Self-endowment raises $40 million - 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: Self-endowment raises $40 million (/thread-21548.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: Self-endowment raises $40 million (/thread-21548.html)
Self-endowment raises $40 million - BACardinal - 02-12-2021
https://www.si.com/college/2021/02/12/stanford-save-cut-sports-movement-ncaa
RE: Self-endowment raises $40 million - triangle2 - 02-12-2021
(02-12-2021, 03:16 PM)kjimenez707 Wrote: https://www.si.com/college/2021/02/12/stanford-save-cut-sports-movement-ncaa
It's very sad to think that Stanford isn't going to reveal the real reasons behind the reduction until the lawsuit is filed, discovery is underway, and Muir and various athletic department administrators are testifying in their depositions. Pro tip to Muir: too late to be deleting those emails...
mtaguchi@yahoo.com - Griffins78 - 02-12-2021
Great on them and us for fighting this.
RE: Self-endowment raises $40 million - donkey687 - 02-12-2021
(02-12-2021, 04:09 PM)triangle2 Wrote:As the clock is ticking for these programs and they are becoming more desperate, it seems like this battle is getting stronger with more noise. I think Stanford was hoping the passage of time and cover of COVID would enable this decision to avoid deep scrutiny. It could get ugly for Bernard. It is a tough position for Bernard and the Board to hold that they won't accept alumni donations to make them self sufficient to save these programs.(02-12-2021, 03:16 PM)kjimenez707 Wrote: https://www.si.com/college/2021/02/12/stanford-save-cut-sports-movement-ncaa
It's very sad to think that Stanford isn't going to reveal the real reasons behind the reduction until the lawsuit is filed, discovery is underway, and Muir and various athletic department administrators are testifying in their depositions. Pro tip to Muir: too late to be deleting those emails...
RE: Self-endowment raises $40 million - Softball Fan - 02-12-2021
It will be interesting to see how aggressively Stanford contests a lawsuit if one is filed. I've been following the civil case of Hodson vs Stanford and the NCAA. I thought Stanford would settle for publicity reasons. Not so. It's been going on for three years.
Stanford's legal team is playing hardball with Hodson. They claimed eight hours of Hodson in deposition was not enough and the court agreed to basically give them as much additional time as they feel is needed. The legal websites following the case say it looks like Stanford would appeal if they don't prevail on every single one of Hodson's claims.
RE: Self-endowment raises $40 million - winflop - 02-12-2021
Well if the University won't voluntarily reveal the financials, a lawsuit should force the issue. Sadly, the sports will be gone before the lawsuits are resolved.
RE: Self-endowment raises $40 million - terry - 02-12-2021
Lawsuits are a good way to resolve certain disputes. This is not one of them.
RE: Self-endowment raises $40 million - akiddoc - 02-12-2021
(02-12-2021, 06:50 PM)terry Wrote: Lawsuits are a good way to resolve certain disputes. This is not one of them.
Maybe. Under rational circumstances.
But I don't think the university intends to reverse this decision no matter how much money is raised. The only way it happens is if a critical mass of rich alumni object. The only way to make the issue big enough and public enough might be through legal action.
RE: Self-endowment raises $40 million - martyup - 02-12-2021
I was a freshman when an alumni endowed the wrestling program and Chris Horpel, an Olympic bronze medal winner, was hired to coach the team. Our understanding was that the endowment would fund the program in perpetuity.
Regarding the use of a lawsuit to force the school to continue self-funded programs, I think there would be a good argument for a temporary restraining order prohibiting the school from ending the program before the case was resolved. There is no doubt the student athletes would suffer irreparable harm if they were not allowed to compete while the case was pending.
RE: Self-endowment raises $40 million - old spanish trail - 02-12-2021
[quote="terry" pid='307293' dateline='1613181005']
Lawsuits are a good way to resolve certain disputes. This is not one of them.
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________I
Hey Terry, I greatly admire your legal acumen, so I'm wondering why you think a lawsuit isn't advised here. From conversations with a member of the 36 sports team group, they say the admin is totally intransigent and unresponsive re how did we get here. Seems like discovery might be a good way to break through. The theory of the case isn't real strong, imo, but they ought to get by a dismissal motion.
If a lawsuit isn't the right approach, what would you recommend?
Fwiw, apparently admin costs of both the department and Buck/Cardinal have totally exploded in recent years with no great explanation.
RE: Self-endowment raises $40 million - 2006alum - 02-12-2021
Can someone explain what the grounds for the lawsuit would be? Breach of contract for the coaches and staff? The students? Why doesn't a university have a right to add or subtract sports teams at its discretion?
RE: Self-endowment raises $40 million - Mick - 02-12-2021
I wonder what David Packard would have thought of the 11 sports cut?
RE: Self-endowment raises $40 million - BostonCard - 02-13-2021
(02-12-2021, 10:05 PM)2006alum Wrote: Can someone explain what the grounds for the lawsuit would be? Breach of contract for the coaches and staff? The students? Why doesn't a university have a right to add or subtract sports teams at its discretion?
The school is entitled to make stupid, unpopular decisions. Just because a group of people offers to pay for something, doesn't mean the university is obligated to provide it.
Muir would be the first bureaucrat I've ever heard of to voluntarily make their "empire" smaller. Reading between the lines, this was the University deciding it wanted a different balance between athletics and academics at the school. And I really do wonder how much the varsity blues incident, despite not impacting most of the sports cut, empowered people who believe that athletics should have a smaller footprint in the University. There are probably a lot more people like the Daily article writer than those of us on this board, who, let's face it, are a biased sample, would like to acknowledge. And, unfortunately, the more that the experience of athletes starts to diverge from the experience of other students, the louder the calls will be to give up on the enterprise altogether.
BC
RE: Self-endowment raises $40 million - martyup - 02-13-2021
If an alumni gives a large endowment to the school to keep an athletic program alive, as was the case with wrestling, there may well be a legal case against the school for cutting that athletic program. Obviously, it would depend on the language of the legal document, if any exists, memorializing the endowment. If there was no legal document, then the intent of the parties would need to be determined by looking at other evidence.
Another legal avenue sports advocates could explore is to look at "implied use" of general donations made to the school by alumni and other outside organizations. For example, if Jane Doe played field hockey at Stanford 30 years ago and decides that she wants to share her great fortunes by donating to the school so other young women can have the opportunity to enjoy a sport she had so much fun playing, she may feel betrayed by Stanford for cutting field hockey. Even though she may not have attached specific conditions to her donation, she may argue that she would not have made the donation if she knew Stanford was going to cut her former sport. There might be hundreds or thousands of Jane Does out there that made donations to Stanford on the assumption that the sport(s) they loved to follow would continue. Brought together in a class action lawsuit, these donors could put tremendous pressure on Stanford to bring back sports that can self-fund. Sure, Stanford might win such a lawsuit on technical legal grounds. But, a non-profit never wants to go to war with its benefactors.
It would be interesting to hear the opinion of the administrators of the Buck/Cardinal club. I would guess that many of its donors are not happy about these cuts.
What makes Stanford stand out as the pinnacle of colleges and Universities worldwide is its combined excellence in academics and athletics. Moving away from prominence in athletics will diminish Stanford and relegate it to the true "Harvard of the West Coast."
RE: Self-endowment raises $40 million - needle - 02-13-2021
Quote:Reading between the lines, this was the University deciding it wanted a different balance between athletics and academics at the school.
For me, only a casual fan of the sports cut, what's most deeply frustrating and disappointing is that absolutely no one believes Stanford was straightforward and transparent in its lengthy FAQ on why the decision was made to cut the sports.
I'm normally not a brobdingnagian fan of the community meeting to gather input, as those tend to be mostly for show rather than substance. In this circumstance, however, Stanford would have been much better served in the long run by holding some forums to discuss the DAPER financial concerns and at least have coaches/students/alumni present some alternate ideas.
RE: Self-endowment raises $40 million - Farm93 - 02-13-2021
(02-13-2021, 12:05 PM)needle Wrote:The unspoken reality is that the school is closing in on a sub-4% acceptance rate soon. However, for those able to run fast or able to shoot, catch, throw or hit a ball the acceptance rate is much, much higher and often includes scholarship money too. Highly selective universities are bumping into a seemingly endless stream of admissions lawsuits so potentially some things were best left unsaid.Quote:Reading between the lines, this was the University deciding it wanted a different balance between athletics and academics at the school.
For me, only a casual fan of the sports cut, what's most deeply frustrating and disappointing is that absolutely no one believes Stanford was straightforward and transparent in its lengthy FAQ on why the decision was made to cut the sports.
I'm normally not a of immense proportions fan of the community meeting to gather input, as those tend to be mostly for show rather than substance. In this circumstance, however, Stanford would have been much better served in the long run by holding some forums to discuss the DAPER financial concerns and at least have coaches/students/alumni present some alternate ideas.
Still the initial reasons provided just do not seem to be holding up well, and that's on Muir IMO. The sports selected, the efforts to find funds rather than cut and/or the lack of full transparency all ultimately roll up to Muir. This might be one of those situations where an executive makes the best call for the university, but that call ultimately must also result in the termination of that very executive for the good of the university.
I feel for the athletes that are currently enrolled that will need to decide between completing their studies at Stanford to get a Stanford degree or transfer to another institution to continue participating in the sport they love. However for D1 sports the best way to terminate a program is to do it quickly so that the athletes can immediately pursue transfer options without worrying about program loyalty pressures.
RE: Self-endowment raises $40 million - BobK - 02-13-2021
Plus Farm We should never forget all the coaches being fired
RE: Self-endowment raises $40 million - Mick - 02-13-2021
(02-13-2021, 02:34 PM)Farm93 Wrote: The unspoken reality is that the school is closing in on a sub-4% acceptance rate soon. However, for those able to run fast or able to shoot, catch, throw or hit a ball the acceptance rate is much, much higher and often includes scholarship money too. Highly selective universities are bumping into a seemingly endless stream of admissions lawsuits so potentially some things were best left unsaid.
Still the initial reasons provided just do not seem to be holding up well, and that's on Muir IMO. The sports selected, the efforts to find funds rather than cut and/or the lack of full transparency all ultimately roll up to Muir. This might be one of those situations where an executive makes the best call for the university, but that call ultimately must also result in the termination of that very executive for the good of the university.
I feel for the athletes that are currently enrolled that will need to decide between completing their studies at Stanford to get a Stanford degree or transfer to another institution to continue participating in the sport they love. However for D1 sports the best way to terminate a program is to do it quickly so that the athletes can immediately pursue transfer options without worrying about program loyalty pressures.
Perhaps Stanford might consider boosting their acceptance rate. Certainly not to the 31% enjoyed by the class of 1978, but Stanford could build out to embrace a larger student body. It isn't as if Stanford lacks the space.
RE: Self-endowment raises $40 million - Farm93 - 02-13-2021
(02-13-2021, 09:35 PM)Mick Wrote: Perhaps Stanford might consider boosting their acceptance rate. Certainly not to the 31% enjoyed by the class of 1978, but Stanford could build out to embrace a larger student body. It isn't as if Stanford lacks the space.
Nothing above 1% population growth is in the 10-Year Development Plan with SCC. Stanford would need to double enrollment size just to get to an 9% acceptance rate. Even if that was possible that would still make Stanford one of the most selective schools in the USA even if that expansion didn't generate an increase in the applications.
At any of the permitted growth rates, the elite admissions games and corresponding concerns related to admission decisions, outreach and privilege would all still apply for decades.
RE: Self-endowment raises $40 million - CTcard - 02-13-2021
(02-13-2021, 12:17 AM)BostonCard Wrote: Muir would be the first bureaucrat I've ever heard of to voluntarily make their "empire" smaller.
Reading between the lines, this was the University deciding it wanted a different balance between athletics and academics at the school.
Taking the second part first: while I see the logic behind that reasoning, I wonder if there are any specific lines that have led you to that conclusion?
On the first, this doesn't seem like Muir's decision - he's just the guy who has to talk about it. Though Persis Drell has been a face of this as well.