Stanford Says Rice, Yang to Play Key Roles - 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: Stanford Says Rice, Yang to Play Key Roles (/thread-24334.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: Stanford Says Rice, Yang to Play Key Roles (/thread-24334.html)
Pages:
1
2
Stanford Says Rice, Yang to Play Key Roles - chrisk - 08-12-2023
Stanford Was Stranded by the Pac-12 Implosion. How Does It Find a Home?
WSJ article by Laine Higgins and Louise Radnofsky
https://www.wsj.com/sports/football/stanford-cardinal-pac-12-realignment-5e265b53
A spokeswoman for Stanford said that Rice, a professor at the university’s graduate school of business, will serve as a special adviser on athletics. Stanford Board of Trustees chairman Jerry Yang, the billionaire co-founder of Yahoo! Inc., will also be a key player, Stanford indicated.
RE: Stanford Says Rice, Yang to Play Key Roles - Softball Fan - 08-12-2023
Yang could offer the most help by donating money to the athletics department. It's his decision. Stanford athletics right now needs all the help it can get.
Mudhead - Mudhead - 08-12-2023
O
(08-12-2023, 10:36 AM)chrisk Wrote: Stanford Was Stranded by the Pac-12 Implosion. How Does It Find a Home?Good news. At last someone is willing to stand up and take charge. Vs interim President who announced he won’t play any role until he is officially in charge on Sept 1 “ you guys just wait until I get the deck chairs arranged”
WSJ article by Laine Higgins and Louise Radnofsky
https://www.wsj.com/sports/football/stanford-cardinal-pac-12-realignment-5e265b53
A spokeswoman for Stanford said that Rice, a professor at the university’s graduate school of business, will serve as a special adviser on athletics. Stanford Board of Trustees chairman Jerry Yang, the billionaire co-founder of Yahoo! Inc., will also be a key player, Stanford indicated.
I don’t know Yang but my guess he has the stroke to make things happen. I do know Rice a bit and she is first rate with a deep and broad understanding of college athletics.
I wish these two had been in charge a year ago. They now have a horrendous challenge .
RE: Stanford Says Rice, Yang to Play Key Roles - 82lsju - 08-12-2023
Oliver Luck may be consulting for the Pac-4
https://www.johncanzano.com/p/canzano-could-oliver-luck-help-save
RE: Mudhead - cctop - 08-12-2023
(08-12-2023, 11:03 AM)Mudhead Wrote: I don’t know Yang but my guess he has the stroke to make things happen.
Apropos of nothing, I was in Branner with Jerry Yang in the fall of 1986. I only spoke with him once or twice but I recall him being a nice down-to-earth guy.
Management consulting was the hot career at the time. Smart ambitious people wanted to work for Bain or McKinsey.
Looking back it's funny that we had no idea how everything was going to change the year we graduated with the invention of the World Wide Web.
RE: Stanford Says Rice, Yang to Play Key Roles - TooMuchTV - 08-12-2023
(08-12-2023, 10:36 AM)chrisk Wrote: Stanford Was Stranded by the Pac-12 Implosion. How Does It Find a Home?
WSJ article by Laine Higgins and Louise Radnofsky
https://www.wsj.com/sports/football/stanford-cardinal-pac-12-realignment-5e265b53
A spokeswoman for Stanford said that Rice, a professor at the university’s graduate school of business, will serve as a special adviser on athletics. Stanford Board of Trustees chairman Jerry Yang, the billionaire co-founder of Yahoo! Inc., will also be a key player, Stanford indicated.
Weird. On first click I could read the article. But I clicked on the link to the Ivy League tweet and when I clicked back it wanted me to subscribe to read the article. I don't suppose you could provide a gift link?
Mudhead - Mudhead - 08-12-2023
(08-12-2023, 02:36 PM)branner Wrote:Pretty sure Rice has not been involved but no insight into Yang. Just curious…what reservations would you have about Rice? She’s got all the Stanford Credentials you could want and has very solid standing in the collegiate sports community nationwide. Adding Luck into the mix makes sense but I think those focusing on what’s good for the PAC 4 should be different from those focusing on what is good for(08-12-2023, 10:36 AM)chrisk Wrote: Stanford Was Stranded by the Pac-12 Implosion. How Does It Find a Home?
WSJ article by Laine Higgins and Louise Radnofsky
https://www.wsj.com/sports/football/stanford-cardinal-pac-12-realignment-5e265b53
A spokeswoman for Stanford said that Rice, a professor at the university’s graduate school of business, will serve as a special adviser on athletics. Stanford Board of Trustees chairman Jerry Yang, the billionaire co-founder of Yahoo! Inc., will also be a key player, Stanford indicated.
Are we to believe that neither Yang nor Rice has been engaged thus far? They've both been watching from the stands since USC and UCLA announced their departures, putting the Pac-12 in what everyone recognized was mortal danger? If so, the university's leadership is in even worse shape than I would have imagined. I am no fan of Rice, but she likely has had a useful perspective on this debacle. Yang has, at least, built a successful Internet media business.
I applaud the involvement of Oliver Luck. But the university should already have been reaching out to the likes of Magic Johnson, Michael Jordan, Michael Bloomberg, Mark Cuban, Ted Turner, Barry Diller, etc. -- successful media entrepreneurs with big vision and who just might have some fantastic ideas. I would also be consulting with big-time agents, e.g., Drew Rosenhaus.
More of the same ol', same ol' isn't going to advance the ball very far.
Stanford.
RE: Mudhead - cardcrimson - 08-12-2023
(08-12-2023, 02:56 PM)Mudhead Wrote: Pretty sure Rice has not been involved but no insight into Yang. Just curious…what reservations would you have about Rice? She’s got all the Stanford Credentials you could want and has very solid standing in the collegiate sports community nationwide. Adding Luck into the mix makes sense but I think those focusing on what’s good for the PAC 4 should be different from those focusing on what is good for
Stanford.
Please don't go there. Branner has already made it abundantly clear his feelings regarding Condi in previous posts that frankly crossed the line well into the political arena.
Mudhead - Mudhead - 08-12-2023
(08-12-2023, 03:34 PM)cardcrimson Wrote:Ah..sorry, I wasn't thinking beyond the Sports challenge at hand.(08-12-2023, 02:56 PM)Mudhead Wrote: Pretty sure Rice has not been involved but no insight into Yang. Just curious…what reservations would you have about Rice? She’s got all the Stanford Credentials you could want and has very solid standing in the collegiate sports community nationwide. Adding Luck into the mix makes sense but I think those focusing on what’s good for the PAC 4 should be different from those focusing on what is good for
Stanford.
Please don't go there. Branner has already made it abundantly clear his feelings regarding Condi in previous posts that frankly crossed the line well into the political arena.
RE: Stanford Says Rice, Yang to Play Key Roles - TonyLima - 08-12-2023
At one point, Condi was rumored to be ln the running for NFL commissioner. brobdingnagian football fan.
RE: Stanford Says Rice, Yang to Play Key Roles - 81alum - 08-12-2023
Here is a solution: Yang endows Stanford football with a billion dollars, and Rice becomes our next AD. The football endowment generates more than enough to offset lower TV revenues, and since we are no longer dependent on TV revenues, we can schedule games at reasonable times and build the college experience on campus. We give football recruits the best educations and also the best of everything else in the nation. Eventually, we win enough to embarrass FOX and ESPN and the conferences they own. Then we decide for ourselves whether to remain independent or to become the premiere program in a conference that previously spurned us.
One can dream.
RE: Stanford Says Rice, Yang to Play Key Roles - 82lsju - 08-12-2023
(08-12-2023, 04:47 PM)81alum Wrote: Here is a solution: Yang endows Stanford football with a billion dollars, and Rice becomes our next AD. The football endowment generates more than enough to offset lower TV revenues, and since we are no longer dependent on TV revenues, we can schedule games at reasonable times and build the college experience on campus. We give football recruits the best educations and also the best of everything else in the nation. Eventually, we win enough to embarrass FOX and ESPN and the conferences they own. Then we decide for ourselves whether to remain independent or to become the premiere program in a conference that previously spurned us.
One can dream.
$1b would be ~40% of his net worth, but for only $500m he could more than endow the football team expenses given most (maybe all) of the football scholarships and many of the coaching positions (especially the more expensive ones) are already endowed
RE: Stanford Says Rice, Yang to Play Key Roles - cardcrimson - 08-12-2023
(08-12-2023, 05:31 PM)82lsju Wrote:(08-12-2023, 04:47 PM)81alum Wrote: Here is a solution: Yang endows Stanford football with a billion dollars, and Rice becomes our next AD. The football endowment generates more than enough to offset lower TV revenues, and since we are no longer dependent on TV revenues, we can schedule games at reasonable times and build the college experience on campus. We give football recruits the best educations and also the best of everything else in the nation. Eventually, we win enough to embarrass FOX and ESPN and the conferences they own. Then we decide for ourselves whether to remain independent or to become the premiere program in a conference that previously spurned us.
One can dream.
$1b would be ~40% of his net worth, but for only $500m he could more than endow the football team expenses given most (maybe all) of the football scholarships and many of the coaching positions (especially the more expensive ones) are already endowed
Question, what is the true cost of a scholarship? The variable costs of tuition have to be a fairly low percentage. Books probably pretty low as well. Room and board? 50%? So of the $70k total, perhaps only $10k is variable. . . .
RE: Stanford Says Rice, Yang to Play Key Roles - chrisk - 08-12-2023
(08-12-2023, 08:11 PM)cardcrimson Wrote:(08-12-2023, 05:31 PM)82lsju Wrote:(08-12-2023, 04:47 PM)81alum Wrote: Here is a solution: Yang endows Stanford football with a billion dollars, and Rice becomes our next AD. The football endowment generates more than enough to offset lower TV revenues, and since we are no longer dependent on TV revenues, we can schedule games at reasonable times and build the college experience on campus. We give football recruits the best educations and also the best of everything else in the nation. Eventually, we win enough to embarrass FOX and ESPN and the conferences they own. Then we decide for ourselves whether to remain independent or to become the premiere program in a conference that previously spurned us.
One can dream.
$1b would be ~40% of his net worth, but for only $500m he could more than endow the football team expenses given most (maybe all) of the football scholarships and many of the coaching positions (especially the more expensive ones) are already endowed
Question, what is the true cost of a scholarship? The variable costs of tuition have to be a fairly low percentage. Books probably pretty low as well. Room and board? 50%? So of the $70k total, perhaps only $10k is variable. . . .
Academic year undergraduate tuition alone for the coming year is $61.731. I found a quote from about 20 years ago that tuition covered about 60% of the actual cost. It is not clear whether that refers to the list tuition cost or the tuition net of scholarships. I assume it is the former.
RE: Stanford Says Rice, Yang to Play Key Roles - cardcrimson - 08-12-2023
(08-12-2023, 08:40 PM)chrisk Wrote:(08-12-2023, 08:11 PM)cardcrimson Wrote: Question, what is the true cost of a scholarship? The variable costs of tuition have to be a fairly low percentage. Books probably pretty low as well. Room and board? 50%? So of the $70k total, perhaps only $10k is variable. . . .
Academic year undergraduate tuition alone for the coming year is $61.731. I found a quote from about 20 years ago that tuition covered about 60% of the actual cost. It is not clear whether that refers to the list tuition cost or the tuition net of scholarships. I assume it is the former.
Wait. You're saying that the cost of one student on the margin is $100k and the university is only charging $60k. Somethings amiss. I'd imagine that adding one student wouldn't increase costs much at all. . . .
RE: Stanford Says Rice, Yang to Play Key Roles - chrisk - 08-12-2023
(08-12-2023, 09:17 PM)cardcrimson Wrote:(08-12-2023, 08:40 PM)chrisk Wrote:(08-12-2023, 08:11 PM)cardcrimson Wrote: Question, what is the true cost of a scholarship? The variable costs of tuition have to be a fairly low percentage. Books probably pretty low as well. Room and board? 50%? So of the $70k total, perhaps only $10k is variable. . . .
Academic year undergraduate tuition alone for the coming year is $61.731. I found a quote from about 20 years ago that tuition covered about 60% of the actual cost. It is not clear whether that refers to the list tuition cost or the tuition net of scholarships. I assume it is the former.
Wait. You're saying that the cost of one student on the margin is $100k and the university is only charging $60k. Somethings amiss. I'd imagine that adding one student wouldn't increase costs much at all. . . .
The biggest cost is faculty which in the Stanford model is much more variable cost, than fixed. Stanford does not have as many very large lecture classes and uses more tenured faculty, compared to the large football factories.
RE: Mudhead - Softball Fan - 08-13-2023
(08-13-2023, 04:32 AM)branner Wrote:(08-12-2023, 03:34 PM)cardcrimson Wrote:(08-12-2023, 02:56 PM)Mudhead Wrote: Pretty sure Rice has not been involved but no insight into Yang. Just curious…what reservations would you have about Rice? She’s got all the Stanford Credentials you could want and has very solid standing in the collegiate sports community nationwide. Adding Luck into the mix makes sense but I think those focusing on what’s good for the PAC 4 should be different from those focusing on what is good for
Stanford.
BS
Please don't go there. Branner has already made it abundantly clear his feelings regarding Condi in previous posts that frankly crossed the line well into the political arena.
I believe it is fair for me to rebut what I consider to be a false assertion about my writing, to wit, that in a previous post I "crossed the line well into the political arena." I do so in the hope that this will improve moderation of the forum, but have no objection if the moderator concludes otherwise and chooses to remove this reply.
In another thread, several writers touted Rice as a replacement for MTL. I objected to her fitness for that position and stated the basis for my objection. My reservations were moral and intellectual in nature, not political or even remotely ideological. In fact, I know nothing about Rice's politics or ideology. Outside of her football interests, I am only familiar with her actions in the foreign policy/national security realm. These took place in a Republican administration, but whether she is a member of that party or even votes Republican, I have no idea. In any event, my concerns about her have nothing to do with her party affiliation or political philosophy.
Imagine that bountiful evidence exists that someone who was once a political figure engaged in plagiarism during his time in political office (for want of doubt, I am not suggesting Rice ever did such a thing, and raise this point only for illustration). Would it be "political" to object that such a person is unfit to serve as president of Stanford? If so, then political service becomes some sort of immunity for candidates for academic office. That is, if they cannot be criticized or disqualified for their non-political actions while in political service, be these actions plagiarism, drug abuse, crimes against humanity, racial bigotry, spousal abuse, culumny, or falsification of evidence or other deception, they come to enjoy an enormous advantage that no other candidates for academic office will enjoy.
I hope that the moderators can appreciate these distinctions, as they can well apply to coaches, athletic directors, etc. If Tommy Tuberville ever returns to the coaching ranks and becomes a candidate for the head job in Stanford football, shall his actions during his time as Senator be off-limits for discussion, even if these actions bear directly on his fitness to lead the program?
What?
RE: Stanford Says Rice, Yang to Play Key Roles - cardcrimson - 08-13-2023
(08-12-2023, 09:41 PM)chrisk Wrote:That model then has changed substantially since I was on the Farm. Even in ME, the smallest classes were in the 50 person range, IIRC. The electives were typically much larger. . . .(08-12-2023, 09:17 PM)cardcrimson Wrote:(08-12-2023, 08:40 PM)chrisk Wrote:(08-12-2023, 08:11 PM)cardcrimson Wrote: Question, what is the true cost of a scholarship? The variable costs of tuition have to be a fairly low percentage. Books probably pretty low as well. Room and board? 50%? So of the $70k total, perhaps only $10k is variable. . . .
Academic year undergraduate tuition alone for the coming year is $61.731. I found a quote from about 20 years ago that tuition covered about 60% of the actual cost. It is not clear whether that refers to the list tuition cost or the tuition net of scholarships. I assume it is the former.
Wait. You're saying that the cost of one student on the margin is $100k and the university is only charging $60k. Somethings amiss. I'd imagine that adding one student wouldn't increase costs much at all. . . .
The biggest cost is faculty which in the Stanford model is much more variable cost, than fixed. Stanford does not have as many very large lecture classes and uses more tenured faculty, compared to the large football factories.
RE: Stanford Says Rice, Yang to Play Key Roles - lex24 - 08-13-2023
(08-13-2023, 09:50 AM)cardcrimson Wrote:(08-12-2023, 09:41 PM)chrisk Wrote:That model then has changed substantially since I was on the Farm. Even in ME, the smallest classes were in the 50 person range, IIRC. The electives were typically much larger. . . .(08-12-2023, 09:17 PM)cardcrimson Wrote:(08-12-2023, 08:40 PM)chrisk Wrote:(08-12-2023, 08:11 PM)cardcrimson Wrote: Question, what is the true cost of a scholarship? The variable costs of tuition have to be a fairly low percentage. Books probably pretty low as well. Room and board? 50%? So of the $70k total, perhaps only $10k is variable. . . .
Academic year undergraduate tuition alone for the coming year is $61.731. I found a quote from about 20 years ago that tuition covered about 60% of the actual cost. It is not clear whether that refers to the list tuition cost or the tuition net of scholarships. I assume it is the former.
Wait. You're saying that the cost of one student on the margin is $100k and the university is only charging $60k. Somethings amiss. I'd imagine that adding one student wouldn't increase costs much at all. . . .
The biggest cost is faculty which in the Stanford model is much more variable cost, than fixed. Stanford does not have as many very large lecture classes and uses more tenured faculty, compared to the large football factories.
“Compared to the large football factories.” No, compared to public Universities.
RE: Stanford Says Rice, Yang to Play Key Roles - Maple Leaf - 08-13-2023
(08-12-2023, 04:47 PM)81alum Wrote: Here is a solution: Yang endows Stanford football with a billion dollars, and Rice becomes our next AD. The football endowment generates more than enough to offset lower TV revenues, and since we are no longer dependent on TV revenues, we can schedule games at reasonable times and build the college experience on campus. We give football recruits the best educations and also the best of everything else in the nation. Eventually, we win enough to embarrass FOX and ESPN and the conferences they own. Then we decide for ourselves whether to remain independent or to become the premiere program in a conference that previously spurned us.
One can dream.
in addition to Yang's $1 Billion, the remaining BOT's to collectively match his billion with $1 Billion for not more involved/pro-active once the condoms and baby bears decided to leave.