[McKenwood]

So I would suggest Stanford drop football or move down to UC Davis's league and refuse to compete semi-pro teams with college names on their jerseys. MBB might fall into this category but I like the fact that good players who aren't interested in a university education have solid alternaitves so maybe MBB can continue to have a more traditional approach .


For all the other teams, I would suggest Stanford reallocate a sufficient amount of its endowment to fund the teams at the highest level. This means scholarships, coaching salaries, training facilities, travel budgets and support would be top of any college teams, even those with SEC football TV money.



Stanford would retain a singular characteristic that differentiates it from other academically oriented universities namely a broadbased, highly successful athletic program. It would remove the necessity of football covering much of the cost of running such a program.



The decision isn't that hard but right now Stanford doesn't have the leadership either in the AD or at the executive level. The fact that Muir still has a job indicates real weakness in Stanford's governance. This will play out in a messy way over the next 3-5 years with Stanford being behind on every major change.

The difference in football media revenue between say a Big Sky team like UC Davis and an SEC or B10 team is over $50M per year. And the gap is increasing. Even a P10 conference (assuming everyone stays) vs. SEC/B10 would be a $30M+ per year gap. Do you think that Stanford would subsidize athletics to that extent?? It may not choose to subsidize athletics at all (at least no more than it current does).

Stanford Athletics needs a champion. But I don't see any fans of athletics among the Provost, President or Board of Trustees.Take a look at the current Trustees list. Does anyone recognize anyone with ties to Athletics, either a former athlete, someone who has endowed a scholarship for Athletics, someone who has had a lead role in the Buck Cardinal Club, etc.?
https://boardoftrustees.stanford.edu/board-members/

To answer your last question there a several champions of athletics and student life at Stanford on the BofT. Several of them are classmates of mine.  I have stopped sending letters to the President and Provost and instead send notes to BofT members. There is a conversation going at the level. Not sure how it will turn out but it is happening. I also get the sense that there is unhappiness with the current executive team At Stanford. Not sure what that means either.

As for money spent on athletics don't forget that schools like Harvard offer even more sports than Stanford. So there is already a big number that would be spent even at lower level and without any football money.

As I suggested Stanford needs to go big for non-football sports. It will be expensive but worth it. Also don't forget the number of pissed off donors that will be unhappy with Stanford becoming the University of Chicago. They might even have a case to get their scholarship endowments back.

[McKenwood]

So I would suggest Stanford drop football or move down to UC Davis's league and refuse to compete semi-pro teams with college names on their jerseys. MBB might fall into this category but I like the fact that good players who aren't interested in a university education have solid alternaitves so maybe MBB can continue to have a more traditional approach .


For all the other teams, I would suggest Stanford reallocate a sufficient amount of its endowment to fund the teams at the highest level. This means scholarships, coaching salaries, training facilities, travel budgets and support would be top of any college teams, even those with SEC football TV money.



Stanford would retain a singular characteristic that differentiates it from other academically oriented universities namely a broadbased, highly successful athletic program. It would remove the necessity of football covering much of the cost of running such a program.



The decision isn't that hard but right now Stanford doesn't have the leadership either in the AD or at the executive level. The fact that Muir still has a job indicates real weakness in Stanford's governance. This will play out in a messy way over the next 3-5 years with Stanford being behind on every major change.

The difference in football media revenue between say a Big Sky team like UC Davis and an SEC or B10 team is over $50M per year. And the gap is increasing. Even a P10 conference (assuming everyone stays) vs. SEC/B10 would be a $30M+ per year gap. Do you think that Stanford would subsidize athletics to that extent?? It may not choose to subsidize athletics at all (at least no more than it current does).

Stanford Athletics needs a champion. But I don't see any fans of athletics among the Provost, President or Board of Trustees.Take a look at the current Trustees list. Does anyone recognize anyone with ties to Athletics, either a former athlete, someone who has endowed a scholarship for Athletics, someone who has had a lead role in the Buck Cardinal Club, etc.?
https://boardoftrustees.stanford.edu/board-members/

To answer your last question there a several champions of athletics and student life at Stanford on the BofT. Several of them are classmates of mine.  I have stopped sending letters to the President and Provost and instead send notes to BofT members. There is a conversation going at the level. Not sure how it will turn out but it is happening. I also get the sense that there is unhappiness with the current executive team At Stanford. Not sure what that means either.

As for money spent on athletics don't forget that schools like Harvard offer even more sports than Stanford. So there is already a big number that would be spent even at lower level and without any football money.

As I suggested Stanford needs to go big for non-football sports. It will be expensive but worth it. Also don't forget the number of pissed off donors that will be unhappy with Stanford becoming the University of Chicago. They might even have a case to get their scholarship endowments back.