarily concerned with material reward at the expense of ethics." It is a term unequivoccally laden with a negative connotation and one that is wholly inappropriate and disparaging in this context. Canady and the rest of these players transferring schools aren't any different from a working professional changing employers.
RE: Canady - CowboyIndian - 07-25-2024
(07-25-2024, 02:18 PM)StanfordMatt Wrote: Canady and the rest of these players transferring schools aren't any different from a working professional changing employers.
You said the magic word. This Wild West chaos is headed for a showdown in court, I'd bet. Always my favorite spot for making college sports news.
RE: Hieronymus - Goose - 07-25-2024
(07-25-2024, 01:15 PM)MV72018 Wrote: How decadent (and revealing of donor priorities) that people with a lot of money to spare give it to be used to hire talented athlete-mercenaries for their alma maters for a year or two of "bragging rights," rather than to support enhanced educational quality and the lives of those who would permanently benefit from it. Welcome to college athletic competition in America 2024!Given the amount of cheating that went on "back in the day", it very well may be that the people with a lot of money to hire talented athlete-mercenaries always existed but were deterred from doing so by the fact it was "illegal". However IMO another major factor was that the administration, faculty, donor base and alumni of the educational institutions strongly supported the "amateur" nature of college sports. They "bought in" to the idea that amateur competition and teamwork added value to education and was therefore an acceptable activity for the institutions to sponsor. I suspect that situation still prevails in most (not all) places.
Right now, the institutions are still reacting to the major changes and have yet to consider what it really "means" for the institution. Things are much too much in flux to reach definitive conclusions. There are still attempts in progress to retain the "good" aspects of college sports while still complying with the court rulings and the obvious injustice of many employees (and the institution itself where applicable) profiting handsomely from the uncompensated labor of students. IMO this will prove impossible, and when it does college athletics will be spun out, disbanded, and/or shut down. A number of "D league" teams of various types will continue to exist because the entertainment dollars to support them will exist. However, any remaining association they had with colleges/universities will quickly fade away.
RE: Canady - Vandelay - 07-25-2024
How is it that Stanford has a $40B endowment yet cannot cobble together a competitive NIL package to keep the Caitlin Clark of college softball?
RE: Canady - dabigv13 - 07-25-2024
Insane to spend a single cent of endowment money on this NIL garbage. They are mercenaries, and I mean that negatively and perjoratively. And she's a pro athlete so she can handle the jeers from online idiots like me. "Oh no, someone on The Cardboard called me a mercenary." I'm sure she's crying all the way to the bank.
Endowment money should be going to support education and research, the core mission of the university. It should never go to hired gun pro athletes who will be around for a year or two and then off to the next place that will pay them more.
And BTW, these mercenary players should not be able to come back and get a Stanford degree after they've transferred.
I'm coming around more to the idea that Stanford ditch sports if this is the way things are going. I knew plenty of athletes when I was a student, and I would have no problem with them making money to sell ads or endorse products. But if the school has to pay them to attend, I think it's more appropriate their spot goes to someone else who is there to be a student.
RE: Canady - Vandelay - 07-25-2024
I'm not suggesting that Stanford should use endowment money for NIL. Just noting the incongruity of being endowment rich / NIL poor.
RE: Canady - Goose - 07-25-2024
(07-25-2024, 03:17 PM)dabigv13 Wrote: Insane to spend a single cent of endowment money on this NIL garbage. They are mercenaries, and I mean that negatively and perjoratively. And she's a pro athlete so she can handle the jeers from online idiots like me. "Oh no, someone on The Cardboard called me a mercenary." I'm sure she's crying all the way to the bank.Agree with everything except not allowing them to come back and finish their degree. Lots of people go take a job before they graduate. IMO that's fine. Lots of people get that job because of what they learned at Stanford. That is also fine and IMO "good". If these people later want to return, they should be allowed to do so, subject to availability. I suspect there are so few of them it won't make a dent.
Endowment money should be going to support education and research, the core mission of the university. It should never go to hired gun pro athletes who will be around for a year or two and then off to the next place that will pay them more.
And BTW, these mercenary players should not be able to come back and get a Stanford degree after they've transferred.
I'm coming around more to the idea that Stanford ditch sports if this is the way things are going. I knew plenty of athletes when I was a student, and I would have no problem with them making money to sell ads or endorse products. But if the school has to pay them to attend, I think it's more appropriate their spot goes to someone else who is there to be a student.
Otherwise, 100% agree :-).
RE: Canady - oldalum - 07-25-2024
I'm with dabigv on this. The get-a-job-and-come-back-later example is inapposite--those people have left college entirely to do something else. Getting $$$ from NIL may make playing a sport a job now, but those people are also students: they have to enroll in college and pass a specified minimum number of units. If someone transfers to a different university for any reason--an academic major, play a sport, music, be closer to family, whatever--they presumably plan to get a degree from that university. If they don't, they shouldn't be transferring, and we shouldn't be honoring their wish to return. If you want to graduate from Stanford, then attend 4 years like everyone else (who didn't first come as a transfer from a different college). I think you give up that option when you transfer out, for any reason. Come back for grad school if you want and can.