[GK3]

Insane to spend a single cent of endowment money on this NIL garbage. They are mercenaries, and I mean that negatively and perjoratively. And she's a pro athlete so she can handle the jeers from online idiots like me. "Oh no, someone on The Cardboard called me a mercenary." I'm sure she's crying all the way to the bank.

Endowment money should be going to support education and research, the core mission of the university. It should never go to hired gun pro athletes who will be around for a year or two and then off to the next place that will pay them more.

And BTW, these mercenary players should not be able to come back and get a Stanford degree after they've transferred.

I'm coming around more to the idea that Stanford ditch sports if this is the way things are going. I knew plenty of athletes when I was a student, and I would have no problem with them making money to sell ads or endorse products. But if the school has to pay them to attend, I think it's more appropriate their spot goes to someone else who is there to be a student.

Agree with everything except not allowing them to come back and finish their degree. Lots of people go take a job before they graduate. IMO that's fine. Lots of people get that job because of what they learned at Stanford. That is also fine and IMO "good". If these people later want to return, they should be allowed to do so, subject to availability. I suspect there are so few of them it won't make a dent.

Otherwise, 100% agree :-).

I also agree with this take, including no coming back to get a Stanford degree. Have that as a deterrent (maybe not a big one for many), but, you transfer away, say bye-bye to a Stanford degree.

Amen +1

---

FWIW, I doubt very much that if a non-athlete student transferred to another university, that they would be guaranteed to be able to return to Stanford at some indeterminate time to finish their degree. An NIL transfer shouldn't have more right to a Stanford degree in that scenario than a regular student IMHO.

We were told when we entered Stanford back in the late 60s that once you were "in", you were "in", period. There were administrative restrictions that meant if you left you wouldn't necessarily be able to come back exactly when you wished, but if you were in "good standing" when you left, you could come back. It literally didn't matter if you did or did not take classes in the interim. That may no longer be true, but FWIW I do know of several people that went elsewhere for a year with the intent to return and did so. We certainly do allow people to defer starting their freshman year at Stanford.

I think it would be a case by case basis, dependent on their grades and personal circumstances. If Canady gets her degree at Texas Tech, maybe she can come back for a graduate degree, if she would otherwise be a competitive applicant to that program. If she doesn't get her degree at Texas Tech, that would seem to be a red flag about how serious she is with her academics. If she transfers to some other third school for a different NIL deal, that would also seem to me to be a red flag about her academic commitment.

I guess where you and I differ is that IMO Canady going elsewhere to earn $1.2M a year is in any way, good or bad, related to academics. If she could, I wouldn't be at all surprised if she took no classes at all at Texas Tech and concentrated on softball. It is a job, nothing more. If/when that job goes away and if she wanted to finish her studies at Stanford, I see no reason to oppose that. If she was academically "good enough" to admit and was in good standing when she left, why does working for one or two years disqualify her? If she obtains a degree elsewhere using transfer credits from Stanford that probably prevents her from doing so at Stanford anyway.

I am ok with coming back if you finished two years and were in good standing, but no more financial support.  You left for the money, then invest it wisely and pay your tuition if you come back.

[GK3]

Insane to spend a single cent of endowment money on this NIL garbage. They are mercenaries, and I mean that negatively and perjoratively. And she's a pro athlete so she can handle the jeers from online idiots like me. "Oh no, someone on The Cardboard called me a mercenary." I'm sure she's crying all the way to the bank.

Endowment money should be going to support education and research, the core mission of the university. It should never go to hired gun pro athletes who will be around for a year or two and then off to the next place that will pay them more.

And BTW, these mercenary players should not be able to come back and get a Stanford degree after they've transferred.

I'm coming around more to the idea that Stanford ditch sports if this is the way things are going. I knew plenty of athletes when I was a student, and I would have no problem with them making money to sell ads or endorse products. But if the school has to pay them to attend, I think it's more appropriate their spot goes to someone else who is there to be a student.

Agree with everything except not allowing them to come back and finish their degree. Lots of people go take a job before they graduate. IMO that's fine. Lots of people get that job because of what they learned at Stanford. That is also fine and IMO "good". If these people later want to return, they should be allowed to do so, subject to availability. I suspect there are so few of them it won't make a dent.

Otherwise, 100% agree :-).

I also agree with this take, including no coming back to get a Stanford degree. Have that as a deterrent (maybe not a big one for many), but, you transfer away, say bye-bye to a Stanford degree.

Amen +1

---

FWIW, I doubt very much that if a non-athlete student transferred to another university, that they would be guaranteed to be able to return to Stanford at some indeterminate time to finish their degree. An NIL transfer shouldn't have more right to a Stanford degree in that scenario than a regular student IMHO.

We were told when we entered Stanford back in the late 60s that once you were "in", you were "in", period. There were administrative restrictions that meant if you left you wouldn't necessarily be able to come back exactly when you wished, but if you were in "good standing" when you left, you could come back. It literally didn't matter if you did or did not take classes in the interim. That may no longer be true, but FWIW I do know of several people that went elsewhere for a year with the intent to return and did so. We certainly do allow people to defer starting their freshman year at Stanford.

I think it would be a case by case basis, dependent on their grades and personal circumstances. If Canady gets her degree at Texas Tech, maybe she can come back for a graduate degree, if she would otherwise be a competitive applicant to that program. If she doesn't get her degree at Texas Tech, that would seem to be a red flag about how serious she is with her academics. If she transfers to some other third school for a different NIL deal, that would also seem to me to be a red flag about her academic commitment.

I guess where you and I differ is that IMO Canady going elsewhere to earn $1.2M a year is in any way, good or bad, related to academics. If she could, I wouldn't be at all surprised if she took no classes at all at Texas Tech and concentrated on softball. It is a job, nothing more. If/when that job goes away and if she wanted to finish her studies at Stanford, I see no reason to oppose that. If she was academically "good enough" to admit and was in good standing when she left, why does working for one or two years disqualify her? If she obtains a degree elsewhere using transfer credits from Stanford that probably prevents her from doing so at Stanford anyway.

I am ok with coming back if you finished two years and were in good standing, but no more financial support.  You left for the money, then invest it wisely and pay your tuition if you come back.