[BillBradley]

Let me just say, I care not one tiny little bit what anybody does in the pros.  The allure of women's basketball to me was precisely BECAUSE it had no reasonable professional outlet and so the college level was the highest level of play.  That meant that college WBB was not only the highest level, but the motivations of the players were more-or-less "pure."  They were doing it for the love of the game and for the sake of being provided an education.  Knowing that made watching the game that much sweeter for me.  For that reason I much preferred WBB to MBB, where all the players seemed to be chasing (mostly unsuccessfully) a professional career. 

The main difference between MBB and WBB used to be that the male players all thought they would be pros even though they would not, while the female players knew full well they were playing for different motives.

I know my attitude is contradicted by Tara's own efforts to promote WBB and "elevate" it to the men's level.  I know that the success of WBB professionally--phenomenally so this last couple of years--is itself a marker of greater social equality.  I can appreciate that without enjoying it.

I do not like professional sports in general, and so WBB becoming more professionalized is at best a mixed blessing to me.  I am a dinosaur from the Triassic period, who genuinely believes in the amateur ideal and also thinks that such an ideal is a particularly good fit for an elite academic institution like Stanford. 

I also recognize that college sports are radically changing, and leaving me behind.  So be it.  I'll just tune them out to the degree they depart from what interests and motivates me.  Maybe a rare few others feel likewise.

re: interest in professional sports, I get where you're coming from. I too would rather watch college or even high school sports. But for me it's because i like the imperfections. In the pros, there's times when no one can stop the offense. They are just so good at what they do. Coaches are less impactful in the pros, there are far fewer upsets, etc. But the college game, especially basketball, is very unpredictable. That's what I love about it.

I disagree though with the "purity of motivation" argument wrt the current college sports environment. The notion that collegiate athletes before NIL and the transfer portal were playing for the love of the game and to get an education is simply not true (IMO). I highly doubt that Maya Moore, Diana Turasi, Brittany Griner, or even the Ogwumike's had their education as top of mind over basketball. Playing a major sport in college dominates your life. And even though monetary compensation wasn't legal for them, the athletes weren't playing college basketball without fame, greed, pride, or arrogance, just to name a few of the awful vices that exist in sports. Those things naturally come with a competitive environment.  All that's happening now is that avarice has been added to the mix. My point being, I don't think it's fair to couch the "pre-NIL athlete" as pure, while the post-NIL athletes are just money-grubbers. All D1 athletes have motivations that can be construed as ugly. Did we enjoy watching Cameron Brink as a senior less than Cameron Brink as a freshman just because she got paid? I know I enjoyed last year's season much less because they struggled down the stretch and didn't win it all! It had nothing to do with the NIL involved.

I will also go on record, again, to say that I don't believe anyone on this board who says they have lost the enjoyment of watching college sports just because of NIL and the transfer portal. I think people (myself included) aren't enjoying this Stanford women's basketball team as much as past teams because, frankly, they aren't as good! But I'm quite sure that if this Stanford team finds the formula and goes on a late season run, all the way to the national championship, 81 and others will enjoy that run just as much as our past national championships, even though the players are getting compensated.

[BillBradley]

Let me just say, I care not one tiny little bit what anybody does in the pros.  The allure of women's basketball to me was precisely BECAUSE it had no reasonable professional outlet and so the college level was the highest level of play.  That meant that college WBB was not only the highest level, but the motivations of the players were more-or-less "pure."  They were doing it for the love of the game and for the sake of being provided an education.  Knowing that made watching the game that much sweeter for me.  For that reason I much preferred WBB to MBB, where all the players seemed to be chasing (mostly unsuccessfully) a professional career. 

The main difference between MBB and WBB used to be that the male players all thought they would be pros even though they would not, while the female players knew full well they were playing for different motives.

I know my attitude is contradicted by Tara's own efforts to promote WBB and "elevate" it to the men's level.  I know that the success of WBB professionally--phenomenally so this last couple of years--is itself a marker of greater social equality.  I can appreciate that without enjoying it.

I do not like professional sports in general, and so WBB becoming more professionalized is at best a mixed blessing to me.  I am a dinosaur from the Triassic period, who genuinely believes in the amateur ideal and also thinks that such an ideal is a particularly good fit for an elite academic institution like Stanford. 

I also recognize that college sports are radically changing, and leaving me behind.  So be it.  I'll just tune them out to the degree they depart from what interests and motivates me.  Maybe a rare few others feel likewise.

re: interest in professional sports, I get where you're coming from. I too would rather watch college or even high school sports. But for me it's because i like the imperfections. In the pros, there's times when no one can stop the offense. They are just so good at what they do. Coaches are less impactful in the pros, there are far fewer upsets, etc. But the college game, especially basketball, is very unpredictable. That's what I love about it.

I disagree though with the "purity of motivation" argument wrt the current college sports environment. The notion that collegiate athletes before NIL and the transfer portal were playing for the love of the game and to get an education is simply not true (IMO). I highly doubt that Maya Moore, Diana Turasi, Brittany Griner, or even the Ogwumike's had their education as top of mind over basketball. Playing a major sport in college dominates your life. And even though monetary compensation wasn't legal for them, the athletes weren't playing college basketball without fame, greed, pride, or arrogance, just to name a few of the awful vices that exist in sports. Those things naturally come with a competitive environment.  All that's happening now is that avarice has been added to the mix. My point being, I don't think it's fair to couch the "pre-NIL athlete" as pure, while the post-NIL athletes are just money-grubbers. All D1 athletes have motivations that can be construed as ugly. Did we enjoy watching Cameron Brink as a senior less than Cameron Brink as a freshman just because she got paid? I know I enjoyed last year's season much less because they struggled down the stretch and didn't win it all! It had nothing to do with the NIL involved.

I will also go on record, again, to say that I don't believe anyone on this board who says they have lost the enjoyment of watching college sports just because of NIL and the transfer portal. I think people (myself included) aren't enjoying this Stanford women's basketball team as much as past teams because, frankly, they aren't as good! But I'm quite sure that if this Stanford team finds the formula and goes on a late season run, all the way to the national championship, 81 and others will enjoy that run just as much as our past national championships, even though the players are getting compensated.