[chrisk]

Agree that the departure of Bowlsby and the loss of an administration that cared about the football program is a great and significant loss.  Stanford exists alone and unique among Top 10 universities with a Power 5 football program.

I saw a study that once tracked Georgetown's undergraduate applications with the success of its basketball team.  As the team won, applications skyrocketed.  I wonder what the impact of losing the football program would be on applications and yield? It had basically no effect on my alma mater, but that was a marginal D2 program.  Within the last decade, Stanford had one of the best teams in the country. I realize that students don't attend Stanford strictly or only because of the football program -- apart from the athletes, I think no student does -- but it helps at the margin, I think.

My guess is loss of football program would have little to no impact on applications and yield.  It’s not Alabama…….

What about fundraising? What about the loss of numerous women's programs to comply with Title IX (and maybe cratering of the athletic department as a whole)? Would we be the same university without football?

Maybe football haters have gamed this out in a way I don't understand, but it seems pivotal to Stanford as we know it for football to survive.

Given the way we compete in college athletics, we've been sui generis for decades. But without football how would Stanford be differentiated from Cal Tech? With a lower level football team how would Stanford be differentiated from NYU? Maybe the calculus has been made that the legacy and endowment Stanford has built up would allow us to continue in/create a new and desirable niche in the college landscape. But my field of vision has trouble imagining it. I don't think we'd be Stanford without competing at the top levels in the things people care about.

I've been singin' that psalm for a long time. Stanford sans big-time FB is not "Stanford". It's MIT/Caltech with palms, eucalyptus and a golf course.

The stark contrast of a Top 25 football school with MIT / Cal Tech misses the significant number of highly-rated academic schools which play Division 1 football and are not consistently in the Top 25.

Northwestern, Duke, Vanderbilt, Tulane, and Rice for example. At least so far, they seem to feel that Division 1 scholarship football is a net positive to their institutions. That may change in the coming years, but Stanford has nore resources to devote to athletics than these other schools. As such, it is fear-mongering to suggest that Stanford must expect to play football consistently at the Top 25 level in order to maintain a high-performing, diverse athletic program.

[chrisk]

Agree that the departure of Bowlsby and the loss of an administration that cared about the football program is a great and significant loss.  Stanford exists alone and unique among Top 10 universities with a Power 5 football program.

I saw a study that once tracked Georgetown's undergraduate applications with the success of its basketball team.  As the team won, applications skyrocketed.  I wonder what the impact of losing the football program would be on applications and yield? It had basically no effect on my alma mater, but that was a marginal D2 program.  Within the last decade, Stanford had one of the best teams in the country. I realize that students don't attend Stanford strictly or only because of the football program -- apart from the athletes, I think no student does -- but it helps at the margin, I think.

My guess is loss of football program would have little to no impact on applications and yield.  It’s not Alabama…….

What about fundraising? What about the loss of numerous women's programs to comply with Title IX (and maybe cratering of the athletic department as a whole)? Would we be the same university without football?

Maybe football haters have gamed this out in a way I don't understand, but it seems pivotal to Stanford as we know it for football to survive.

Given the way we compete in college athletics, we've been sui generis for decades. But without football how would Stanford be differentiated from Cal Tech? With a lower level football team how would Stanford be differentiated from NYU? Maybe the calculus has been made that the legacy and endowment Stanford has built up would allow us to continue in/create a new and desirable niche in the college landscape. But my field of vision has trouble imagining it. I don't think we'd be Stanford without competing at the top levels in the things people care about.

I've been singin' that psalm for a long time. Stanford sans big-time FB is not "Stanford". It's MIT/Caltech with palms, eucalyptus and a golf course.

The stark contrast of a Top 25 football school with MIT / Cal Tech misses the significant number of highly-rated academic schools which play Division 1 football and are not consistently in the Top 25.

Northwestern, Duke, Vanderbilt, Tulane, and Rice for example. At least so far, they seem to feel that Division 1 scholarship football is a net positive to their institutions. That may change in the coming years, but Stanford has nore resources to devote to athletics than these other schools. As such, it is fear-mongering to suggest that Stanford must expect to play football consistently at the Top 25 level in order to maintain a high-performing, diverse athletic program.