[BillBradley]

I would describe Stanford's NIL approach as reactive. Other schools have been proactive.

Here is an example of what other schools are doing. Clemson opened a 12,000 square foot NIL branding institute on campus with a director plucked from the corporate executive suite. 

https://businessofcollegesports.com/name...velopment/

From what I can tell, the more aggressive schools are aligning their NIL function with their business development function. Some others are putting it alongside compliance (maybe because they don't know where else to put it).

Stanford actually has an Assistant Director / Name, Image & Likeness Services, Katie Bridge. She is a former college athlete with little if any corporate, development, or communication experience (judging from her LinkedIn profile).

Thx for starting this thread 82lsju! Agree with Spiny, Outsider, Softball et all. At least it's moving and shows there are alums who can get behind this. Also thought this paragraph was salient to some of the other discussions on NIL as it relates to influencers and the Stanford degree.

“We’re not going to teach them to be social media influencers,” Thorpe said of the athletes. “Much more important, we’re going to give them real alumni mentorship, connectivity and career support throughout their time at Stanford. If we can go to employers and say, ‘We represent hundreds of Stanford athletes. They are an incredibly talented and diverse group of women and men. It’s not just about using their faces to sell your product. Wouldn’t you want their brains and effort level at your company?’”

Thorpe sees those services as leveraging what Stanford has always sold its recruits – a great education and a “40-year decision” that will provide for a lucrative career long after the uniform is hung up. The allure of the 40-year decision has cooled in the what-are-you-going-pay-me era of NIL.

[BillBradley]

I would describe Stanford's NIL approach as reactive. Other schools have been proactive.

Here is an example of what other schools are doing. Clemson opened a 12,000 square foot NIL branding institute on campus with a director plucked from the corporate executive suite. 

https://businessofcollegesports.com/name...velopment/

From what I can tell, the more aggressive schools are aligning their NIL function with their business development function. Some others are putting it alongside compliance (maybe because they don't know where else to put it).

Stanford actually has an Assistant Director / Name, Image & Likeness Services, Katie Bridge. She is a former college athlete with little if any corporate, development, or communication experience (judging from her LinkedIn profile).

Thx for starting this thread 82lsju! Agree with Spiny, Outsider, Softball et all. At least it's moving and shows there are alums who can get behind this. Also thought this paragraph was salient to some of the other discussions on NIL as it relates to influencers and the Stanford degree.

“We’re not going to teach them to be social media influencers,” Thorpe said of the athletes. “Much more important, we’re going to give them real alumni mentorship, connectivity and career support throughout their time at Stanford. If we can go to employers and say, ‘We represent hundreds of Stanford athletes. They are an incredibly talented and diverse group of women and men. It’s not just about using their faces to sell your product. Wouldn’t you want their brains and effort level at your company?’”

Thorpe sees those services as leveraging what Stanford has always sold its recruits – a great education and a “40-year decision” that will provide for a lucrative career long after the uniform is hung up. The allure of the 40-year decision has cooled in the what-are-you-going-pay-me era of NIL.