[Giants]

We absolutely have to start winning games and make a bowl game.  

Or… what?

Don’t get me wrong; I would rather be cheering for a winning team than a losing team, but I’m not sure what the long term consequences of having a chronically losing football team are.  It doesn’t threaten Stanford’s accreditation, it doesn’t threaten the school’s financial health.  People will still write 8-figure checks to get their name on buildings and Stanford’s applications are not hurting.  I think it would make the place more enjoyable, and as I said I would rather root for a winning team than a losing team.  Winning might have a marginal effect on alumni donations and applications, but I doubt it would be dramatic.  Let’s face it, the long term consequences of having a chronically bad football team are not catastrophic, and although I do think we will eventually turn things around, I don’t think your statement is supported by any evidence.

BC

The current direction of college football is taking the sport towards a round of realignment that would result in Stanford’s relegation to a lower level within the FBS group.  The question Stanford leadership should be asking themselves is how would that impact the overall athletic program.  If the answer to that question is yes, Stanford would still be able to continue to field championship level teams in most sports, then I believe the administrators would choose to go down that road.  Of course, that would require a substantial subsidy because without a football program at the premier level of the game, the finances would take a significant hit.

[Giants]

We absolutely have to start winning games and make a bowl game.  

Or… what?

Don’t get me wrong; I would rather be cheering for a winning team than a losing team, but I’m not sure what the long term consequences of having a chronically losing football team are.  It doesn’t threaten Stanford’s accreditation, it doesn’t threaten the school’s financial health.  People will still write 8-figure checks to get their name on buildings and Stanford’s applications are not hurting.  I think it would make the place more enjoyable, and as I said I would rather root for a winning team than a losing team.  Winning might have a marginal effect on alumni donations and applications, but I doubt it would be dramatic.  Let’s face it, the long term consequences of having a chronically bad football team are not catastrophic, and although I do think we will eventually turn things around, I don’t think your statement is supported by any evidence.

BC

The current direction of college football is taking the sport towards a round of realignment that would result in Stanford’s relegation to a lower level within the FBS group.  The question Stanford leadership should be asking themselves is how would that impact the overall athletic program.  If the answer to that question is yes, Stanford would still be able to continue to field championship level teams in most sports, then I believe the administrators would choose to go down that road.  Of course, that would require a substantial subsidy because without a football program at the premier level of the game, the finances would take a significant hit.